Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Oh, the humanity... Boot-edge-edge is going down in flames)
(Why are we supporting these protests?)
 
Line 4: Line 4:
  
  
== Tax returns ==
+
==Who will win the Democrat presidential primary? ==
 +
:''See also [[2020 presidential election]]
 +
{| class="wikitable sortable"  style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
 +
|+Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee
 +
|+Who will win?
 +
|+
 +
|-
 +
! colspan="3" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" |
 +
! colspan="10" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" | Chance of becoming<br>Democratic nominee
 +
|-
 +
!class=unsortable|Candidate
 +
!<font size="-2">CA<br>ND<br>.<br>SO<br>RT
 +
!class=unsortable|Home<br>state
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>June<br>26<br>8:57<br>pm<br>EDT
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Mon-<br>day,<br>Jul.<br>29,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Mon-<br>day,<br>Aug.<br>26,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|End of<br>month<br>Tues-<br>day,<br>Oct.<br>1,<br>2019
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Mon-<br>day<br>Oct.<br>28,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>4,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>11,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>18,<br>2019
 +
!Mon-<br>day<br>Nov.<br>25,<br>2019
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|V. Pres [[Joe Biden]]
 +
|{{invi|Bid}}
 +
|align="center"|DE
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|28.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|20.2%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|23.6%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|18.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|19.2%
 +
|align="right"|19.6%
 +
|align="right"|20.4%
 +
|align="right"|21.5%
 +
|align="right"|22.0%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Michael Bloomberg]]
 +
|{{invi|Blo}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right"|
 +
|align="right"|5.1%
 +
|align="right"|2.9%
 +
|align="right"|7.3%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Pete Buttigieg]]
 +
|{{invi|But}}
 +
|align="center"|IN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|11.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|8.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|6.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.1%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|9.8%
 +
|align="right"|14.3%
 +
|align="right"|12.2%
 +
|align="right"|16.4%
 +
|align="right"|17.4%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tulsi Gabbard]]
 +
|{{invi|Gab}}
 +
|align="center"|HI
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|2.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.2%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|0.7%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kamala Harris]]
 +
|{{invi|Har}}
 +
|align="center"|CA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|12.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|27.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|10.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.8%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|1.2%
 +
|align="right"|1.0%
 +
|align="right"|2.1%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|[[Amy Klobuchar]]
 +
|{{invi|Klo}}
 +
|align="center"|MN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.6%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|0.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.0%
 +
|align="right"|1.5%
 +
|align="right"|1.3%
 +
|align="right"|2.0%
 +
|align="right"|1.7%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Bernie Sanders]]
 +
|{{invi|San}}
 +
|align="center"|VT
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|11.2%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|13.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.8%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|7.5%
 +
|align="right"|12.1%
 +
|align="right"|12.7%
 +
|align="right"|12.2%
 +
|align="right"|11.5%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Elizabeth Warren]]
 +
|{{invi|War}}
 +
|align="center"|MA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|15.9%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|21.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|31.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|46.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|43.7%
 +
|align="right"|33.1%
 +
|align="right"|32.0%
 +
|align="right"|23.0%
 +
|align="right"|18.9%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sec'y [[Hillary Clinton]]
 +
|{{invi|Cli}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|1.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|2.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.7%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|6.1%
 +
|align="right"|5.4%
 +
|align="right"|4.1%
 +
|align="right"|5.6%
 +
|align="right"|5.3%
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|[[Andrew Yang]]
 +
|{{invi|Yan}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|5.5%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|3.3%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.0%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|4.4%
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|3.0%
 +
|align="right"|3.4%
 +
|align="right"|3.5%
 +
|align="right"|3.3%
 +
|align="right"|3.1%
 +
|}
  
Why won’t he (Trump) release his tax returns. He lied and said he would before he got elected and now he is going to every effort to block the release. Why doesn’t anyone here have anything to say about it? If it were Obama you’d be frothing over it. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 01:42, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
{| class="wikitable sortable"  style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
:Let's see the tax returns of Nancy Pelosi, Eric Holder, and the other banking bailout profiteers. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:07, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
|+Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee
::Well sure but that doesn't excuse Trump lying about releasing them and now stonewalling. Like I say, if it were Obama Conservapedia would be very focal about it. Why the silence on Trump? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 02:22, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
|+Who will win?
:::Trump is under audit. Re: releasing tax returns: "Most tax attorneys would typically advise a client against doing so if they're under audit to avoid further scrutiny. Once the tax returns are out, reporters could find something that the IRS missed." -CNN[https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/04/politics/trump-audit-fact-check/index.html]
+
|+
 +
|-
 +
! colspan="3" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" |
 +
! colspan="8" style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 5px; background: #efefef;" | Twitter followers
 +
|-
 +
!class=unsortable|Candidate
 +
!<font size="-2">CA<br>ND<br>.<br>SO<br>RT
 +
!class=unsortable|Home<br>state
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Accts<br>as of<br>June<br>29
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>July<br>30
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>Aug<br>26
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Sep<br>16
 +
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New<br>accts<br>Oct<br>1
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Oct<br>16
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Nov<br>1
 +
!New<br>accts<br>Nov<br>18
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|V. Pres [[Joe Biden]]
 +
|{{invi|Bid}}
 +
|align="center"|DE
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|&nbsp;&nbsp;03.6M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+19,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+64,000
 +
|align="right"|+36,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+45,000
 +
|align="right"|+98,000
 +
|align="right"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+27,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Cory Booker]]
 +
|{{invi|Boo}}
 +
|align="center"|NJ
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|04.4M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+28,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+39,000
 +
|align="right"|+12,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+9,000
 +
|align="right"|+12,000
 +
|align="right"|+16,000
 +
|align="right"|+6,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Mayor [[Pete Buttigieg]]
 +
|{{invi|But}}
 +
|align="center"|IN
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|01.2M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+72,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+101,000
 +
|align="right"|+80,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+26,000
 +
|align="right"|+30,000
 +
|align="right"|+34,000
 +
|align="right"|+34,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tulsi Gabbard]]
 +
|{{invi|Gab}}
 +
|align="center"|HI
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|00.6M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+34,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+118,000
 +
|align="right"|+25,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+27,000
 +
|align="right"|+27,000
 +
|align="right"|+141,000
 +
|align="right"|+11,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kamala Harris]]
 +
|{{invi|Har}}
 +
|align="center"|CA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|03.6M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+245,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+119,000
 +
|align="right"|+56,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+61,000
 +
|align="right"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+32,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Rep. [[Beto O'Rourke]]
 +
|{{invi|O'R}}
 +
|align="center"|TX
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|01.4M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+4,000</s>
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+116,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+44,000</s>
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|<s>+24,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+22,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|<s>+13,000</s>
 +
|align="right"|
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Bernie Sanders]]
 +
|{{invi|San}}
 +
|align="center"|VT
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|17.8M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+134,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+264,000
 +
|align="right"|+136,400
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+93,000
 +
|align="right"|+140,000
 +
|align="right"|+146,000
 +
|align="right"|+108,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sen. [[Elizabeth Warren]]
 +
|{{invi|War}}
 +
|align="center"|MA
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|07.8M:2
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+225,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+273,000
 +
|align="right"|+137,400
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+137,000
 +
|align="right"|+182,000
 +
|align="right"|+107,000
 +
|align="right"|+70,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Sec'y [[Hillary Clinton]]
 +
|{{invi|Cli}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|24.7M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+316,000
 +
|align="right"|+137,500
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+123,000
 +
|align="right"|+152,000
 +
|align="right"|+171,000
 +
|align="right"|+83,000
 +
|-
 +
|align="left"|Andrew Yang
 +
|{{invi|Yan}}
 +
|align="center"|NY
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|00.5M:1
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|
 +
|align="right"|+119,000
 +
|align="right" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|+48,000
 +
|align="right"|+51,000
 +
|align="right"|+39,000
 +
|align="right"|+29,000
 +
|}
  
:::““O divine art of subtlety and secrecy! Through you we learn to be invisible, through you inaudible, and hence we can hold the enemy's fate in our hands.” - [[Sun Tzu]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 03:45, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
===Nov. 18===
 +
Warren's 10 point swings show how unstable the situation is; Biden's firming up is a circling of wagons by the pro-impeachment crowd (a whole 1.5% of Democrats); Booty-boy is the darling of Millenials, CNN & MSNBC; all of this also is exposes the anti-Asian racism prevalent among Democrats and media. If Klobuchar sticks around long enough, she may have her 15 minutes of fame at some point.
  
::::Even if the audit excuse is bogus, Trump has the right to tax privacy. He has been keen on keeping his returns private for many years, so the reasons may not have anything to do with politics. The tradition of presidential candidates releasing their returns did not arise in response to anyone's idea of good government. Nixon's return was leaked by an accountant who joined the IRS just to expose him and then quit before anyone could finger him. Subsequent presidents figured they were better off releasing this material themselves. FDR refused to pay the tax increases he approved for everyone else. This would have been hugely scandalous if his returns had been released while he was still alive.[https://www.history.com/news/6-times-presidential-tax-returns-made-us-go-hmmm] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:13, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Bottomline: What we're seeing in the Democratic party is Blacks getting a little too uppity since the election of Barack Obama and are now being put back in their place by the top white frontrunners. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:18, 23 November 2019 (EST)
:::::BTW, that reminds me, think you can provide a reference or link to the whole Nixon tax leak thing and how that started the "tradition" of presidential candidates releasing their tax returns? That might be something worth noting on Nixon's article. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:12, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Sure there’s no law that says presidents have to release their tax returns but he said he would but is now going to extreme lengths to block their release and I have no doubts the if Obama had done the same Conservapedia (among other media outlets) would be crying foul. Trump needs to do what he promised he would. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 17:16, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::I agree with PeterKa on this, and the current push from Democrats to release Trump's tax returns is merely a political action, nothing more. The only people who even care about Trump's tax returns or their contents are leftist hacks on CNN and MSNBC, as well as those gullible enough view those hacks as authoritative. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 02:46, 20 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Not at all.  Obama had so lowered the bar in not releasing ''anything'' about his academic records (among other records), that his tax records were the ''least'' of the concerns that conservatives had.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 00:47, 19 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::That's not really the point. Firstly I don't think Obama is bar we should use. Aren't conservatives (at least I think so) supposed to maintain a higher level of integrity than the Obama's of this world? Secondly - you lose all moral authority. You've accepted Trump's lie about releasing his returns and his refusal to now do so. If a Democrat refuses to release his returns, benefits from the presidency the way Trump has in using his own business for presidential business (essentially getting the tax-payer to pay him personally), if a Democrat asks a foreign power to hack his opponents emails the way Trump did then you have to allow the bar to be set there. How can you demand a democrat to have integrity if you let Trump slide? You're either a hypocrite or you've set the bar even lower. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 02:37, 20 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::You're over the cliff on this one, before you even managed to make your point.  Uninformed people cry "He's been spending millions of dollars flying to Mar-a-lago every two weeks!  Spendthrift!"  Within the last week, it was revealed that corrupt U.S. intelligence agencies were spying on Trump.  Earlier in his term, Trump was lied to by FBI director James Comey that he wasn't being investigated.  It turns out they were wire-tapping his campaign.  At the beginning of his Presidency, Trump was warned by a whistle-blower FBI agent that he was being spied on.  With this security breach, Trump was forced to make Mar-a-lago his second White House.  If you want to blame someone for the cost of traveling there blame the conspirators who planned an "insurance policy" operation to be carried out in the event Trump was elected, where he was spied on in the White House itself. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 02:09, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Right - but that’s only one small part of it (and do you really believe all that?). He could settle it all by doing what he promised. Released his returns. Now if Biden refuses to release his tax returns and enriches himself through the presidency then conservatives have NO argument. It doesn’t matter what side of the fence you are on - integrity is integrity. Trump has none and now conservatives have lost the argument by refusing to call him out. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 02:58, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
In fact - just block me please. I have no time for fake conservatives like the people here. Selling out their principles for power. Trump is liar and a crook and I’m disgusted by what used to be the party of R. Reagan. Trump is the used car salesman of politics. Please remove me from CP. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 03:01, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:Of all politicians in the U.S. and the world with genuine political power, Trump adheres very closely to conservative principles. Look at the facts, rather than repeating the MSM's left-wing/establishment criticisms. In his first year, [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/heritage-foundation-64-of-trumps-agenda-already-done-faster-than-reagan Trump implemented 64% of the Heritage Foundation's recommendations, versus only 49% for Reagan]. His policies are even more conservative than Reagan's: [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-oe-election-anniversary-updates-despite-his-many-foibles-trump-has-1509748851-htmlstory.html] The American Conservative Union has rated his [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cpac-acu-trumps-cabinet-the-most-conservative-surpassing-reagan cabinet as even more conservative than Reagan's]. The judges he's appointing are more consistently conservative than the ones Reagan appointed: [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/trumps-supreme-court-legacy-could-be-more-conservative-than-reagans] And he's going right at our migration and trade problems (among others), things other politicians overlooked for years. Trump is even more pro-life than Reagan was, based on his policies ([[Donald Trump achievements: Abortion]]). An establishment person like Bush, Kasich, or Romney wouldn't have governed so conservatively, and they would have likely caved to the Left on multiple issues.
+
==Trump's legitimate ''quid pro quo''==
  
:If anyone is a fake conservative, who claims to be conservative while advancing left-wing policies, it's you, JohnSelway. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 03:13, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
It's already been shown by Trump's transcript, or rather, actually ''reading'' the transcript, that there was no ''quid pro quo'' offered for information about Joe Biden's family, but it wasn't always clear whether there was one offered for information about collusion on the part of business and government entities from the Ukraine that was applied ''weeks after'' Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian president. It was already established that President Obama, the DNC and some Democratic Senators asked the Ukraine to investigate Trump.
::I haven’t advanced any policies - left wing or otherwise. And yes, POLICY wise Trumps agenda is fine but he is a liar, a cheat and a narcissist. He fails at displaying any type of integrity whatsoever. So yes, the conservative principles have been forgotten in the pursuit of power. I don’t care what his policies are when he fails to even have any association with the truth. Please remove from CP is you have blocking rights. No one here seems to care about having a demigod of a president as long as he advances their brand of conservatism. You’re a sellout. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 03:25, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::I (and most other editors on CP, I suspect) am a pragmatist who is not going to sell myself to the Left by opposing an effective conservative leader just because  his personal life isn't great (but few high-profile people have great personal lives). That said, I'll repeat that the only people who even care about his tax returns are hacks at the MSM. Since 1789, we've been electing politicians, not pastors, and presidents as early as Jefferson and Cleveland (both being strong limited-government presidents highly regarded by modern conservatives) have been caught in sex scandals during their presidential campaigns.
+
Kimberly Strassel pointed out, however, that Trump's actual requests to the Ukrainian president together with whomever had part in delaying aid, is questionable only when seen in the context of "moving the goalposts". Digging up dirt on an opponent is one thing, but Ukrainian entities colluding with members of the U.S. government is a legitimate concern having to do with national security [about which] the U.S. president has a right to know, and the request for which is legitimately susceptible to the application of ''quid pro quo'' leverage.
  
:::You continue to downplay Trump's success at advancing conservative policies ("''as long as he advances their brand of conservatism''") -- if you look at Reagan's policies and public statements, Trump is doing and saying the exact same things as him, except that he's even more consistent on policy than Reagan. For example, Trump has reinstated ''and even expanded'' several government abortion spending restrictions first enacted by Reagan, and he's tough on trade similar to Reagan (remember the Japanese car restrictions). This is about conservative public policy, not anyone's personal agenda.
+
This week the liberal press has been trying to blur the lines between the two requests, not to mention never mentioning the similar requests of high-ranking Democrats. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 17:15, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:"It was a perfect phone call. Everybody knows it." - Donald Trump.[https://www.wral.com/what-donald-trump-has-already-said-about-ukraine-tells-us-plenty/18652854/]
  
:::Your block request is denied. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 03:49, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:"If that perfect phone call with the President of Ukraine Isn’t considered appropriate, then no future President can EVER again speak to another foreign leader!" - Donald Trump.[https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1177604833538392065?lang=en][[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 17:52, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
Trump is a breath of fresh air. He opposes China's state funded mercantilist system and has pared back the job killing administrative state in the USA.  One of the biggest problems of the USA is that its populace adopted a consumer based outlook instead of a producer outlook and used debt to finance it. Under Trump the civilian labor participation rate has gone up, and wages have gone up.[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300060]
+
  
While some find Trump's right-wing ideology mixed with New Yorker bluntness/brashness offensive, many delight in it because it has put a big dent in political correctness.
+
::Perfect. I hope this clarifies things.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 17:55, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::The purpose of the impeachment inquiry, begun with a anonymous source who now Schiff ''will not'' call to testify, is to discredit the Barr/Durham investigation. This is the same pattern the same deep staters and the same media [[sockpuppets]] used with the ''Steele dossier''. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:22, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Yes, it's all of a piece. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 22:20, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Most of Trump's scandals have to do with his past womanizing related behavior that appears to have occurred about 10-15 years ago (Hollywood Access tape, Stormy Daniels, etc.). And of course, his past divorces hurt him being a role model which is one of the duties of a leader. But there have been great leaders whose personal lives were not the very best they could be (Winston Churchill drank too much but he was not an alcoholic[https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/myths/alcohol-abuser/][https://allthatsinteresting.com/winston-churchill-drinking], [[Samson]] was a womanizer, King David committed adultery, etc.).[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 06:08, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
==Warren's 3½ month climb comes to an end==
  
:I agree with Conservative. Also, there are two different things here -- Trump's personal life and his "style" as president (as opposed to his policies). His style is refreshing, his lifestyle isn't great though also not unusual in the current culture. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:57, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Some people have said that [[Elizabeth Warren]]'s campaign has been perfect. Okay, in reality, nobody did.  But it looks like this week she will fall from grace with a 3% decrease!
:::I don't mean Reagan's or Trumps policies. I was referring to Reagan's character. You support a man who lies with every breath and turned a discussion about God into a discussion about himself and how wonderful he was. A vainglorious huckster. Lying is lying, vanity is vanity. You have utterly lost any moral high-ground in support of a blatantly unchristian president in exchange for political expediency. If this is the conservative movement then it is as corrupt as the corrupt president. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 22:27, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::There was a certain general in World War II who had moral problems, but he was effective, and we couldn't put someone else in his place because the stakes were too high.
+
::::If Trump is effective, future generations will thank us for voting for someone who defended our country's borders.  If not, maybe they'll thank us for trying. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 06:52, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Yeah, and besides, at least Trump largely cleaned up and owned up to his bad elements, which is far more than can be said of Hillary Clinton, who doesn't own up to her actions, or her husband's actions (and make no mistake, their actions make even the worst of Trumps' behavior seem like an outright piker by comparison). Is Trump my preferred choice? Quite honestly, no. If anything, my personal choice was [[Ben Carson]]. And I also was exceedingly reluctant to vote for Trump when he implied that he wasn't going to overturn Roe v. Wade. In fact, I only ended up deciding to vote for him days before the election when he nominated Mike Pence as his VP, who actually is strongly pro-life, which sealed the deal for me. And as it is, it's a darn good thing Trump is actually making measures to ensure Roe v. Wade is overturned, and restoring America's greatness. And make no mistake, Trump's still closer to actually BEING moral than the Clintons and the Obamas were. Heck, he's closer to moral than George Lucas was (especially when Lucas thinks the Vietcong were the good guys and we Americans were the bad guys). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 07:12, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Also, let's remember that JFK and Clinton both had affairs while they were in the White House. Trump (like Reagan, the first divorced president) didn't have a moral life before election, but his personal life as president hasn't had any problems -- and if JohnSelway thinks we shouldn't vote for Trump because of his personal life, we also shouldn't have elected Reagan for the exact same reason.
+
::::::Also, to echo VargasMilan, Christians and conservatives in the U.S. are under attack by an increasingly radical left-wing. Thus, we need a fighter, not "Mr. Nice Guy." Trump is a fighter, and an effective one too. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:50, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Heck, in the case of Clinton, there's actually a lot of evidence to suggest that he actually ''raped'' women, not just had affairs with them. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:17, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::''Yeah, and besides, at least Trump largely cleaned up and owned up to his bad elements'' What poppycock. He said, on camera,he didn't believe he needed to repent because he never made any mistakes. He also continues to lie, daily, about almost anything and everything - shameless and without contrition even when ''pointed out'' that it isn't true. He asked a foreign power to hack an opponents emails - if Obama had asked China to hack Romney's emails would you have been OK with it? Trump may be a fighter but he a sorry casefor a conservative. Morals count and he has none. I would much rather throw my lot in with a man like Huckabee rather than a liar and crook. But you have sold out for political expediency which a proper conservative, who cares about honesty and values, wouldn't. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 21:57, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::At least Trump didn't rape any women or defend child molestors with unabashed pride, or leave US soldiers to die and blame a terror attack on a youtube video. And just as an FYI, the mainstream media has lied quite a bit, like with George Zimmermann/Trayvon Martin, or Vietnam, or all of that stuff. They also didn't even expose Obama's crooked elements. And your description of Trump matches Obama more, being utterly shameless and an unrepentant liar. Heck, it matches Clinton a lot more, even. And just as an FYI, Trump NEVER asked Russia to hack into Clinton's emails. That was a joke. Even if Putin was to interfere with the election, he'd be more likely to back Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump (why would Putin want to back a guy who wants to restore America, when Putin wants to restore the USSR?). That statement proves you're falling uncritically for the media's lies, and thus not likely to be an actual conservative. Also, I voted for Romney and McCain, preferring them over Obama (and with Romney, similar to Trump, he wasn't even my first choice, Rick Santorum was. Also like Trump, I ultimately was motivated to vote for Romney due to his VP pick of Paul Ryan, who is pro-Life [if he had picked Condolezza Rice, I would have sat out on the election since I refuse to vote for anyone who would back abortion.].). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:16, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::''And just as an FYI, Trump NEVER asked Russia to hack into Clinton's emails. That was a joke.'' A joke which was then carried out. He asked a foreign adversary to muddy themselves in the election. THat's a fact, joke or no joke. Media aside, former presidents actions aside (I don't support their behaviour either) Trump is an unrepentant liar, his administration have been exposed in ''multiple'' ethics breaches (Zinke, Pruitt and Carson have all dipped their hands into the public purse) while Trump himself is earning money '''as a private citizen''' from the presidency. He is even so weak he attacks Fox News for hosting his opponents. No matter which way you cut Trump is a liar and a crook, if Obama committed these acts you'd be calling for impeachment but with Trump....silence. Because of political power. You are no conservative - conservatism is about integrity. Trump has none and you are an enabler. Block me - I do not wish to be associated with such spineless, dishonest and ethically corrupt people such as yourselves. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 19:46, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::"''conservatism is about integrity. Trump has none and you are an enabler''" -- Trump has tried very hard, much harder than any other recent president including Reagan, to keep his campaign promises. That's integrity, and since his promises/policies are very conservative, I and other consistent conservatives support him. Not only are your accusations nothing more than rehashed CNN/MSNBC leftist propaganda, but reducing the political philosophy of conservatism merely to the single character trait of "integrity" (whatever that even means) allows you to prefer socialist leftists like Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg, who have zero respect for the Constitution, natural law, and Christian values, over a president whose policies are, without a doubt, conservative. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:54, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::If you're going to claim Trump is an unrepentant liar, I strongly suggest you actually post evidence to back your claims up. Otherwise, I suggest you can it. And just as an FYI, I need you to cite stuff that isn't from the mainstream media outlets, since they are rather notorious for lying to viewers since the Tet Offensive when Walter Cronkite lied through his teeth about that battle's outcome. I also personally would suggest citing ethics breaches and how exactly they are ethics breaches. And just as an FYI, Obama DID lie to his constituents, repeatedly, like spying on the Trump campaign in an illegal manner, or how about "You like your doctor? You can keep your doctor" when promoting Obamacare. And there's nothing to suggest Russia even carried out the hacking on Trump's request. And use your head, do you REALLY think they'd back Trump when Putin's rather notorious for wanting to restore the USSR, and has spoken in Communist activities? If anything, they'd be more likely to back Clinton, especially when she pretty much gave them everything they wanted. If I were Putin, I wouldn't dare try to back a guy who most likely would cripple Russia just to restore America, period. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 20:36, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:
+
:::::::::Hey, wait a minuteCome back.  As a democratically elected president, I think you owe it Trump to support him, and not faint-heartedly either, seeing he was framed for a crime he didn't commit.  Don't get mad at us, we're just his supporters.  And I think that little story about appealing to foreign adversaries wasn't true but part of the wishful thinking the media broadcast during the investigation to keep their viewers on the hook—Google it! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 20:13, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:
+
::"In fact - just block me please." - User:JohnSelway
+
:
+
::He is a concern troll and drama queen.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:30, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Speaking of "jokes," Obama liked to threaten the Koch brothers and others with IRS audits. Some people assumed Obama was joking, but the audits turned out to be real. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:24, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Point of fact: John Selway: "He said, on camera, he didn't believe he needed to repent because he never made any mistakes."  I think what would be more consonant with the facts, is that a reporter asked Trump if he had ever asked for forgiveness, and Trump sidestepped the captious question to avoid giving his enemies any ammunition, by saying "I try not to do bad things to begin with," thus salvaging at least some encouragement to others from the elevated-seeming question.
+
:
+
::::::But John, go for it and go on trusting today's typical [non-]journalists' biased generalizations and then following up with precisely-worded moral conclusions, while the rest of us roll our eyes.  I'm sure future generations will find the discussion of "the presidential tax return custom" a ''much'' more important legal event in Trump's presidential term than the attempted ''coup d'état'' at its beginning, and whose investigation has been carried in motion from that point to this present day as RobS has so aptly recorded. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 00:28, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::''[[Roe v. Wade]]'' guaranteed a right to privacy. It doesn't matter if it's between a woman and her doctor or a taxpayer and the tax man. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:26, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
===In answer to Selway===
+
Never trust the Democrats—they always lose one way or another and leave you holding the bag. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 21:54, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
You claim Trump is a liar, fine.  Show us and the American public the empirical evidence that he did cause an alteration of the 2016 election in partnership with the Russians and we'll believe you. But at the same time, you prove to us and the American public as well that you're a much better investigator in these matters than Robert Mueller and his staff; if they had the training and the money, you JohnSelway, with your absolute knowledge, should do a whole lot better with diddly squat. After all, you have stated here that you know this for a fact.
+
:Dick Morris says if Hillary has a pulse, she's running for president. A month ago news reports were Hillary was the mastermind behind then Warren's rise; then Hillary was advising ''both'' Biden and Warren, which explains Biden's downfall. Warren is too stupid to severe all ties with Clinton, which will be her downfall. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:46, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:The parallels between [http://www.dickmorris.com/will-hillary-follow-humphreys-trajectory-history-video/ Humphrey and McGovern, Hillary and Warren, 1972 and 2020] are too powerful to ignore. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:50, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
As to his tax returns, why don't you demand the individual returns of every Democrat in Congress?  I want to know why these clowns can become multimillionaires on a $175,000 base salary...or are you just another liberal troll who has to look the other way because it's people you love and support? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 04:35, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
====Warren's odds plummet 10½%====
:To answer that question, insider trading rules only apply to Wall Street types. They do not apply to members of Congress and staff. After some regulatory agency gives the go-ahead on some new product or idea, Washington types invest $5000 in an IPO (initial public offering) that, with in a year or so, is worth 10 times or more its value. Hillary did something like that back in Arkansas in her famous Cattlegate scandal. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:32, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Thank you for your comments Karajou - I've always had friendly interactions with you so happy to engage. Firstly I haven't mentioned anything about Trump and partnering with the Russians to alter the election. I don't know enough about that issue to comment and it is far murkier than I know how to understand so I make no judgement on it. Trump ''is'' a habitual liar and the evidence for that is all around us. You wouldn't accept it from a Democrat or liberal so we shouldn't accept it from Trump either. His post as president is of the highest esteem and Trump should have respect for that instead of lying with almost every breath. His disrespects the office of president.
+
::Secondly, yes I agree -  I do think members of congress should divulge their tax returns. Remember though there are just as many Republican millionaires as Democrats so they should ''all'' divulge their income. [https://www.businessinsider.com.au/how-richest-members-congress-made-money-house-senate-2019-2?r=US&IR=T This might be of interest]. As should the president given he ''said'' he would. Would you have accepted it if Obama refused to release his? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 18:27, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::That's the biggest pile of bullrot I've read in this forum in awhile. After three years of communist garbage fed by FBI leakers, CNN. NYT ''et al'', and Mueller says 'no there there', it's murky? C'mon, puleeze...
+
:::As to Trump's tax return, you must have conservatives confused with Marxist [[class war]]riors. Sorry, we don't respond to [[envy]] as a supreme virtue. We do believe in an individuals right to life and privacy, or personal 'integrity'. We adamantly oppose unjust taxation. And if a zillionaire finds a legal way to beat the system, God bless him. No one has implied Trump has violated tax laws, which seems to be the dark aspersions you are casting. Show some personal integrity yourself, and stop this unjust, unfair insinuation and innuendo. If envy and covetousness is your personal sin and vice, I suggest you pray to Jesus and ask him to relieve you of this burden. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:54, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
The opposition, as in our left-wing liberal establishment, demand Trump's tax returns because they want to see if he committed a crime.  Part of the reason that we overthrew the British government back in the late 1700s was that we - as in everyone on earth - have natural rights from God that cannot be taken away, not even by a tyrant, and these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happinessAnd an important part of securing our right to liberty is found in the 4th Amendment to our Constitution: ''"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."''  And it was a TYRANT in the person of George III and his government that caused us to put down the 4th Amendment in writing a few short years after we kicked his sorry butt out.  In the case of Trump ''vis-a-vis'' those tax records, there has to be a warrant SECOND, and based upon the evidence collected indicating that there was in fact a crime committed FIRST; a judge has to sign off on that warrant AFTER he has seen that evidence, and that evidence has to be convincing enough to withstand a trial.  If Trump had indeed committed a crime, the IRS would have shown it a long time ago and brought charges; they are greedy enough to do that, and the rich is as much fair game as the poorWhat does not count, and should never, ever count, is a bunch of people in a position of power grabbing those tax records to see if there's a crime on the inside, and based on nothing more than their own bigotry and hatred of the man. "Trump hurt our feelings" doesn't count! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 06:11, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Don't say RobS didn't warn you, folksHe didn't even mention Kamala Harris, but she's similar to Hillary too, and the DNC and the donors had been grooming her for the Presidential roleNotwithstanding, she was a precursor to Warren's precipitous plummet, a front-runner having dropped to 2%. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 23:14, 4 November 2019 (EST)
:The opposition wants Trump's tax returns due to the following reasons: Trump wants to pare down the administrative state; Trump is a nationalist who wants fair trade and he wants allies who pull their weight and are not merely protectorates; and lastly, Trump is an ally of the religious right and he is putting socially conservative judges in the judicial system. On top of this, he is blunt and sometimes brash. Those are the main reasons why Trump is hated by many of his enemies although there are other reasons as well.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:16, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:Yep. As Harris herself says, those racist and sexist Democrats aren't ready for black woman president.  
::In any $4 billion enterprise, there are lots of people involved. If a maid at a Trump hotel got arrested for shoplifting, I'm sure our leftist friends will argue Trump heads an organization that hires criminals, or Trump is a greedy capitalist who exploits working class people and doesn't pay them enough, forcing them into a life of crime. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:33, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== JohnSelway: Stop the sore loserism. Donald Trump and his supporters have won hands down ===
+
:Things are setting up pretty good for a wildcard, a dark horse, maybe even a third party candidate. Otherwise we're looking a Pete Buttigieg. Buttigieg is hard to get excited about.  OTOH, Biden hasn't suffered much, he's holding steady with his black base. It's hard to imagine blacks jumping from Biden to Buttigieg, Warren, or Sanders. Polls show Trump has a 42% approval among black males. If that holds, it won't matter who the Democrats nominate. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:34, 4 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It's bizarre to see Biden leading the pack again.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html] This is a man with no discernible principles or talent beyond raking in all that dirty money from Ukraine, China, Romania, etc. etc. [https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Jimmy+Dore+biden+president&view=detail&mid=07D9BE56CD19CA8DDFDB07D9BE56CD19CA8DDFDB&FORM=VIRE This video] of Biden forgetting Obama's name has to be seen to be believed: "He's saying that it was President [long pause with blank expression] my boss." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:58, 5 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Blacks are sticking with a moderate they know. It demonstrates that blacks are not particularly excited or happy about the radical left turn the rest of the party has taken. Remember blacks are pro-God, pro-family, pro-entrepreneurial capitalism, pro-gun rights for self defense (after their experience with the KKK and Democrats), anti-crime, anti-bad schools, anti-illegal immigration, and anti-stupidity.
 +
:::Blacks who don't support Biden support Trump. [https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/11/04/number-democrats-showing-trump-rallies-stunning/] We're seeing the long awaited break up of the Democratic behemoth.  Blacks know instinctively if they don't stop voting Democrat, it will be another 150 years before a black man is ever elected President after the experience of Obama. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:09, 5 November 2019 (EST)
  
A ''New York Times'' article admitted that this statement of [[Donald Trump]] was prophetic: "We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you'll say please, please Mr. President, It's too much winning! We can't take it anymore!"[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQOgUVsUQJQ]
+
==Popular government==
  
You can keep kvetching about Donald Trump, but in the end Trump and his supporters are going to keep on winning.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:13, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
The United States may not be a democracy, but [[James Madison]] called it a popular government.  He also said:
  
:I agree. So back off, pal! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 15:54, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:[I]n a democracy the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and administer it by their representives and agents...
  
== Massive deregulation in Idaho ==
+
:[M]ost of the popular governments of antiquity were of the democratic species; and even in modern Europe, to which we owe the great principle of representation, no example is seen of a government wholly popular, and founded, at the same time, wholly on that principle. If Europe has the merit of discovering this great mechanical power in government, by the simple agency of which the will of the largest political body may be concentrated, and its force directed to any object which the public good requires, America can claim the merit of making the discovery the basis of unmixed and extensive republics. (''Federalist Papers'', no. 14, 1787)
  
Some good news in Idaho -- the legislature failed to renew the state's 8,200 pages of regulations, so they'll all expire on July 1: [https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/esto-brevis-how-idaho-accidentally-let-all-of-its-regulations-expire] This development won't harm citizens, partially because many of these regulations are unhelpful and partially because the government will seek to enforce a limited number of them. Hopefully, this "accident" will bring long-term regulatory improvement to Idaho. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:36, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 02:01, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:The word that has crept into the American political vocabulary ''via'' Hillary Clinton no less is [[stakeholder]]. It's still common now in State Department press releases, usually about negotiations with foreign "stakeholders" while ignoring popular sentiment in various countries. Mexico, Egypt, and Turkey are all considered "democratic" in American parlance, while really being governed by "stakeholders", similar to the British House of Lords prior to the 1990s reforms. Brexit and Trumpism are struggles between populism and established "stakeholders", i.e. multinational corporate globalists. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:02, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
== Australia rejects climate alarmism ==
+
==Response to unimportant remarks==
  
Australia's Labour Party went all in on climate nuttery and has gone down to defeat: "[https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/05/breaking-big-election-upset-in-australia.php Breaking: Big Election Upset in Australia]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:46, 18 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Some self-proclaimed watchdogs of truth here are in reality Big Babies for their liberal cause.  What is this uproar among the nations?  Why are the pagans devising a vain thing? The {{sc|Lord}} and His anointed scoff at them.  Then he speaks to them with anger: "I have established thee a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek."
  
== Is Trump derangement for real? ==
+
Strangely, SamHB wasn't convinced by my clear statement that there is a movement, especially among non-denominational church-goers, of not calling their relationship with Jesus Christ a religion.  He also seems completely unaware that it has been that way for over thirty years.
  
Crazier than thou: "[https://hotair.com/archives/2019/05/20/dems-fake-stress-over-trumps-election/ You Knew It! Dems Are Faking Their Stress Over Trump’s Election]." I have to say, no I didn't know it. But I guess it makes some sense. It used to be that the left boasted of how deeply angry it was. Now the ideal is Blasey Ford, who looks pathetic and gets victim points by posing as a head case. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:22, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Nor did he notice the different strains of arguments along those same lines, clearly committed to memory after passages of time, that only could have been independently developed, among Christian Conservapedians, nor did he stop to think that the basis for rejecting the reports of the Gallup poll results presupposed that custom, rather than it being suggested as a matter for dispute, nor did he look to see it was actually shown to be the case after JohnZ repeated the poll question.
:The website Marketwatch reported concerning the aftermath of the 2016 presidential race: ''[[Donald Trump|Trump]]’s win is causing a surge in demand for mental health services''[http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trumps-win-is-causing-a-surge-in-demand-for-mental-health-services-2016-11-10].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:25, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::''[[The Guardian]]'' reported about [[Brexit]]:
+
Nor did he search the internet to look for other examples to see if he could confirm or deny the doubt he expressed, nor was he paying attention when I repeated one of the same arguments to User:Conservative three years ago when he queried his fellow editors about a poll from Baylor University, and of course Sam's lazy skeptic behavior is just the personality type people like the most.
::::In shrinks’ offices across the country, just as in homes, pubs and offices, people are trying to come to terms with the surprise and shock of the Brexit result. Strangers gather together to talk of how “the world is falling apart”.
+
  
::::Many people feel transported into a dystopian Britain that they “do not recognise, cannot understand”. Thousands are hatching plans to leave the country. Social media are full of suddenly violent flaming between former friends.
+
I only dealt with one crybaby in this section, so why did I omit others?  Maybe I'll get to them later. It's not as if disputing these slack-handed objections are pressing or significant. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 23:35, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::Therapists everywhere are reporting shockingly elevated levels of anxiety and despair, with few patients wishing to talk about anything else. Mental health referrals have already begun to mushroom. Why is the Brexit vote affecting us so personally? And, what does this tell us about the make-up of our psyches?[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/29/eu-referendum-mental-health-vote]
+
==Golden Fleece Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2016 dinner guests==
  
:::See also: [[Secular leftists and psychogenic illness]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:30, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
+
[[John Brennan]]<br>
 +
[[Susan Rice]]<br>
 +
[[Eric Ciaramella]] knew John Brennan, Susan Rice, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, was 1st whistle-blower<br>
 +
[[Joe Biden]]<br>
 +
[[Nancy Pelosi]]<br>
 +
[[John Kerry]]<br>
 +
[[Loretta Lynch]]<br>
 +
[[John Podesta]]<br>
 +
[[Tony Podesta]]<br>
 +
[[Valerie Jarrett]]<br>
 +
[[Samantha Power]]<br>
 +
[[Leonardo DiCaprio]]<br>
 +
[[James Clapper]]<br>
 +
[[James Comey]]<br>
 +
[[Matteo Renzi]] helped Brennan, Comey spy on Trump, possible target of Bill Barr and John Durham<br>
 +
[[Charles Kupchan]], [[Eric Ciaramella]]'s boss. Worked at [[NSC]]
  
::Associated Press (May 21, 2019). [https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/national-international/911-Call-Manhattan-Jumper-Handmaid-Outfit-Umbrella-Police-NYPD-Joke-510264021.html?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_CHBrand "Liberal woman reports woman on roof of New York City building dressed as oppressed woman from  television series ''A Handmaid's Tale'' about to jump; police arrive, encounter large red umbrella."] NBC Chicago 5 website.
+
The White House<br>
:
+
Washington D.C.<br>
::The story was very plausible since you might expect a liberal to climb to the top of a building or tree and act like a nut.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 13:11, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
1:00 pm<br>
 +
Formal attire<br>
 +
RSVP<br>
  
== Kobach for immigration czar ==
+
Menu<br>
 +
[it writes itself] Roast Trump
  
If Kris Kobach wants a jet on call to be immigration czar, I say give him a jet on call. Anne Coulter is pushing Kobach hard.[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ann-coulter-celebrates-kirstjen-nielsens-resignation-hallelujah] For Trump, it's a win-win. If Kobach can resolve the immigration crisis, a jet is a small price to pay. If he can't, Trump can say that he gave the Coulterian approach a chance. The drama surrounding the appointment creates pressure for Kobach to produce results. As the crisis at the border escalates, the time has come for desperate measures. See "[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/give-kris-kobach-whatever-he-wants-if-he-can-fix-the-asylum-scam Give Kris Kobach whatever he wants if he can fix the asylum scam]" and "[https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a27541070/kris-kobach-immigration-czar-demands-leak/ Kris Kobach's Cartoon Demands to Serve as Trump Immigration Czar Just Leaked]." The second article is an MSM hatchet job. After seeing how much the MSM hates him, I only want to see him appointed more. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:32, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
 
:If you want Kobach running anything important, you [https://www.propublica.org/article/kris-kobachs-lucrative-trail-of-courtroom-defeats haven't been paying attention]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:29, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
 
::The article is an example of severe [[liberal bias]].  Kobach made less for doing a ton of work than his adversaries; the article made a key factual error as it admits at the end; and many Trump-appointed judges are likely to vindicate Kobach's arguments.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:59, 21 May 2019 (EDT)
 
:::You must be joking. The man's [https://www.propublica.org/article/kris-kobach-voter-fraud-kansas-trial a disaster] [https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/election/article221350970.html on wheels]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 07:53, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
 
::::@JohnZ: All you've proved by your comment is that you're uncritically drinking the left-wing Kool-Aid. [[Voter fraud]] does happen in the U.S., and even if it didn't, it's still a wise idea to have laws safeguarding against it. Also, Kobach, as a strong conservative, was strongly opposed and harshly attacked by many in the GOP establishment who agree with 50% of liberal positions anyway and who did the exact same against Trump in 2016. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:56, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
 
:::::Oh, c'mon. Kobach is a clown: ''...“it is not clear to the Court whether Defendant repeatedly failed to meet his disclosure obligations intentionally or due to his unfamiliarity with the federal rules.” She ordered Kobach to attend the equivalent of after-school tutoring: six hours of extra legal education on the rules of civil procedure or the rules of evidence (and to present the court with a certificate of completion).'' 
 
  
:::::Which is almost as funny as being contradicted by his own expert witness on voter fraud: ''"In the courtroom, Ho asked Richman if he believed his research supported such a claim. Richman stammered. He repeatedly looked at Kobach, seemingly searching for a way out. Ho persisted and finally, Richman gave his answer: “I do not believe my study provides strong support for that notion."'' [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:36, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
[[Diane Feinstein]] liked China together with [[Joe Biden]]<br>
::::What you conveyed about that witness's testimony doesn't seem to me like that deep of a contradiction, and I suspect that Kobach had more than one witness.  You'd do better to stick to the facts.
+
[[Sean Misko]] Second whistle-blower, recruited by [[Adam Schiff]], August 2019<br>
:
+
[[Abigail Grace]] Schiff employee, recruited February 2019<br>
::::If you did, it could show that Kobach was very effective, for it could be that among those of the many illegal immigration lovers, there have been some who were watching his every move to obtain any piece of information that could be used to damage his reputation, in hopes of preventing illegal aliens from leaving the country.
+
:
+
::::I hope that Trump picks Kobach, because he acknowledges the illegal alien problem, and because Kobach can do the things he does best like running an operation or being an expert in immigration law and delegate authority to those who can do better what he is less able to do himself. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 12:40, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Hahaha. Feel free to identify some facts that show Kobach was very effective in that courtroom. Best of luck, son. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:50, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Liberals oppose the Harvard/Oxford/Yale-educated Kobach because they know how effective he would be.  Liberals wouldn't protest so much otherwise.  No one or very few doubt Kobach's abilities.  What liberals stridently oppose are his positions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:39, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::: Unfortunately, in the U.S. (and the EU), it doesn't matter how sound or strong your legal arguments are -- what matters is the personal beliefs of the judge in question, since many judges, particularly those on the Left, subscribe to the "living constitution" theory. If more judges on Kansas were originalists and textualists who don't subscribe to judicial activism, Kobach would have won many more cases. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 03:53, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Scalia himself could have run that bench trial in Kansas, and Kobach would still have gone down in flames. You, too, should feel free to present any evidence to the contrary. I'm away for a few days now - that should give you plenty of time to read up on the case. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 08:01, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Your absence means you'll have fewer opportunities to prove your ignorance of judicial activism. In the meantime, I recommend you read up on these related cases of judicial ideological conflicts of interest: [https://www.theepochtimes.com/obama-appointed-judge-who-upheld-committees-subpoena-of-trump-donated-to-democrats-on-committee_2935592.html][https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/federal-judge-who-blocked-trumps-border-wall-donated-20k-to-obama] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 13:58, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
''New York Times'' is reporting it will be [[Ken Cuccinelli]].  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 00:16, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:56, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
:"The ''New York Times'' is always wrong." - Donald Trump.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 01:41, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Exactly! They're due for a win.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 12:36, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Message to JohnZ: Trump knows building a wall and putting in a hardliner for immigration czar is a must for being reelected because Trump needs turnout from his base to win in 2020. Whoever is going to be put in the position of immigration czar is going to be a hardliner, and Trump is going to demand results from him, or he will be fired.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:18, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
=== Message to JohnZ: Re: Anti-immigration nationalism and recent victories ===
+
  
The ''[[New York Times]]'' FINALLY Admits: The World is Turning [[Nationalism|Nationalist]] [[Populism|Populist]].[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQOgUVsUQJQ]
+
==[[O’Sullivan’s First Law]]==
  
The ''New York Times'' article admitted that this statement of [[Donald Trump]] was prophetic: "We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you'll say please, please Mr. President, It's too much winning! We can't take it anymore!"
+
[[File:Pew polls Democrat divergence 1994-2017.jpg|right|275px]]
 +
It's not your imagination.
  
Speaking on behalf of my fellow Conservapedians, we are declaring total victory when it comes to the Western World. It's all over with the fireworks liberals/leftists. You had your day. It is largely a moppping-up operation now!
+
:Wow, those graphs really illustrate the point.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:11, 21 October 2019 (EDT)
  
9/11 and the terror attacks in France and elsewhere combined with stagnant wages stoked a lot of anti-Muslim immigration around the world.  
+
==Y'all==
 +
...should probably read [https://www.lawfareblog.com/amb-william-taylor-testifies-impeachment-inquiry Bill Taylor's opening statement]. Your boy just got deep-sixed. Best to start the grieving process now so you're all ready to rally round the flag for Pence 2020. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:15, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>''Yawn''* A State Department official (one of the most liberal of the various government agencies, which says a lot) said something bad about Trump. This is old news and has been for the past three years. It's happened countless times. I recommend you read/watch this: [https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/10/22/fncs-ingraham-who-are-these-deep-state-state-department-types-heading-into-the-hill-to-testify/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:27, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::That's the spirit. Denial's the first stage. Get it all out. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:34, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Exactly -- this is probably the 20th time you've posted something on this talk page essentially saying: "look at this--Trump's going down big time and you're all going to weep." Well, we're still waiting. He won't be removed from office, he won't resign, and there's a good chance he'll win re-election next year. The media's been making predictions of Trump resigning since 2017. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:50, 22 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Did the media ever object to any investigation of Trump? The Obama FBI thoroughly investigated him when he was a candidate -- and came up with nothing. At least that's what the NYT reported at the time. Hunter Biden got $83,000 a month from Burisma and never even went to Ukraine. It was probably all because of his unique skill set and had nothing at all to do with the fact that his dad was Obama's "point man" on Ukraine. All the same, I don't see any harm in asking the Ukrainian government to check it out. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:15, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Bill Taylor is a Russian asset. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:10, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
Trump is not only resilient, he is anti-fragile. What do I mean by that? I mean not only are these illegitimate attacks and threats of impeachment not harming Trump, but they are making him stronger.  When the Democrates shout impeachment, Trump's reelection team sounds out campaign donation requests and the money is flooding in. Please see: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_qvvyUhMxg Trump's record-breaking cash haul reportedly rattling Dems].[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:22, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
In the near term, the only major task left is to bring the godless, communist Chinese to the bargaining table and strike an acceptable trade deal. Of course, it is just a matter of time before this happens because Donald Trump is a winner![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:26, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:''Antifragile?!'' Trump is going to pieces so fast, most of his people have abandoned their posts to avoid the smouldering orange shrapnel. There's no way we would've seen the Syria or Doral disasters if he still had a functioning WH/legal team (or competent Congressional allies) determined to see him through to 2020.  
:Aye. Game over, man. Roll the credits. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:36, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Trump, Iran, and declarations of war ==
+
:This is the ugly twisting in the wind stage while McConnell tries to figure out how to pull the trigger and still save the Senate. Expect Bolton and Romney to play prominent roles, with Pence as the clean-hands conservative for the base to rally round afterwards.  [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:00, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
''The American Conservative'', a bi-monthly paleoconservative magazine founded by Pat Buchanan, Scott McConnell, and Taki Theodoracopulos, has published [https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/impeachment-should-be-on-the-table-if-trump-bombs-iran/ an article] on its website calling for Congress to impeach President Trump if he goes to war with Iran without a declaration of war. The article was written by Gene Healy, a vice president at the Cato Institute.  
+
::I think we should dig up all your past predictions of Trump's imminent doom. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:06, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::You mean the Syrian cease-fire????  (This is my impression of SamHB's unnecessary punctuation manoeuvre, where he tries to stun readers into abandoning rational thought.  Only this time, the question is based on something relevant. And yes, I know I'm replying to JohnZ—SamHB does it too.) [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:16, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Knock yourself out, man. It's almost certainly of greater historical utility than chronicling Trump's "achievements". [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:39, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Yet, you won't comment on the cease-fire.  <s>Coward</s>. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:41, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::The withdrawal / "cease-fire" looks like a rotten deal for the Kurds. It's also hard to see how it advances US interests in the region. See if the Israelis are happy about it. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
[[File:C9Pak4-W0AIldKy (1).jpg|right|350px|thumb|Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton, Feb. 12, 2012, "Al Qaeda is on our side in Syria." ''The Guardian'' reported on July 30, 2012, “[Al-Qaida’s] goal is establishing an Islamic state and not a Syrian state.” [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/30/al-qaida-rebels-battle-syria] ]]
 +
:::::::Yah. Real leadership. First you arm al Qaeda. When al Qaeda morphs into ISIS and starts beheading people, then you arm the Kurds to fight the monster you created. The Kurds take the arms you give them and commit terrorist attacks against a NATO ally.
 +
:::::::Why don't you go die for Obamunism and Clintonism if its such a glorious cause. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:15, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Man, I love it when you try and do history. You'll never have the stones to admit it, but you were cheering bin Laden, the mujahideen and the CIA every inch of the way when they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.
  
Feel free to address and/or rebut Healy's core argument: that ". . . except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress . . .” is an impeachable offense. The quotation is from a 2012 House resolution introduced by Walter Jones (R-NC), and is used in the article. [[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] [[User talk:Geopolitician|(talk)]] Wednesday, 13:13, May 22, 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::And as far as the current situation in Syria goes, there's a whole bunch of GOP senators who've just witnessed Trump get pantsed by Erdogan and Putin. Bear that in mind when you're running the odds on his Senate trial. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:40, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
:Iran is dependent on oil exports and the U.S. Navy controls the shipping lanes. I don't see how a confrontational policy can end well for Iran. Iraq defeated Iran in the Iran-Iraq War, so how hard can it be? We should find out before they get nuclear weapons. They are allowed to continue with supposedly civilian aspects of their nuclear program under Obama's nuclear deal. None of the Iranian reactors is producing electricity for the grid, so claim that any portion of the program is non-military is a fiction. The Iranians have announced they will withdraw from the nuclear deal on July 7. If that happens, the U.S. can move ahead with European support. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 13:48, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Not to say that they had abided by the treaty before then.  The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad produced evidence that Iran has been working furiously on their nuclear weapon program practically since the day after they signed that nuclear deal. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 18:52, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::There are several theories about the current situation. One is Trump is looking for an excuse to fire John Bolton. Secondly, a large scale ground action seems highly unlikely. More-likely is a quick widespread strike on Iranian operations throughout the region, including, but not limited to, assets in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and the territory of Iran. The longer the delay, the more greater the risk of a Chinese reaction. Also, a strike against Iran may result in fulfilling former National Security Advisor [[Michael Flynn]]'s strategy of coaxing [[Putin]] out of [[Russia]]'s military alliance with Iran.
+
:::::::::No, we did not cheer on or, heck, have any involvement in bin Laden or al Qaeda's actions in Afghanistan during the Soviet-Afghan war. He got his own form of training and supplies. The 9/11 Commission Report made that VERY clear. Now, the mujahideen was in fact backed by us, but on the other hand, the mujahideen also attempted to aid us in taking out Osama bin Laden during the Clinton years (just watch Path to 9/11, or more specifically the deleted footage). As far as GOP senators, give names (besides Mitch McConnell, I mean). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::The basic playbook to review is Trump/Kim jong-un North Korea playbook - tuff talk followed by hugs 'n kisses. China is the big focus here, in dealing with both North Korea and Iran. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:06, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Eh? Who's this "we" you're talking about? You weren't even born when the Soviets withdrew. And if you think bin Laden wasn't elbow deep in the wider mujahideen effort - and coordinating extensively with other US-backed proxies - then you've got yourself some serious lernin' to do.
:::[https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/12/john-boltons-long-goodbye/ See also]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:18, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== Trump needs to fire John Bolton NOW. ===
+
::::::::::As for GOP senators, there's currently a grand total of [https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/22/republican-senator-ruled-out-impeachment-trump/ ''seven''] who've come out explicitly against impeachment. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:12, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::[https://www.scribd.com/doc/431916070 46 Republican Senators] are on the record condemning the unconstitutional Pelosi/Schiff impeachment process: 1.Graham 2.McConnell 3.Grassley 4.Thune 5.Blunt 6.Shelby 7.Inhofe 8.Roberts 9.Crapo 10.Cornyn 11.Burr 12.Barrasso 13.Wicker 14.Risch 15.Boozman 16.Moran 17.Toomey 18.Rubio 19.Paul 20.Hoeven 21.Lee 22.Johnson 23.Scott (SC) 24.Fischer 25.Cruz 26.Capito 27.Cassidy 28.Lankford 29.Cotton 30.Daines 31.Perdue 32.Ernst 33.Tillis 34.Rounds 35.Sasse 36.Young 37.Kennedy 38.Hyde-Smith 39.Blackburn 40.Cramer 41.McSally 42.Braun 43.Hawley 44.Scott (FL) 45.Portman and 46.Sullivan. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:30, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Just when you thought John Bolton couldn't sink any lower, he decided to spread lies about the extent of Deep State influences among President Trump's staff. According to John Bolton, all the reports about how certain members of Trump's staff have been insubordinate and/or sabotaging his agenda are fake news. Even if the reports are from conservative sources. Fake news. It's all propaganda created by North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and/or China.[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/john-bolton-substantial-belief-five-countries-spreading-lies-on-trump-team-dysfunction]
+
<--- Well, it's much more measured in tone than the Cipollone letter, but it's just as constitutionally illiterate. Trump will get all the rich creamy justice and due process he can handle in his Senate trial. In the meantime, the House gets to set the rules and there's no requirement to hold a vote on starting an impeachment inquiry. Graham and McConnell know this, of course, but they're hoping the rubes and loons in the base will swallow it as a sincere and suitably ''forceful'' act of protest.
  
In other words, he's now attacking the base and accusing people like us of being useful idiots for America's enemies. And when I say he thinks we're "useful idiots," I mean "useful ''idiots''." He thinks we're stupid enough to believe that "oh, he's just talking about the left-wing media." No, he's not. He's talking about ''all'' media, including pro-Trump media. You know, the pro-Trump media that's reporting the insubordination/sabotage ''in good faith'' because ''they want this administration to succeed?''
+
Don Jr. and allies have already condemned it as weak sauce process / precedent bluster (which it obviously is), and apparently want Graham to start holding parallel hearings in the Senate. Lindsey's none too enthusiastic about that, though... [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:56, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:This is a tempest in a teapot. Barr/Durham will start raining down the artillery of prosecution on some of the Democrats. The Senate will vote not to impeach Trump. And the exceedingly weak Democratic candidate to Trump in the presidential election will be steamrolled by the 2020 Trumpslide. It will be a brutal campaign, but Trump will once again be the triumphant winner. Because that is what winners do. They win![[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 23:22, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I think our friend JohnZ doesn't understand the American justice system. Even a homeless bum on the street who's arrested for panhandling understands that he is entitled to [[due process]], which Democrats have ignored and bulldozed under a mountain of garbage. If they want to proceed with this railroad job of burning the Constitution in plain sight of all, it will cost them dearly for generations to come - generations that survive their abortion holocaust and generations of immigrants. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 03:54, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
If that disgraceful display of arrogance doesn't convince you that Bolton is part of the Deep State, then I don't know what else to say.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:16, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Wut? Trump is currently in a far better position than any ordinary poor schmo under criminal investigation. There are '''47''' GOP members of the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight Committees entitled to sit in on the depositions and ask questions, so he's got ''friendly representation'' in what is essentially a grand jury process.
  
:Not disagreement with what you wrote, but while I oppose Bolton's positions on foreign intervention and overseas troops, I think he's really good on other issues such as international organizations and national sovereignty, and I think he actually has advanced Trump's nationalist agenda on those issues despite failing on troop levels and interventionism.
+
:::And when that 47 includes partisan cranks-on-wheels like Devin Nunes, Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan, no sane person believes that a) witnesses aren't being subjected to hostile questioning, or that b) Trump isn't getting a blow-by-blow account of proceedings. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:49, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::It's not even worth debating if you are going to pretend to be that ignorant of justice, due process, and the Constitution. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:58, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::You keeping banging on about the Constitution. It's so silent on the matter, Pelosi could write "abuse of power" on the back of a napkin and put it forward as an article of impeachment for the House to vote on. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:31, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::You are correct. The House could even vote on and pass it. And it's ''still'' a violation of an American citizens due process rights. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:33, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Because of that, I'm reluctant to call for firing Bolton because the likelihood of him being replaced by an even worse globalist, similar to McMaster, is high. The deep state will fight tooth and nail against choosing someone like Douglas MacGregor, who I think should serve in the Trump Administration. Instead, I would prefer if Trump chooses a good Defense Secretary, like MacGregor or Jim Webb, who will counter Bolton on the issues he performs poorly at while still allowing Bolton to advance issues related to sovereignty. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:30, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Nope. In our hypothetical, a fair trial in the Senate would give Trump his full complement of due process rights. He'd also have his Fifth Amendment grand jury protection prior to this, as Nancy's napkin would have to convince a majority of the House to vote to impeach.  
  
::At this point, I actually believe Bolton is worse than McMaster. And this is coming from the guy who created the "McMasterites" article.  
+
:::::::If you want to argue otherwise, you'll need to show how being impeached by the House deprives Trump of life, liberty, or property. Best of luck with that. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 12:07, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::This man has nothing but contempt for the concept of an "America First" foreign policy, and he's not even trying to hide it anymore. He is ''constantly'' trying to lure us into a war, more often than not on behalf of an "ally" that we shouldn't have anything to do with for both ideological and practical reasons. He wants us to go to war with Iran and Turkey on behalf of Saudi Arabia. He wants us to go to war with Venezuela on behalf of Juan Guaido, who is a socialist just like Maduro. He may even want us to go to war with Russia! He also wants the US to support far left militias in the Middle East such as the MEK and the PKK. He attempted to sabotage the Syria withdrawal, and he may have even succeeded at that one. And now he's attacking Trump's base as useful idiots for America's enemies.
+
::::::Wrong.  Your hypothetical, an impeachment based on bad faith as ''you'' chose to put it, written ''"on a napkin"'' deprives the ''American people'' the due process rights of an election!  Trump is our agent!  And we will not stand for you to deny them, even in the form of insulting hypotheticals! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 21:42, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::Trump has fired other staff over far less. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:53, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Great stuff. Go shake your fist at the Constitution, not me. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:15, 28 October 2019 (EDT)  
:::John Bolton a Deep Stater? Surely you jest. Bolton is Trump's pitbull on Iran, precisely at the time it's needed. The risk of war with China is overriding, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkRM8k2N1FU&feature=youtu.be they have said as much]. Trump splitting-off North Korea from the Chinese orbit is not complete, and at a very difficult stage. The Chinese-Iranian alliance (through Huwai and other sanction export violators) makes simultaneous naval confrontations in the Persian Gulf and South China Sea very real. What's most important in diplomacy is that Iranians believe war with the US is a real possibility, and we're not there just to show the flag. That's Bolton's job right now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:28, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::IMO, Trump's foreign policy has been going quite well lately. He just made a breakthrough on the asylum issue with Mexico. The Russians are out of Venezuela. The sanctions against both China and Iran seem to be making progress. So I would question the need for a staff shakeup. Of course, Secretary of State Pompeo deserves his share of the credit. The issue with Bolton may relate to problems with North Korea. NK is a puppet state of China. I assume the Chinese are using NK to get back at us on the trade issue. Either way, the focus needs to stay on China/U.S. relations. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:34, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::RobS, I absolutely am not jesting. Virtually all of Bolton's actions have been motivated by a desire to get us into another war in the Middle East. He wants a war because he wants to keep the petrodollar alive. He doesn't care that Saudi Arabia is the greater of two evils when compared to Iran. In fact, he's all in on perpetuating the Deep State lie that ''Iran'' is the greater evil. He is willing to pull every dirty trick in the book to make sure this war happens, even if it means committing public acts of insubordination against President Trump. Not only is he part of the Deep State, I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of the Deep State's ''leaders''.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:15, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::PeterKa, all of Trump's successes with foreign policy will be meaningless if Bolton gets his way with Iran. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:15, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::An Arab told me on Facebook that the Saudis don't make love to their wives without consulting Washington first, so trying to gauge who's the lesser of two evils, the Saudi clan or the Iranian Supreme Council is an ideological debate. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:22, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::The Saudis are and always have been the greater evil. They control the Muslim World League, a so-called "charity" that is responsible for funding most of the Islamist terrorism that has taken place over the past 40 years. That includes virtually every Islamist attack on the West. In stark contrast, almost all of Iran's state-sponsored terrorism has been confined to the Middle East. The Saudis have a much wider reach and a much higher body count. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:30, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Of coarse. There's 10 times more Sunnis than Shia. The Muslim World League is a competing organization to the Muslim Brotherhood. It was created to compete for recruits and control them. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 00:48, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::@Geopolitician: I strongly disagree with the notion that Bolton is worse than McMaster. McMaster blindly accepted the neocon/liberal "consensus" on globalism and international organizations and made no effort to challenge the EU or UN. McMaster also wanted Trump to continue his predecessor's policies on trade. Also, it was McMaster who advocated for a major troop surge in Afghanistan when we should rather be pulling out: [https://dailycaller.com/2017/07/24/trump-sends-back-mcmaster-plan-to-surge-troops-in-afghanistan/][https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/08/us/politics/donald-trump-afghanistan-troops-taliban-stalemate.html] (not as many troops were added as McMaster wanted).
+
::::::Your hypothetical contradicts itself, not the constitution! A denial of the rights of the American people through a bad faith impeachment could not [allow Trump to be provided] with procedural due process [by extension] to his grand jury [despite] the fifth amendment rights you assume <s>they</s> would protect [them], because [the results of the denial] would be fruit from a poisonous tree! If I were you, I'd choose my next words very carefully, as you've already chosen words beneath what the dignity of the American people should be obliged to bear! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 23:13, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::Bolton, on the other hand, vocally supports Brexit and has challenged/opposed international organizations and treaties which reduce American sovereignty and threaten the freedoms contained in the Constitution. I agree that his views are wrong when it comes to troop levels and foreign wars, but I also think he can be considered a nationalist when it comes to other areas like sovereignty. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:45, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Go home, Vargas. [https://youtube.com/watch?v=0k9SjMpAxRM You're drunk]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:53, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
::::Trump does not want to get into another war. He cares more about the men in military than many of his predecessors and does not want to spill their blood in another pointless/endless war (Trump is the only president who is making significant reforms to the VA). He is also a businessman and doesn't think the return on investment is good in modern day wars. Trump picked Bolton for the obvious reason that Bolton scares U.S. enemies/frenemies so they will think twice about attacking the USA. I just wish the Trump administration would pull the USA out of the Afghanistan quagmire as soon as possible.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:20, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::We can't pull out of Afghanistan. That would hand over the $60 billion a year international heroin trade to China and the Taliban, who not only will profit off of destroying Western European and American children, will use the profits to fund terrorism (in the case of the Taliban) and modernize their military (in the case of China). Take off your rose-colored glasses and stop sounding like an idiot/ideologue. This is the real world, and has been the real world for the seventeen years we've been in Afghanistan. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:15, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Yeah, and besides, considering that after we drove out the Soviets, we let the Afghanis alone and that ultimately resulted in the Taliban taking over, and that essentially resulted in not just 9/11, but also the World Trade bombing in 1993, USS Cole bombing, among others, we simply cannot afford to leave Afghanistan. Heck, do I really need to remind you of Vietnam? We left the country, and it fell apart shortly thereafter thanks to those idiot Democrats in Congress slashing arms shipments to Vietnam. We cannot afford to leave until we have a decisive victory. If we leave too soon, we WILL have another 9/11 on our hands sooner or later. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 12:20, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::1990'sguy, Bolton may not be a globalist, but his positions on interventionism are so extreme that sometimes I wish he was. If he were a globalist, we'd all be united against him, instead of some of us overlooking just how dangerous this man really is.
+
:::::::Conservative, Trump may not want to get into another war, but Bolton clearly does. And his recent behavior indicates that he's dissatisfied with merely scaring enemies (real or imagined) and would rather outright provoke them. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:47, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:Peace or war, the drone shoot down is already a win for warmongering anti-Russia Democrats and the Pentagon: [https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2019/06/how-pentagon-nickel-and-dimed-its-way-losing-drone/157901/?oref=defense_one_breaking_nl How the Pentagon Nickel-and-Dimed Its Way Into Losing a Drone]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:33, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Well, that is a fairly unintelligible response.  Let us hope this non-responsive utterance marks a return to an emphasis on learning and a departure from gratuitously insulting Trump—he undeserving of such, as demonstrated by the record of his achievements and accomplishments so comprehensively curated by [[User:1990'sguy]] in the Conservapedia article [[Donald Trump achievements]] and its sub-articles. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 15:39, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
===Iran attacks Gulf shipping===
+
===Obama bin Biden's jihadis===
Who does this kind of thing when the U.S. has [https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/06/08/breaking-news/u-s-carrier-in-persian-gulf-region-sends-clear-signal-to-iran/ a carrier stationed near the Gulf]? "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/oil-tankers-attacked-in-gulf-of-oman-us-navy-says/2019/06/13/d59b784c-8db0-11e9-b162-8f6f41ec3c04_story.html Oil tankers attacked in Gulf of Oman, U.S. Navy says]." It's time for the U.S. Navy to blow up some Iranian speedboats. Do another one every day ````````````````````````````````````````````````                                  the Iranians agree to pay damages to Oman. Iran is a nutty place. This is the top story in ''[https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/436919/Leader-No-talks-with-U-S Tehran Times]'': "Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei dismisses US President Donald Trump as a person not worthy of exchanging messages with." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 16:55, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::"We" as in America, obviously. And while it is true that I wasn't born when the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, I can tell you that the [https://web.archive.org/web/20060601201108/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec2.pdf 9/11 commission report] specifically states on page 56 that, and I quote, "But Bin Ladin and his comrades had their own sources of support and training, and they received little or no assistance from the United States." And the [https://web.archive.org/web/20150307182839/http://www.gpo.gov:80/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT-23.pdf footnote] near that even expands upon that by saying, and I quote, "In his memoir,Ayman al Zawahiri contemptuously rejects the claim that the Arab mujahideen were financed (even “one penny”) or trained by the United States. See Zawahiri,“Knights Under the Prophet’s Banner,” Al Sharq al Awsat,Dec.2,2001.CIA officials involved in aiding the Afghan resistance regard Bin Ladin and his “Arab Afghans” as having been militarily insignificant in the war and recall having little to do with him. Gary Schroen interview (Mar.3,2003)."
::Although I wouldn't be surprised if Iran did this, I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. Anyone else here concerned that it may have been a false flag?--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:47, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Iran is boasting that will acquire more than 300 kg of uranium by June 27 in open violation the nuclear deal.[https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/437072/Iran-s-stockpile-of-enriched-uranium-will-surpass-300-kg-by-June]. I liked this headline in ''Tehran Times'': "[https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/437087/If-Iran-does-something-it-will-bravely-announce-it-military If Iran does something it will ‘bravely’ announce it, military chief says in response to accusations of oil tanker incidents]". Mobster talk is the way to go when you are accused of something you can't refute. I notice that neither the ''Tehran Times'' nor the Iranian military chief are promoting Ben Rhodes' "false flag" line. Instead, they are threatening to cut off shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and are comparing Trump to....Saddam Hussien (?!). I mean, don't those Iranians realize that Saddam never had any WMD and was the innocent victim of George W. Bush's rage? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:42, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::It would take about 10 minutes to wipe out the Iranian navy. As noted, the U.S. can't risk simultaneous confrontations in the Gulf of Oman and the South China Sea. China is already in violation of Iranian sanctions with Huwai. That's why the pressure to act now quickly is on, before China has a chance to beef up its ally Iran. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:08, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I was thinking an attack on the Iranian navy as well. But Pompeo may have bigger things in mind. The U.S. is planning, "an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program," according to the ''[https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-News/UN-officials-US-is-planning-a-tactical-assault-in-Iran-592832 Jerusalem Post].'' The bombardment "will be massive, but limited to a specific target." Iran's nuclear facilities are protected by Russian S-300 anti-aircraft batteries. It seems that the Pentagon is now confident that it has a solution to that problem. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:59, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Do you believe such an aerial bombardment wouldn't escalate into a wider war? --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 11:57, 18 June 2019 (EDT)t
+
:::::::What do you mean 'wider war'? The US has no intention to occupy ground or force regime change. A 'wider conflict' would be engaging with the Chinese military in the South China Sea. Trump and Xi will meet in coming days. The pressure to act against Iranian forces and facilities is now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:58, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Iran has leverage all over the region thanks in large part to Bush's invasion of Iraq and Obama's "Arab Spring." ''Any'' large-scale attack on Iran will likely prompt it to retaliate in other parts of the region, starting a wider conflict which could get us into a war with among other countries China, Lebanon, Russia, Qatar, Syria, Turkey (and possibly other members of NATO if it invokes Article V), and/or Yemen.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 18:41, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::Destruction of the Iranian navy would end the supply line to Yemen; destruction of warmaking facilities would terminate overland supply lines to Syria (and Afghanistan). Tensions between Russia and Iran over Syria are already developing, to be discussed in Jerusalem this week. China's the wildcard here, and Trump has already made it clear to Chairman Xi he has to do something about North Korea's nuclear program if China wants continued trade talks. China has a decision to make, peace or war with the United States. And the US will no longer submit to nuclear blackmail, be it from North Korea, China, or Iran. Russia likely is with the US in this approach. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup>
+
:::::::::The Iranians have indicated many times that their plan is build a nuke and drop it on Israel. This, they hope, will bring about the end times. Tell me again about that wider war thing. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:08, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::I'm not disputing that. In fact, that gives us all the more reason to fear a wider war should we launch pre-emptive strikes.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:39, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::If we attack Iran, its proxies will attack our forces in Syria and Iraq. This will escalate fighting in the Levant and cause Russia, Syria, and Turkey to intervene. Meanwhile, Hezbollah and the Houthis will start attacking Israel and Saudi Arabia, causing those countries to get dragged in, along with Lebanon, Qatar, and Yemen. Meanwhile, if we end up attacking Turkey as a result of this wider war, there's a good chance Turkey will invoke Article V against us, and then what? And no, Russia is not with the US on this approach. We've alienated it so much that it now considers China to be the lesser evil. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:39, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Sure, there'd be a few scattered dead-enders and stragglers holding out. But once Iran's war making ability is destroyed, they'd have no re-supply of weapons. Food would become a problem in short order. And their attacks wouldn't be against Americans who vote in U.S. elections, so who cares? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:12, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::It won't matter if we destroy Iran's war-making ability. It already has enough clout in the region to blow it all up and spread the fighting across the entire western half of the Eurasian super-continent. This could be 1914 all over again.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 09:35, 19 June 2019 (EDT)]
+
::::::::::::You need weapons and food to fight. Do they have that? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 04:51, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::If a 1914 scenario occurs, it won't matter. We would have far more enemies to deal with and they would be more than happy to rectify any food shortages in Iran caused by our bombing runs.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 12:35, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::What you are talking about now is a breakdown in the whole sanctions regime ([[Magnitsky Act]], Iranian Sanctions Act, etc). The [[JCPOA]] was just that - recognition and concession by the Obama administration that the sanctions regime was failing. By extension, what you just suggested, would be a total break down of the global financial system. If Iran wanted or needed Chinese food or weapons assistance, it would have to shipped beyond the limits of the China's navy. As to food assistance locally, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere agricultural production has been hampered and disrupted by wars and terrorism (that's why there's 3 million refugees flooding Europe.
+
::::::::::::::Unreported in the U.S. is a Iranian missile attack on the sovereign territory of Saudi Arabia. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:38, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
::::Actually, Iran ''has'' promoted the "false flag" line[https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/436981/Iran-urges-U-S-allies-to-stop-false-flag-operations-in-region]. And again, although I'm not gonna outright say that it was or wasn't a false flag, I ''am'' going to point out that there are multiple actors in the region who want the US to go to war with Iran because they believe they will gain something from that. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 11:57, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::And I meant "give names" regarding which GOP senators witnessed Trump being "pantsed". And besides, there are 100 senators in the senate, so I'm pretty sure the Republican Party is the majority party, with 53 Republicans in the Senate. Even if 7 went up against impeachment, you still haven't listed the number of how many explicitly voted for impeachment, either. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 16:24, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
:::::Ok, so the phrase has been used by the UN delegation in New York. But wouldn't military and intelligence people be on the case if Iran was seriously promoting the idea? My point is, it's much more about the Russia collusion people looking for a new conspiracy theory to latch on to than it is about Iran. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:08, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::But it may not even be a conspiracy theory. It may in fact be what happened. There are multiple actors in the region who ''want'' war to happen. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:39, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::There is more than enough crude in the international market these days. Iran retains its old arrogance, but no longer has the leverage it once had. It's caught in a Thucydides trap. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:04, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::The whole incident resembles the 1980s when Libya challenged the US Navy and declared a 200 mile "line of death" over the Gulf of Sidre. After a few aspirin factories and fertilized plants were blown up, it was over. Yah, the Iran operation might take half a day or a few days at most. Itineraries of the G20 meeting are being discussed right now; when Trump & Xi are talking face-to-face might be good time to pull it off. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:36, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::The Iran operation will take far more than just a few days. The network of alliances created in the Middle East since 2003 will see to it.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 09:35, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Reagan also had to deal with a Tanker War in the Persian Gulf. ''[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/06/18/donald-trump-ronald-reagan-iran-227156 Politico'' has a story about it].<br/> The carrier USS Abraham Lincoln was sent to the gulf, not by Bolton or anyone in Washington, but by CENTCOM commander Frank McKenzie. <s>McKenzie is clearly a man we should all know more about, perhaps a proconsul in the making.</s> '''Add''' I shouldn't imply that McKenzie is freelancing. He is a protege of Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the joint chiefs. But it does appear that the military has made some major decisions without consulting the White House.<br/>As for the Gulf of Sirte incident, it was a response to attacks on the Rome and Vienna airports in 1985 by the Abu Nidal group. Libya retaliated for Gulf of Sirte taking down a Pan Am jet over Lockerbie. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:33, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::Iranian militia networks will whither on the vine once you eliminate Iran's weapons production and transport capacity. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:16, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::It's not just the 2019 Tanker attackers prompting a response; it's the discovery of 3 metric tones of ammonium nitrate fertilizer (almost twice the amount use in the [[Oklahoma City bombing]]) stockpiled in [[London]] months after the UK signed the [[Iran nuke deal]]. This news has been kept secret until now. [[Theresa May]]'s resignation may be directly related to this cover up, moreso than Brexit.
+
:::::::::::[[Hezbollah]] is under the direct command of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and is a standing occupation force in Lebanon. Hezbollah is in Venezuela, traffics cocaine to Africa, North America, and Europe. Hezbollah is not "just another terrorist group." It is an official arm of the Iranian government.
+
:::::::::::The revelation of Iranian activities has a media blackout in the US cause it conflicts with the 'Orange Man Bad' narrative. But it has [https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14409/iran-terrorism-europe not been hid in the UK.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:35, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==European Parliament==
+
::::::::::JohnZ, It's a moot point you're arguing about bin laden in the 1980s. Yes, bin Laden single-handedly took down the godless Soviet Union. Then, full of himself, he was going to take down the House of Saud and the United States, as well. And finally, create the Islamic State. You're peeing in the wind, again. Arming bin Laden was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BEsXLNE8tA Zbigniew Brzezinski's idea] after his brilliant "human rights" policy brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power. What's your point? Other than to prove what an ignorant idiot you are? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::Wut? My point - though you'll never admit it - is you were 100% cheering on Reagan, the CIA, the mujahideen (and by extension, bin Laden) when they were fighting the filthy commies in Afghanistan. So it's pretty funny watching you now play the committed isolationist and parroting Putin's talking points on US interventionism. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:29, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::First of all, while Reagan and the CIA were backing the mujahideen, they did NOT back bin Laden, or al Qaeda. In fact, Ayman al Zawahiri specifically stated that al Qaeda didn't get any backing from the United States, not even one penny, and specifically stated it in his tract ''Knights Under the Prophet's Banner'', which BTW was also sourced in the 9/11 Commission Report. And another thing, who said we're denying our backing Reagan and the CIA? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::"Arming bin Laden was [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BEsXLNE8tA Zbigniew Brzezinski's idea] after his brilliant "human rights" policy brought the Ayatollah Khomeini to power." Ah, don't you mean "arming the mujahideen" was Brzezinski's idea? Both Gary Schroen and Ayman al Zawahiri specifically denied that the United States supplied much, if any training and financing to al Qaeda, or for that matter to bin Laden, who headed al Qaeda back then as well. There's plenty to blame Brzezinski for, including the disastrous "human rights" policy that resulted in Iran becoming a terror state and the closest thing to a Caliphate, but I'm not sure al Qaeda/bin Laden is one of the tings to blame him for (and believe me, if he did in fact arm them, I most certainly would make sure he's blamed for it). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:16, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Earlier today, Friday, May 24, 2019, Europe voted in the European Parliament elections.  [[Tommy Robinson]] ran as an independent in a small Parliament district in the north of England.  Robinson was a free speech champion who had been jailed for reporting on the trial of a Muslim, contrary to the judge's gag order on public response to the trial for its duration.
+
::::::::::::Go do some more reading. If, after that, you can't see the historical significance of establishing an Islamist international brigade, then I really can't help you.
  
[[Nigel Farage]] ran with his fellow members on the [[Brexit Party]] slate, which under his leadership had grown to being the plurality party in Britain.  
+
::::::::::::Not sure what to make of your last paragraph (previous post). They all witnessed Trump get pantsed. There's no way to spin it as good for US interests / allies in the region, and this will likely have a  bearing on how many of them vote in the Senate trial.  
  
The results of the European Parliament election will be announced on Sunday, May 26, 2019. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 22:18, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::None of them have (or will) vote for impeachment. That's the House's job. Are you talking about who I think would vote to convict? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:32, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
:Voting started in the UK and the Netherlands on Thursday, May 23, and is ongoing through Sunday, the day which most countries vote. Let's hope Europe wises up and chooses patriotic parties this time around. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:45, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::I gave you the 9/11 Commission Report, and more than that, I even gave you sources cited within that document, in particular ''Knights Under the Prophet's Banner'' written by Ayman al-Zawahiri, and even an interview with Gary Schroen dated March 3, 2003 specifically stating that al Qaeda had minimal, if any funding or backing by the US during the Soviet-Afghan war. Not to mention [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asw8fhpz0wA a deleted scene] for ''Path to 9/11'' specifically had Mujahideen attempting to aid CIA agents in taking out Bin Laden (and only didn't do so because Sandy Berger and Bill Clinton evidently got cold feet, with the Mujahideen evidently having nothing to do with their failure, and if anything the Mujahideen were very adamant in wanting to kill Bin Laden, which can be gleaned from what bits of Path to 9/11 they DIDN'T cut due to Clinton interference.). And you shouldn't have mentioned GOP senators earlier regarding the whole Trump getting "pantsed" thing. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:51, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::And what is YOUR JOB here on this website, JohnZ?  So far all I've been seeing is a shoveling of your leftist ideology that's at odds with this site and the people in it. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 17:37, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden was rich. He didn't need CIA money. he was part of a coalition of the CIA and Saudi Arabia. He spent his own money ferrying jihadis from Saudi Arabia and the Middle East to Pakistan and Afghanistan. He spent most of his time in Pakistan as a cheerleader and motivational speaker for jihadis ("[[community organizer]]" in Marxist terms). He was one of the few leaders who survived the war (1988-89), and returned to Saudi Arabia as a hero and hometown kid who did good.  His falling out with the Saudi ruling klan came in 1991, when his offer to use his Afghan veteran jihadis to expel Saddam Hussein from Kuwait was rejected, and King Fahd invited American military personal into the Islamic Holy Land for the express purpose of killing Muslims.
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden's crime was being anti-globalist and anti-politically correct (he didn't like the U.S. military which included women, Jews, and Christians who carried the bible and wore the cross). Contemporary communists try to make something out of his anti-communist alliance with the CIA in the 1980s as something hypocritical. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:00, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::IOWs, bin Laden spent his own money to fly jihadis into Pakistan/Afghanistan and remained on the ground as a coach. Once they were there, the CIA armed them. So yes, there is no material assistance provided to bin Laden.
 +
::::::::::::Bin Laden was a supporter of the Saudi monarchy throughout this period.
 +
::::::::::::By 1991, bin Laden and his followers viewed themselves as responsible for the destruction of the Soviet Superpower. Puffed up in their pride, they thought they could take on the U.S., the Saudi ruling klan, and Israel next and establish a Sunni Islamic State, along the lines of the Shia Islamic state established by Brzezinski and the Carter administration in Iran in 1979. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:22, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::It should further be noted, traditional jihadis and Islamists thought bin Laden was nuts, and still do. Since 1948 and the creation of Israel, the saying was that "the road to Jerusalem is through Cairo", meaning a revolution to retake Jerusalem would begin in Cairo (as in 1948, 1967, 1973, etc.). Bin Laden held a minority view that the way to retake Jerusalem, and ultimately Mecca to establish an Islamic State, was through New York and the World Trade Center. Traditional jihadis in Egypt and elsewhere viewed  this dangerous and crazy, which would call down the wrath of the United States on the jihadis all over the globe. They viewed bin Laden's crusade as a personal vendetta between him and the Saudi ruling klan. He remains a controversial figure; while he's appreciated for uniting and inspiring jihadis worldwide, most jihadi strategic thinkers view his strategy as flawed, dangerous, and insane. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:39, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::So, wait, hold up. How could the CIA have been involved in Bin Laden and al Qaeda during the 1980s when Ayman al-Zawahiri made it very explicit that they never received any funding or training in his memoirs? Or for that matter Gary Schroen in that interview specifically saying that the CIA had very minimal, if any actual backing of Osama bin Laden. I find it hard to believe that Bin Laden's #2 man in al Qaeda would specifically deny and even scoff at the idea of the CIA or America backing al Qaeda, or Osama bin Laden for that matter, if they actually did. Being his #2 guy, he'd know about al Qaeda's history and inner workings, not to mention alliances made between the organization and others, directly or otherwise. That's kind of the entire point of being the #2 guy, to be entrusted with this information and man the inner workings of the group. Even if we were to argue the whole thing about Gary Schroen was CIA misinformation, I fail to see why al-Zawahiri would lie about something like that, especially when by that point, he and al Qaeda were very obviously not part of the CIA and if anything open enemies. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 21:59, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::::First off, let's clear up some basic facts: (1) al qaeda was not formed until the 1990s, ''after'' bin Laden's expulsion from Saudi Arabia and ''after'' his expulsion from the Sudan; (2) Ayman Zawahiri was sitting in an Egyptian jail throughout half the 1980s for his involvement in the assassination of Anwar Sadat; (3) Zawahiri and bi Laden did not formally link up until after both their expulsions from Sudan in the 1990s.
 +
::::::::::::::During the [[Soviet-Afghan War]], the CIA and Saudi regime worked together. The Saudis provided manpower from all all over the Mid East, and bin Laden's personal financial contribution was to provide airfare. He didn't provide material assistance to jihadis once they were flown there - that came from the CIA. And bin Laden was not content to sit home in Saudi Arabia and be just a financial backer - he lived in Pakistan and functioned as (one of several) preachers of jihad, giving moral and spiritual guidance to young jihadis (although he was never trained as an Islamic scholar). When the war ended, [https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Yusuf_Azzam Abdullah Yusuf Azzam] was assassinated under mysterious circumstances. Azzam was considered the spiritual leader the jihad, but bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia claiming the title.
 +
::::::::::::::As cited, traditional jihadis of the Sayyid Qtab and Hassan al Banna stripe, always considered jihad against secular leaders as their main objective, such as Sadat, Mubarak, Assad, Saddam, the Shah, or King Hussein of Jordan. This was the big difference between [https://ctc.usma.edu/harmony-program/zawahiris-letter-to-zarqawi-original-language-2/ Ayman al-Zarqawi] (founder of AQI and ISIL) and bin Laden.  Ayman al-Zawahiri took the Egyptian Islamic Jihad in a different direction, which was and remains controversial. The Egyptian Islamic Jihad (or Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood) was always focused overtrhowing first Nassar, then Sadat, then Mubarak, now Sisi. Zawahiri got in bed with bin Laden and brought the wrath of the United States down upon the Egyptian Islamic Jihad for his role in the Embassy bombings. Zawahiri remains on the outs of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad homies for making the jihad global and inviting the U.S. to pursue them. Obama sympathized with them by helping overthrow Mubarak, and widened the split between al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.
 +
::::::::::::::IOWs, al Qaeda mostly always was and is a detached branch of Egyptian jihadis in exile at odds with the homies remaining in Egypt. Bin Laden supplied the money. Zawahiri supplied the manpower. I suspect Zawahiri's denials about CIA funding in the 1980s is simply to protect what they consider the first of their great achievements - that a ragtag bunch of jihadis destroyed a Superpower, the Soviet Union. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:07, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::Some corrections. I am not stating or inferring an opinion, merely stating some facts. Tommy Robinson is not standing for Parliament, he is standing for the European Parliament. He was not jailed for reporting on a trial, he was jailed for contempt of court because the trial was one one of a series and he risked giving the defendant a reason to ask for a mistrial. He might have escaped jail if he didn't already have convictions for assault, fraud and using a fake passport.   Tommy Robinson is not his real name. Nigel Farage's party is riding a protest wave and, in a general election, stands to win zero seats again. In the European elections, the Brexit Party is likely to beat all the other individual parties. Its success is largely down to it being the only party with a coherent pro-Brexit position whereas the anti-Brexit vote is fragmented among three parties. The combined share of the anti-Brexit parties is likely to be significantly larger than the Brexit Party's.  Nigel Farage has made it clear several times that the Brexit Party is running without a platform beyond leaving the EU. In the recent local government elections, the strongly pro-EU Liberal Democrats wiped the floor with everyone else.  At an MPR tangent, Scotland is still part of Great Britain, although it looks likely to move for independence when we leave the EU. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 13:33, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::A word on the material assistance provided by the U.S.: The only American hardware provided (eventually, after any years), were TOW missiles or [[MANPADS]] to shoot down helicopters, which proved decisive. Prior to that, it was all Soviet equipment (trucks, guns, etc) the U.S. acquired from Egypt as a result of the 1979 Camp David Accords when Egypt became a U.S. client state and kicked the Soviets out. Perhaps because Zawahiri saw no American equipment, only Soviet, he denied any U.S. contribution. And bin Laden certainly did not have the resources to ship the volume of equipment from Egypt to Pakistan.
 +
::::::::::::::The reason for using exclusively Soviet equipment in the war zone is the issue of spare parts; for example, if a truck needs a generator, it can be cannibalized off a captured Soviet truck or one partially destroyed in combat. These are lessons learned from the Germans during WWII, at Kursk and North Africa where spare parts became a big issue. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:33, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::Everything else aside, I'm pretty sure VargasMilan was referring to the EU parliament when he said "small Parliament district in the north of England" -- the UK has multiple "districts" that, in each district, it groups several of its EU parliament seats. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 13:39, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
====JohnZ's "Kurdish" communist professional victims====
:::Also, the recent local elections may not have been entirely representative of the nation's attitudes considering that the Brexit Party did not participate and the Conservative Party had deeply disappointed pro-Brexit people, likely discouraging such people from voting. This allowed the Lib Dems to steal the show. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 13:48, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
::::Question: Are EU Parliament seats ''At-Large'' or divided into local districts? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:54, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::Crybaby JohnZ's charity case, the "Kurds", have their counterpart to Insana bin Laden (follow the money):
:::::Depends on the country. Some have all their EU Parliament members elected proportionally based simply on a national popular vote, while some divide the country into districts and elect members proportionally in each district. Either way, it's all based on proportional representation. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:57, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::Well, I said Tommy Robinson was running in a district.  As a side note, I thought you knew everything. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 15:22, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::The Kurds' Democratic Union Party (PYD), the Kurds JohnZ are referring to, has a military wing, the People’s Protection Units (YPG) the "international" office of Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the Marxist group at war with Turkey since 1984, causing tens of thousands of deaths and is listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.
::::I may have to go back and re-read Congressional Research Reports or, heaven forbid - rely on Wikipedia, [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:41, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/05/26/european-elections-2019-results-maps-brexit-party-expected-win/ The preliminary results fom the U.K. Telegraph website] from today's counting with 10 of 12 regions declared gives the Brexit Party 28 seats of the 751 seat European Parliament (evidently, since the same people who won want Britain to leave the European Parliament, they may not be there for long) which is 3.7% of the seats. Brexit is part of a larger European alliance called the EFDD (Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy) which has preliminarily won 56 seats (7.5%). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:45, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:The 11th British region, Scotland, will report their results at 7 am today (Monday, May 27, 2019 [EDT]). Northern Ireland has a unique voting system where voters rank the candidates when they cast their vote, the counting of which, consequently, is complicated, but we can be fairly sure that they reach completion by the end of the year, 2021 at the latest.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 03:23, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::::::::The Obama Administration counseled YPG leadership to camouflage the group’s roots in the PKK after getting them to fight ISIS--they were rebranded the Syrian Democratic Forces, being promised U.S. weapons and money, which brought in other Arabs.
::[https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/eu-election-results-find-out-who-won-all-of-the-seats-for-scotland-1-4935003 Brexit won another seat from the Scotland region] (taking second place to first place Scottish National Party) bringing their total to 29 seats of the 751 seats. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 08:42, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==[[Laura Loomer]]'s legal action against [[CAIR]] and [[Twitter]]==
+
:::::::::::::The whole goal right now is to bring the activities of Obama's "foreign legions" to a close, not tally up more to Kurdish communists' killcounts. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 16:05, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
  
"This is an action for
+
::::::::::::::And you have to study the activities of the [https://cryptome.org/ansar-al-islam.htm Kurdish Ansar al-Islam], which merged with Ayman al-Zarqawi]]'s group in 2004 and founded the Islamic State in 2014. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup>
#breach of contract
+
#tortious interference with an advantageous business relationship
+
#restraint of trade in violation of Fla. Stat. § 542.18
+
#civil conspiracy
+
#violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. § 501.201, ''et seq.''"
+
  
As you might have guessed, some of these legal complaints could carry legal conclusions with a broader scope than just Laura Loomer's case.  President Trump himself recently attempted to "settle out of court" and avoid these trials and other barriers directed solely towards conservatives by making some noise with the goal of awakening the social media companies back to their senses.
+
:::::::::::::::Aye. You've convinced me. What have the Kurds ever done for us, eh? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:56, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::::::Well, explain to me why Kurdish [[nationalism]] is suddenly sacred and holy to anti-nationalist globalists right now, other than pure opportunism? I think we've made the case that "The Kurds" are a wide, diverse group. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 04:16, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
As more conservatives get hit/shadow-banned on social media, keep in mind which torts might be applied to each of their situations when you read about them, so you will feel less demoralized and more persevering as they occur.
+
<---The Iraqi Kurds got their spoils of war for fighting alongside the US against Saddam, and later ISIS. It hardly seems unreasonable for the Syrian Kurds to get theirs as well. If Erdogan wants to secure the border to stop traffic between the Turkish and Syrian Kurds, then let him do it on his side of the fence. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:49, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:<s>I love it. "Syrian", "traffic".</s> [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:38, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::JohnZ, you still don't get it. Abu Musab Zarqawi, founder of the Islamic State, set up a chemical weapons plant in Iraqi Kurdistan, under U.S. protection of the No Fly Zone. Zarqawi merged his organization with the Kurdish Ansar al-Islam. [http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln&us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_general_topics=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_al_zarqawi___al_qaeda_in_iraq "The Iraqi Kurds" were co-founders of the Islamic State], if you wanna play stupid with words.
 +
::Saddam didn't have a chemical weapons factory -- the Kurds did, under U.S. protection, along with Zarqawi.
 +
::The [https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-four-as-of-american-policy-failure-in-syria/ Adana Agreement] of 1998 between Turkey and Syria allows the Turks to enter Syria for distance of up to 5 kilometers to beat back the Kurds. It's a legal treaty between the two.  The two have asked the Russians to be there to police the situation.
 +
::I've met brainwashed people by the mainstream media before, but you take the cake. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:39, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::"Saddam didn't have a chemical weapons factory -- the Kurds did, under U.S. protection, along with Zarqawi". Actually, it's more accurate to say both the Kurds and Saddam had chemical weapons factories, since [https://theblacksphere.net/2017/04/leftist-myth-busted-saddam-moved-wmd-from-iraq-to-syria/ several sources, including one of Saddam's top generals and even one of the pilots responsible for transferring the chemical weapons materials, verified that Saddam did in fact have chemical weapons factories, and that they had been relocating since 1991]. Said general, George Sada, even attempted to alert the British news media to Saddam's creation of chemical weapons and supplied proof, but they buried the story, deciding instead to just falsely tarnish Bush and Blair as liars. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 08:52, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
And consider donating to freeloomer.com to offset her legal expenses. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 23:24, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::(@RobS, for the avoidance of doubt): It's times like this when it's hard to tell whether you're just really bad at basic research, or completely at Trumpian ease with arguing in bad faith to avoid retreating from something stupid you've said previously.
  
==Pete Buttigieg tests new campaign slogans==
+
:::Yes, Ansar al-Islam carved out a bit of territory in Iraqi Kurdistan. No, that was not with the blessing of the Kurdish authorities, nor did the Kurds have the military muscle to dislodge them from the mountains until they received the backing of US special forces and air support in Operation Viking Hammer, March 28–30, 2003.
  
As a gay man, Trump is a racist #Buttigieg2020.
+
:::And I've no idea what point you're trying to make about the Adana Agreement. It appears neither Erdogan or Assad have any intention of honouring it at the moment. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 12:07, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::"Kurdish authorities" HAHAHAHA! Careful. You're revealing you're totalitarian mindset.
  
Instead of shaming our children for their lunch debts, we need to tackle the problem of food insecurity in America #Buttigieg2020.
+
::::I have a simple question: When are "the Kurds" not "the Kurds"? When they are Shia Kurds armed by Iran? When they are [[Salafi]] Kurds under U.S. protection from Saddam in a No-Fly Zone? When they are Syrian Kurds taking U.S. assistance to stage terror attacks on a NATO ally? When they are Salafi Kurds and co-partners of the U.S.-armed Islamic State? When they are Qawqaz Kurds at war with Russia? When they are [[feminist]] Kurds fighting ISIS? When they are victims of a U.S. Army live fire exercise in Kentucky broadcast on ABC News? When?
 +
::::And why all this globalist promotion of Kurdish nationalism? I thought nationalism was the enemy of globalism?
  
I don't know, either. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 08:18, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::And as best as I can determine, to the extent that "Kurdish democratic" forces exist anywhere (Iraq, Syria, Turkey, the Caucasus), they don't want a landlocked independent Kurdish state, knowing that without a NAFTA-style free trade agreement with their neighbors, they couldn't export their oil wealth. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:13, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
:Pete Buttigieg on the 2020 presidential race: "...I’m going to make a really good president and I’m going to win.[https://www.seacoastonline.com/news/20190524/buttigieg-targets-trump-during-exeter-stop]
+
:::::You say "and why all this globalist promotion of Kurdish nationalism?" I'll give you an answer. It's because ''some'' globalists, particularly those of the neocon variant, see the creation of a Kurdish state as necessary to achieve their goals. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria are all opposed to the Saudi-centric regional status quo. That automatically makes them enemies of the petrodollar, and therefore, in the eyes of the neocons, worthy of regime change and/or destabilization. In that case, Kurdish nationalism would be a great tool for the neocons to use. For this reason, at this time, not only do I ''not'' support the creation of a Kurdish state, I actively oppose it.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:10, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::Actually, let me walk that back just a little bit. At this time, I do support Kurdish nationalism, but only in Turkey, and only because Erdogan's regime is still in power and there's very little moral equivalence between that regime and its Saudi counterpart.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:17, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Personally speaking, the only regime change I'd even remotely endorse is if it's changing the Middle East from Muslim-dominated to Christian dominated, whether it be Roman Catholic dominated or, heck, even Coptic Christian dominated. Don't bother switching Sunni for Shia, or Shia to Sunni, or either for Kurd or Kurd for either for that matter. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:18, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::There actually was an opportunity for a Kurdish state 10 years ago in Iraq. The Kurds themselves didn't want it. Largely due to two factors: (1) their diversity and/or lack of unity; and most importantly (2) a Kurdish state would be held hostage to tariffs when it tried to ship its oil down the Tigris to Persian Gulf ports for export to the rest of the world. The Kurds of Irbil figured it would serve their best interests to remain within an Iraqi system and Iraqi parliament where they have continuous engagement, rather than having no influence over the Baghdad regime and being at the constant mercy of outside forces. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:34, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Well, then. ''Those'' Kurds are cool with me. They're definitely a lot smarter than their Syrian counterparts. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:48, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::We get little reporting on Kurds in former Soviet republics - Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia and elsewhere, as well as Iran. Here again you have secular (on the side of Russia) vs religious (on the side of ISIS) Kurds fighting each other. Then you have Shia Kurds fighting Sunni Kurds (ISIS). These same divisions exist among Kurds in Germany and the U.S.
 +
::::::::For these reasons I'm very skeptical when I hear anyone discussing "the Kurds" (like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcCN0DGvqE0 Bernie Sanders statement] here). I'll go a step further - Media, being fed by the [[intelligence community]], is playing on the deliberate ignorance of the American people, if not even a racial stereotype.  The journalists who use the phrase, "the Kurds" are just ignorant partisans themselves. And this sort of Deep State/media collusion, appealing to what they assume are irrational bigoted stereotypes in the soul of the American people, is how the U.S. has blundered into numerous wars beyond my lifetime. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:20, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::User Masaman on youtube [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDlcJslnNqQ is one of the best] at [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z26S0XgduYc handling issues like this].  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:34, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:First Pete Buttigieg convinces himself that it is better to have a sexual relationship with a man rather than a beautiful and demure woman with long locks of flowing hair and now this!!!! The man is truly delusional! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:00, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
Allow me to say this, plain and simple. The Kurds are not our allies. In fact, they border on being our enemies. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:53, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
::Don't over-focus on the man. Keep in mind that he is representative of a large segment of a generation that will come into American leadership someday. Stick to the issues. Beat him on the merits. Don't make his queerness the focus. His homosexuality is only bait to paint critics as bigots. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:12, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Let me clarify. They border on being our enemies in Iran, <s>Iraq</s>, and Syria.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:17, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::How do you cross out text? I want to cross out "Iraq."--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 23:48, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::use < s > for strike with a close </ s> <s>like this</s>. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:22, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::Thanks. I wish Wiki would allow you to do that with a single highlight-and-quick, but then again we are living in the "learn to code" era.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:43, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::All other Democrat candidates should be torn limb-from-limb with ''ad hominems''. Buttigieg is unique in his queerness. Focus on criticizing his ideology. Read, masticate, and digest [https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/15545-gramscis-grand-plan THIS ARTICLE] (begin at '''Subverting Christian Faith''' if it would help). Buttigieg is the living embodiment of [[Gramsci]]. Buttigieg should not be treated like the other candidates. Defeat Buttigieg by mastering criticism of Gramsci's ideas ([[political correctness]], [[cultural Marxism]], the [[Frankfurt School]], etc.) and you by default will subvert all the other Democrat candidates and sick ideology driving them. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:38, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::@RobS: I'll content myself with noting that, having been called on talking rubbish about Ansar al-Islam being allied with Iraqi Kurdish forces, your response was to try and start a game of ''Well, what's a Kurd anyway?'' Spineless. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:40, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::If he's so wrong why do you have to exaggerate to prove it?  I started the topic, he just sustained it. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:47, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::I was called ''what'' on ''huh?'' Facts:
 +
::::::#Ansar al-Salam, a Kurdish group, harbored Abu Musab al-Zarkawi after his flight from Afghanistan in 2002 when the Americans chased him out;
 +
::::::#Ansar al-Salam and Zarqawi were protected under the American No-Fly Zone in 2002 and 2003;
 +
::::::#Zarqawi and Ansar al-Salem operated a [[WMD]] camp in Iraqi Kurdistan under the protection of the American No-Fly Zone.
 +
::::::#Zarqawi's Organization of Monotheism and Jihad merged with Ansar al-Salm to form AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq);
 +
::::::#AQI became the [[Islamic State]] in 2014.  
 +
::::::Where am I in error? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:01, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::Buttigieg is not "the first" gay Democrat to run for president; Hickenlooper, Harris, Booker, Michelle, Barry and Hillary are all gay. Buttigieg is nothing new. He's a walking timebomb of cultural marxism, moreso than Barry Obama. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:46, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Your error is a product of your usual bad faith in discussion. You appear unable to admit that Ansar al-Islam was engaged in a terrorist campaign ''against'' the  regular Iraqi Kurdish forces, and that those same forces drove them out of the territory they'd seized as soon as they received the necessary US military support. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:27, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
:::Character counts in terms of peoples' voting. And the sooner Republicans/conservatives stop cowering in their bunnyholes when people cry racist, homophobia, misogny, etc., the better off they will be. 46% of Americans feel uncomfortable with the idea of a homosexual presidential candidate[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/436776-poll-majority-of-americans-are-comfortable-with-gay-presidential-candidate] and if that is not enough of political handicap, Buttigieg says "capitalism has let a lot of people down."[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/16/buttigieg_capitalism_has_let_a_lot_of_people_down_democracy_and_capitalism_are_not_the_same_thing.html]
+
::::::::Right. Where'd you get that spin? Don Rumsfeld? Dick Cheney? Ansar al-Salam merged into Al Qaeda in Iraq, conducted the insurgency, and established the Islamic  State.
 +
::::::::Ok, you got me. Ansar al-Salam changed its name to Ansar al-Sunna, and merged with Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad (Group of Monotheism and JIhad, Zaqrawi's group).
 +
::::::::''Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad was started by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, other foreigners, and local, mostly Kurdish Islamist sympathizers. ,,,Following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, it is believed that Zarqawi moved westward into Iraq, where he may have received medical treatment in Baghdad for an injured leg. It is believed that he developed extensive ties in Iraq with Ansar al-Islam ("Partisans of Islam"), a Kurdish Islamist militant group that was based in the extreme northeast of the country. Ansar had alleged ties to Iraqi Intelligence; Saddam Hussein's motivation would have been to use Ansar as a surrogate force to repress the secular Kurds who wanted a "free Kurdistan".'' [http://www.thefullwiki.org/Tawhid_and_Jihad#Origins] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:55, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::The founding fathers of the USA certainly would not have voted for an openly homosexual political candidate.
+
:::::::::Some light reading on [https://www.soc.mil/ARSOF_History/articles/v1n1_op_viking_hammer_page_1.html Operation Viking Hammer]. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:15, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::The whole idea of an openly homosexual USA president is a joke. About 70 countries have anti-homosexuality laws. How would a homosexual American president deal with the Middle East? Asia and the Middle East are important regions of the world and both areas frown on homosexuality. And evangelical Christianity and Islam are spreading fast in the world and both are very anti-homosexuality (see: [[Growth of evangelical Christianity]]).  There are 619 evangelical Christians in the world and Pentecostals alone are expected to reach 1 billion people in the world by 2025.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:34, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Ok, that's progress. At least we're back to distinguishing "the Kurds" as between ''pershmerga'' and AQI. That link covers 2005, from Cheney & Rumsfeld's perspective. Now let's pick up the story from [http://www.aymennjawad.org/2015/12/a-complete-history-of-jamaat-ansar-al-islam their own history, translated by Aymenn al-Tamini]:
 +
:::::::::::''the position of general security official in the Dawla [Islamic State] currently [December 2015] and the man is considered the most important after [[Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi]].
 +
:::::::::::''In 2006, a deal was struck in the American prisons for the release of some of the leaders...
 +
:::::::::::''In 2007, the leadership of Jamaat Ansar al-Sunna took a decision to change the name of the group and revert it to the old name of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam....
 +
:::::::::::''When the armed revolution of al-Sham [Syria] began against the Assad regime, Jamaat Ansar al-Islam entered al-Sham and began operating under the name "Jamaat Ansar al-Islam in BIlad al-Sham."
 +
:::::::::::''On the third day of the Mosul events, the Majlis Shura of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam decided to come down and aid the Dawla [ISIS], and this meant the group came down on the left side of the city [east Mosul]''
 +
::::::::::Indeed most of Jamaat Ansar al-Islam gave allegiance, but a simple and small presence for the group remained in Iraq and the most important of those who gave allegiance feature in the photographed allegiance ceremony. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:47, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::::The difference between Buttigieg and Obama is, we've already had a gay president and gay First Family, only Buttigieg is "openly gay." Buttigieg has the "courage" to declare himself "openly gay," whereas Obama cowardly remains in the closet. Yet Obama fostered the gay agenda and gay marriage. Meanwhile the homosexual agenda marches on. I don't care to debate this issue, and dance to their tune. Don't put yourself in a position of always reacting. Let's seize the initiative. Defeat Buttigieg as the re-incarnation of Gramsci (there is much more at stake than homosexual issues) and you defeat the entire cultural Marxist agenda of the Left for a generation. Use Buttigieg to educate the American people - particularly young people - as to what cultural Marxism and the cultural Marxist agenda is. It is more than just the homosexual agenda and much more dangerous.  
+
:::::::::::You'll have to help me with the relevance of this. Were there ethnic Kurds in Ansar al-Islam and its successor outfits? Sure. Does their presence have any significant bearing on the development and legitimacy of a reasonably autonomous and functional Iraqi Kurdistan? Absolutely not. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:26, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::These guys ("the Kurds" if you will), took part in the capture of Mosul, the resurrection of the Caliph, and were rewarded with the VP spot and head of internal security. They weren't bit players in the Islamic State. These guys killed their fellow Kurds, ''Pershmerga'', Shia Kurds, and anyone who wouldn't submit to the Caliphate. So when we hear talk about "the Kurds", "abandoning the Kurds", and globalists pushing Kurdish nationalism, it is not unreasonable to ask just what exactly are you talking about.
  
::::Use Buttigieg to open a debate and discussion on what Cultural Marxism is, and educate a generation on its dangers. Do not over-focus on just their efforts to legitimize homosexuality, you play into cultural Marxist's hands painting yourself as a bigot. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:52, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::Pardon my thoughtlessnes, I forgot; there are good guy Kurds and bad guy Kurds; the bad guy Kurds are the guys who do beheadings; the good guy Kurds are the guys who take U.S. taxpayer money and kill U.S. NATO allies. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:27, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
Defeat Buttigieg? He is already defeated! He has a snowball's chance in hell of ever being the president of the United States.  
+
:::::::::::::Right now, I consider ''all'' of the Syrian Kurdish factions associated with the SDF to be bad guys, even the non-Communist ones.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 16:53, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
“Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” ― [[Sun Tzu]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:33, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
<--- It's kind of fun watching you twist yourself like a pretzel over this, just so you can ultimately argue abandoning the Turkey/Syria border region wasn't an unmitigated disaster. Ansar al-Islam numbered in the hundreds (including Arab and other foreign fighters) when they were driven out in March 2003. Shortly afterwards, ''tens of thousands'' of Iraqi Kurds fought alongside US forces in the invasion of Iraq.
:You're missing the point. Buttigieg should not be debated as a person, but rather as an idea. Buttigieg is the embodiment of what all 23 candidates, the [[DSA]], the [[Green New Deal]], and every other leftist whacko idea or agenda you can imagine. Like Gramsci, if Buttigieg died in a fascist prison tomorrow his ideas would not die, but become even bigger and more of a threat to survival of the planet. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:46, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Buttigieg and his financial backers just want to inch closer to normalizing homosexuality by having him be a declared US presidential candidate (''New York Times'', April of 2019: [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-gay-donors.html As Buttigieg Builds His Campaign, Gay Donors Provide the Foundation]).They probably know he doesn't have a chance of winning the presidency. Quinnipiac University National Poll: "Voters say 52 - 36 percent the U.S. is not ready to elect a gay man as president".[https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2617][[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:07, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Buttigieg is not a man, he's an idea. It wasn't Beto who was born and bred to carry the Marxist/Gramsci gospel, but Buttigieg. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:10, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Britain's next PM ==
+
Seriously: What. Is. Your. Point? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:14, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
[[File:Mifsud with Boris Johnson.jpeg|right|350px|thumb|'''Mifsud (right) with [[UK]] Prime Minister frontrunner Boris Johnson (center)''' two weeks after [[George Papadopoulos]]' plea agreement with [[Robert Mueller]].<ref>https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-pictured-with-london-professor-from-fbi-russia-probe/amp/ </ref> According to Democrats, [[John Brennan]], [[James Comey]], [[Rachel Maddow]] and [[Never Trumper]]s, Mifsud is a Russian agent.]]
+
Just what sort of man is Boris Johnson? The former foreign secretary has been described as Britain's Trump. He is widely tipped to be the next prime minister.<br/>Well, he certainly has his share of amusing quotes: "If the EU was an animal it would be a lobster. I tell you why it would be a lobster. Because the EU, by the very way it works, encourages its participating members to order the lobster because they know that the bill will be settled by someone else, usually the Germans. So that's what the EU would be: A gigantic lobster with some sort of butter sauce."<br/>Here is why Britain should vote Tory: "Voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3." See "[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/london-mayor-election/mayor-of-london/10909094/Boris-Johnsons-top-50-quotes.html Boris Johnson's top 50 quotes]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:12, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:We'll know soon enough. If he wants to preserve the US-UK "special relationship," Boris Johnson needs to come clean on who [[Joseph Mifsud]] is. That means the [[Deep State]] crisis and housecleaning in the US will spread to the UK. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:23, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
{{reflist}}
+
::The photo was taken at a "Brexit dinner" held on October 19, 2017.[https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/11/boris-johnson-met-london-professor-linked-to-fbis-russia-investigation] At the time, Johnson was foreign secretary and thus the cabinet member presiding over British intelligence. At one point, Johnson claimed he never met Mifsud. When the photo came out, this was changed to, he never "knowingly" met Mifsud. So Johnson saw Mifsud as just another Brexit diner? The Papadopoulos plea was still confidential at this time, but surely MI-6 was aware that Mueller had Mifsud in his sites. Was Mifsud an MI-6 spy trainer, a Russian election interference superagent, or just a guy who happens to show up in various interesting places? We can't ask him as he disappeared soon after this photo was taken. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:39, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::He's been located (an aside to collusion junkies: Stephan Roh, Mifsud's lawyer, I suspect Roh's wife may be "Putin's niece" that Mifsud introduced to Papadopoulos). [https://jonworth.eu/joseph-mifsud-professor-papadopoulos-manafort-revelations/ Here's one of the best reads you'll find on Mifsud]. This read, after it's verified by Barr's report, will certainly give away much of [[NATO]]'s "sources and methods." Too bad. Brennan, Clapper and [[Richard Dearlove]] fell into Obama's trap to destroy the Western alliance. Everything, including the US-UK relationship, has to be rebuilt from scratch.
+
  
:::As to the photo, it may be a fake. Mifsud head is far larger than the rest and the lighting behind him is brighter. But ''Politico'' thinks it's real. I understand it has been established Mifsud and Johnson did meet. Mifsud has been photographed with Theresa May, and Roh with Bill Clinton. And Mifsud's 302 interview with the FBI, three weeks after Trump's inauguration when Mifsud was an honored speaker at a State Department function, will be declassified. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:05, 26 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:He's right, Rob: Kurdistan was ''just'' about to exist for the 30 million Kurds scattered about near Asia—and then Trump came in and caused it ''not'' to happen, because all the Kurds had really been planning it the whole time and were really about to get together and make the nation happen. Really. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 23:39, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
::::Regarding whether or not Mifsud is a Russian agent, if he is instrumental for Brexit, I really fail to see how he'd be an agent of Putin. I don't think dismantling the EU would have helped Putin at all. Heck, if anything, given how he doesn't make much secret to still be an adherer to Communism, keeping the EU intact would work better for Putin's aims, to say little about how Merkel's pro-EU status landed Putin with supplying gas to Germany and them eating out of his hands. Also keep in mind the EU was created largely to push Marxist-Leninist/Marxist-Trotskyite views. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 21:55, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Well I thought nationalism was fascism. Now globalist are pushing Kurdxit, MKGA, and the Yellow Turbin movement.
:::::That's correct. I'm slowly coming to the opinion he was cynically and unwittingly used by Brennan, Dearlove, [[Robert Hannigan]] and [[Richard Wood]]. It'll take likely a year (closer to the 2020 election) to bring to light British interference in the American electoral process, just in time to expose to the American public Democrat illegal collusion with foreign intelligence agencies to thwart American democracy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:52, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== Brexit: the British deep state strikes again ===
+
::JohnZ, you certainly don't understand anything about jihadism. Your frame of reference comes from your Western Eurocentric colonial imperialist and racist outlook. Jihadi groups appear, disappear, reappear, merge, change their names, and form alliances routinely. Leadership and experience are vital. 40 year old veteran fighters  are more valuable than a 20 year old punk who doesn't know anything. 300 veterans of Ansar al Salam make up the drill sergeants and the equivalent of an officer corps for radicalized punks coming from the EU and elsewhere. They trace their war against Western influences and Shi'ism back several decades at this point. An Arab figurehead was put at the helm - Baghdadi - but the Kurds were in charge of internal security - who gets let into the organization and who may be a risk and needs to be disposed of. None of this is rocket science. Sure, these experienced fighters had sons and kid brothers who came with them, but the organization traces its origins back to the end of Iran-Iraq war in 1988. They were the most experienced fighters in Iraq. From their perspective, their war against secularism, Western influences, and Shi'ism, was finally joined by ''outside'' fighters coming to their aid.
  
Just as the Conservative Party is beginning its leadership contest, it was announced that Boris Johnson would face charges for "lying" to voters during the Brexit campaign over three years earlier: [https://thehill.com/policy/international/europe/445894-uks-prime-minister-candidate-boris-johnson-to-face-charges-he] Johnson is the frontrunner in the contest and the strongest supporter of a "no deal" Brexit, and the Tory leadership, which opposes Brexit, is happy at this news: [https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/05/29/tory-leadership-hopeful-boris-johnson-served-with-court-summons-over-private-prosecution/] This is yet another example of the British deep state working against what voters chose in 2016. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::In the meantime, the Hong Kongers can all get squashed by tanks and shipped off to the gulag cause we don't want to upset our Chinese communist trading partners.
:Eh? It's a private prosecution. The state, deep or otherwise, had nowt to do with bringing it. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:13, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Yeah, and it just so happens that the target is the Tory candidate most favorable to a "no deal" Brexit, specifically as he begins his campaign to succeed Theresa May. What a coincidence.
+
::Unrelated to this, I found an article that states Philip Hammond will advocate against free-market policies in a speech: [https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-politics-hammond/hammond-warns-leadership-hopefuls-against-low-tax-deregulation-dogma-idUSKCN1SZ2PB] Once again, this illustrates how liberal the Tory leadership has become. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 01:37, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Boris Johnson most favourable to a "no deal" Brexit?  Andrea Leadsom, Dominic Raab, Esther McVey and a large proportion of the party membership disagree.  Boris Johnson can most politely be described as pragmatic.  He is most favourable to Boris Johnson. 
+
:::Unrelated to this, which Tory leadership candidate, when asked about the impact of Brexit on business, said "F**** business"?  His initials are B and J. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 02:29, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Boris Johnson is most outspoken in favor of it compared to the other candidates, as far as I know. The "f**** business" quote affirms this perception -- partially or entirely because of big business interests, which lean left-wing (it's outdated, at least, for people to believe they're essentially conservative), that Brexit is stalled and why other countries aren't leaving, that the Euro and Schengen Agreement remain in force in countries like Italy and Greece, why NAFTA and other bad globalist trade deals remain in force, and why mandatory E-Verify hasn't been approved. In other words, many big businesses advocate for globalist and open borders policies -- as well as [[crony capitalism]], which is compatible with socialism -- rather than limited government. Thus, I think it's a great thing that Johnson is suggesting he won't be beholden to them as the UK (hopefully) attempts to leave the EU. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 02:54, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::@[[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] It may have started as a private prosecution case, but a District Judge allowed it to proceed and the Director of Public Prosecutions has [https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9233184/boris-johnson-traitor-max-hill-qc/has a massive anti-Boris bias]. Thankfully, this nonsense has been stopped and the case thrown out. --[[User:RWRW|RWRW]] ([[User talk:RWRW|talk]]) 16:34, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
Dominic Raab might be as good, if not better, of a candidate that Johnson, considering that he won't rule out suspending parliament to achieve Brexit, something that Johnson has ruled out: [https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/pm-candidate-raab-says-suspending-parliament-remains-a-brexit-option-idUSKCN1T90AX] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:39, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::And do you have any clue how ridiculous it sounds to say we should defend the Syrian border but not the Rio Grande?  Especially since our Mexican allies, whom we depend on so much for help, just got their butts kicked by [https://time.com/5705358/sinaloa-cartel-mexico-culiacan/ the Sinoloa cartel who took over a town of 800,000.] t[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:50, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:Curb your enthusiasm, man. There's zero chance of Raab or anyone else proroguing Parliament to force a no-deal Brexit. It would require the Queen's assent and there's absolutely no way she'd allow the monarchy to be dragged into such a constitutional clusterf___. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:44, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::"require the Queen's assent"???  The symbolic monarchy hasn't interfered with major political decisions in how many decades, or centuries.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:18, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::You can put as many question marks as you like. Constitutionally, it's her call, and there's not a cat in hell's chance she'd support an unelected PM's boondoggle over the clearly expressed will of Parliament. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 19:59, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Biden's "limited exposure" ==
+
:::Once again: What does the presence of a small number of ethnic Kurds in various jihadi outfits have to do with the development and legitimacy of a reasonably autonomous and functional Iraqi Kurdistan? I've seen estimates of 400-1500 Brits who went to fight for ISIS. We've had our share of eejits who stayed home to maim and kill in the name of their twisted version of Islam. None of which has any bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy or viability of the British state, or its institutions, or its armed forces.
  
I have been predicting the collapse of the Joe Biden bubble for a while. So far, he has not only defied my predictions, but grown increasingly dominant in terms of 2020 polling. What's his secret? He skips almost all campaign events. Here is ''WaPo'': "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/joe-bidens-campaign-of-limited-exposure-how-long-can-he-keep-it-up/2019/05/26/dcc045e4-7e2e-11e9-8bb7-0fc796cf2ec0_story.html Joe Biden’s campaign of limited exposure: How long can he keep it up?]." Democrats have fond memories of Biden campaigning for Obama in 2008. He's a lot older now. After campaign events, reporters ask audience members what they think of Biden. They generally say "old." Hey, but Biden does great as long nobody's looking! Maybe the DNC can cancel the debates for him. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:04, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::It's not like the US is flush with regional success stories for all the blood and treasure it's spent over the past 30-odd years. You've got the liberation of Kuwait, and then you've got Iraqi Kurdistan as far and away the most successful bit of Iraq to date. Not much after that. You'd think a good conservative patriot like yourself would be proud of the US having brought a bit more freedom and self-determination into the world, but hilariously, you can't because that would beg the obvious question re. cutting and running in Syria.
:C.mon now. Are you telling me you put any stock in polls? It's no different than watching ''Meet the Press'' or any so-called MSM "news show" that leads with the Democrat race. Nobody cares what the Democrats think or say, and it's certainly not news. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:21, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::If Biden is playing not to lose instead of fearlessly playing to win, it is a sign he is a status quo type candidate.[https://hbr.org/2013/03/do-you-play-to-win-or-to-not-lose]  America can't afford a status quo president. It has too many serious problems to address.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:54, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::At this point in the election race, dollar donations are more telling than popularity and name recognition polls. I'd compare it to Jeb Bush in 2015, who sucked up all the money making it impossible for any other candidate to challenge Trump later when the voting began. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:28, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::With Bernie fading as well, Fake Indian Elizabeth Warren could be back in the spotlight. The media is certainly eager to lie on her behalf. If you point out point that she gets significantly fewer votes than other Democrats running in Massachusetts, you're a "sexist." The claim that she is an Indian is a so blatantly untrue that it insults the intelligence of the news reading public.<br/>Here is how the Warren character puts it in ''Our Cartoon President'': "Look at me. I was a rising star and then people found out I told one weird lie a thousand times and now no one will look me in the eye."[https://youtu.be/ZNK-DaLOHn8] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:31, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::That may be a little funny, but you are quoting a cartoon produced by [[Stephen Colbert]], who compared Trump to Hitler by giving a Hitler salute on his late night talk show, and, after [[Kanye West]] said he was supporting Republicans, called him an adjective that sounded a lot like "uppity". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 18:18, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
====Capt. Obvious adds his 2¢====
+
:::If memory serves, Rand Paul clapped like a seal, whilst the rest of the GOP senate was aghast. They can't all be neo-con RINOs. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:10, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:::::During Justice [[Clarence Thomas]]' confirmation hearings, Senator Biden took the lead in the Committee and enjoyed guiding those giving testimony into clearer ideas of what they were meaning to say with respect to legal and juridicial precedent.
+
  
:::::When Biden ran for vice president, and for his whole vice presidential term, he showed no such insight; it was almost as if he had dumbed himself down with the intent of making sure he ''never'' upstaged President Obama.
+
::::Just as an FYI, there's actually some evidence that Trump deliberately gave that Syrian withdrawal order specifically to bait a key leader of ISIS to into revealing himself and getting himself at the very least captured, if not killed, and that operation was such a success that you leftists were caught with your pants down due to not even your installed leakers finding out about the op (and we had the bonus of his second in command being taken out as well). To put it another way, Trump played ISIS like Palpatine played the Rebels at Endor in Return of the Jedi. I'll admit I was very unsure about leaving the Kurds behind, mostly because I feared we'd have the same thing as Vietnamization after the end of the Vietnam War where the Democrats exploiting Watergate sold out the South Vietnamese to the Communists. Since we just shattered the vertebrae of ISIS, I don't see any reason to be concerned about our forces staying in Syria right now. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 23:18, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::::During the 2020 campaign we can probably expect to see the old Biden return who takes care in drawing distinctions in whatever subject about which he is taking part in having discussions. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 16:35, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::There's much more evidence which says Trump's withdrawal announcement caught the Pentagon completely off guard, and they had to scramble to launch the operation for fear of losing effective force projection should the withdrawal be fully realised.  
  
::::::Personally, I think you are seeing the bigotry and racism on full display in the Democrat party. Harris, [[Amy Klobuchar|Klobuchar]], [[Kirsten Gillibrand|Gillibrand]], Warren are all much more fit and qualified to be president than Biden. None are even seriously being talked about or considered. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:58, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I'm glad to hear you had qualms about ditching an ally, though. That's the proper response. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:26, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::Here's an immediate problem that hasn't been addressed now for two or three decades: the U.S. provided air defense and a No-Fly Zone for a group that set up a WMD lab. When it was discovered, the Deep State deceived the American people when [[Colin Powell]] went to the UN and blamed Saddam for it, when in fact the people we were protecting uder our No Fly Zone had created it. And this idiocy of the Deep State they blamed on Saddam as an excuse to go into Iraq in 2003. People are tired of these lies, and ain't falling for arguments about "the Kurds" and Kurdish nationalism again as an excuse to send troops into a war zone that Congress itself, under two presidents, has refused to pass an authorization for. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:49, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Wait, didn't General Sada as well as one of the guys who flew the chemical weapons stocks to Syria confirm that Saddam WAS in fact making WMDs, and had been doing so since before the Gulf War or something? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:38, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::I'm not arguing whether or not Saddam had WMD, I'm pointing out the historical truth that our friends, "the Kurds" had WMD and Colin Powell lied about it, which was the No.1 fact pushing Obama's candidacy in 2008. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:50, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::You'd think the answer would be easier to know—they spend a billion dollars to find out. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 18:05, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::I've never heard of the Kurds having WMDs. Can you provide a link?--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 16:49, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
:::::::Klobuchar threw a binder at one of her employees. How is she going to handle the stress of a presidential campaign? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 17:32, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::"Ditching"?  The PKK succeeded beyond its wildest dreamsIt got a quasi-state in Syria from which to attack Turkey, and is now positioned to receive the "creamy" (your word) concessions from the peace process Erdogan initiated.
 +
:
 +
::::You have no standing in the matter: as a New Zealander (or globalist), you're not encumbered with the difficulty of possibly rewarding a disloyal president, the evidence of which demonstrated by the information that is coming out through Justice Department reports daily, though you probably love that ''we'' are because you share his politics.
 +
:
 +
::::You probably suspect RobS, Pokeria and I may have trouble articulating this sense and hoped your high-tensioned rhetoric would provoke us into being strung along by your series of objections and qualifications, however lengthy[, to Donald Trump's military movements]. If so, you suspected wrongly. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:06, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::::::[[Andrew Yang]] is polling better than Klobuchar, [[Cory Booker|Booker]] and Gillibrand combined.  Yet, no one talks about him, so why should the first and third of those be mentioned? Yang almost has as many Twitter followers as [[Rick Santorum]] already. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 17:53, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::@Vargas: Who you calling a Kiwi?
  
::::::::Racism. Democrats don't like Asians, even when they offer you $12,000 a year for your vote. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:47, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::@RobS: How on earth did we get back to conflating Ansar al-Islam and their weapons plant with the Iraqi Kurds in general? For extra "protected under a no-fly zone" lulz, the [http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln&us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_general_topics=us_occupation_of_iraq_tmln_al_zarqawi___al_qaeda_in_iraq link you shared earlier] clearly states the US was aware of the plant from at least June 2002 onwards. Even better, they rejected an airstrike several times, because ''"...we were so concerned that the chemical cloud from there could devastate the region that we chose to take them by land rather than by smart weapons.”''
  
:::::::::Then how come they don't like Beto? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 22:48, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::That's according to Lt. Gen. Michael DeLong, at least. Much of the rest of your link suggests it was either simple dithering by the Bush administration, or due to worries about appearing too eager for war in the eyes of potential coalition allies.
::::::::::White privilege. Hispanics and women don't like him. He's only popular with over 50 college educated males. Face it, Beta doesn't measure up to America's stereotype of a Texan. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:22, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::::Democrat sweepstakes:  Biden 5:17; Sanders 1:6; Harris 3:20; Buttigieg 2:17; Warren 1:14; O'Rourke 1:26; Yang 1:27; Gabbard 1:36. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 23:51, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::And while we're at it, an honourable mention for this quote: ''"...Ansar al-Islam militant group ... controls a '''very small region''' of Kurdish Iraq near the Iranian border"''. (emphasis mine)  
::::::Typically, three candidates survive New Hampshire, and two shortly after that. If it were tomorrow, it would be Biden, Harris and Buttigieg. The lone stalking horse (''ala'' Cruz, Santorum, Romney v. McCain, McCain v. Bush, Edwards v. Kerry 2004, Bradley v. Gore 2000) would be either Harris or Buttigieg. Harris is more likely (based an D.C. experience, gender, and racial identity), with an ultimate Biden/Harris ticket (''ala'' the 2004 Democrat and 1980 Republican scenario where the nominee picked his chief primary rival as running mate). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:39, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Addendum: If Biden were to crash and burn, a distinct possibility, a Harris/Buttigieg ticket is a real possibility. No one is taking the other two dozen candidates seriously. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:53, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
If the gaffe prone Joe Biden crashes and burns, Bernie Sanders might muscle himself into winning the Democratic nomination for president. Even if Bernie doesn't manage to do this, he might damn an insufficiently progressive candidate with faint praise - especially if he feels that he was not treated fairly.[https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445859-democrats-worry-bernie-sanders-could-play-spoiler] In short, Sanders could act as a quasi spoiler again.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 13:34, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:Sanders has several strikes against him: (1) he's lost the younger Millenials who have moved to Buttigieg, Harris, Beto etc.; (2) he has no support among Blacks; (3) he's angered the big money party establishment donors who back Biden and Harris; (4) he's not even a Democrat; (5) he's just another older white guy, which is one of Biden's biggest weaknesses and will be instrumental in causing Biden's fall. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:50, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:There's a simple reality: Millenials (under 35) now are the biggest age group in the US, outnumbering boomers. Gen-X'ers are few in number (35-55), and have to coalesce with either Boomers or Millenials to form a majority. Millenials are highly progressive and socialist, impatient, frustrated, angered, and feel their time has come. They feel even the oldtimers, Pelosi, Sanders, Biden, Hilary, Trump, etc. are standing in the way of progress. (And they're right). This explains [[Ocasio-Cortez]]. Placating them backfires, as Pelosi is experiencing right now ([[Green New Deal]] fiasco, impeachment, etc). Biden flipped on marijuana the other day, an issue dear to Millenials' heart, after locking up 2.5 million blacks for carrying a joint (it wasn't Trump who coined the phrase "Nasty Woman," he was paraphrasing Louis Farrakhan. I highly recommend [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu41CPQw0hg viewing this video]. These are the issues the Democrat base turns on). Running Biden would be a huge mistake, cause if Millenials want to become the dominant group, they need to force these issues in the 2020 election. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:11, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::I already told you.  It's more than just a joint and more than just blacks (I bet there was a lot of crack cocaine, too). The marijuana possession jail times were the result of plea bargains when there were problems with the case like when witnesses were shaky, and they got bad guys off the street.  Ann Coulter's analysis beat your source hands down.  You read the statistics.  It's over. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 23:04, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::De Blasio wants to close Rikers Island. Let's hope it doesn't happen before Biden does a stretch. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:11, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::::AOC is upping the ante.  She wants Rikers Island closed ''and'' solar panels [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvG-rXGiDDI set up on all the vacant land]. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 02:08, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== Milano rules the Dems ===
+
:::::What you reckon, then? One more crack, or have you finally tired of beating this particular dead horse? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:06, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
It looks like we all need to learn more about the new boss of the Democratic Party: "[https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2019/06/07/alyssa-milano-was-instrumental-to-bidens-flip-flop-on-hyde-amendment/ Report: Alyssa Milano Instrumental in Biden’s Flip-Flop on Hyde Amendment]." If I was Biden, I would have said it was Obama, Bill Clinton, or Pelosi. Definitely not Milano. Once upon a time, actresses were supposed to be good looking. The best you can say about Milano is that you appreciate her breast augmentation surgery more when you look away from her face. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:13, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== 4 resources which show America has a religious future in the 21st century ==
:Especially when she's speaking about politics, eh?  I guess you could say it was the Edict of Milano.  Heh-heh!  Heh-heh!  How did I come up with that?  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 10:20, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::America need to end its idolatrous and Satanic ritual human sacrifice of Hollywood child stars. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:34, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== [[Human rights]] article ==
+
I was recently asked about the future of American Christianity.  Below are 4 resources which show America has a religious future in the 21st century.
  
I read the [[human rights]] article, and it seems to be incomplete.
+
Read this material:
  
I understand the values of the American Revolution to be that governments are instituted among men to secure these rights in order to promote their free exercise.
+
1. [[United States, irreligion vs. religion and demographics]]
  
I'm also given to understand that they presuppose that human beings share a species-specific human nature, so [[existentialist]]s like [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] who stated it is the nature of man not to have a nature, shouldn't agree about the existence of human rights[, taken generally, regarding man's intelligence and rational components in desires].
+
2. [http://www.sneps.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/jssr_15101.pdf ''Secularism, Fundamentalism or Catholicism? The Religious Composition of the United States to 2043''], ''Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion'', vol. 49, no. 2 (June) 2010, Eric Kaufmann, Vegard Skirbekk and Anne Goujon
  
Also: by that human nature our natural (that is, having to do with our full conscious human nature) desires pursue what are real goods, so we don't have the right to things that are bad for us. That is not to say that all real goods exist in isolation from everything that might be evil. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 22:46, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
3. [https://thefederalist.com/2018/01/22/new-harvard-research-says-u-s-christianity-not-shrinking-growing-stronger/ New Harvard Research Says U.S. Christianity Is Not Shrinking, But Growing Stronger], 2018
  
== Mueller crawls out from under his rock ==
+
4.  "Among Protestants, Gallup has found weekly churchgoing to be consistent. In 2017, 45 percent attended at least once a week. In 1955, it was 42 percent."[https://factsandtrends.net/2018/04/10/protestant-church-attendance-stable-but-warning-signs-remain/] [[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 12:59, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Mueller is once again demonstrating his most amazing skill: the ability to sit almost silently at the center of one swirling Washington controversy after another. Why did he pursue the wrong anthrax suspect for five years? If Governor Elliot Spitzer committed sex trafficking, why didn't Mueller recommend charges?<br/>As special counsel, Mueller recommended various charges of "lying to the FBI." Mueller could just decide that he doesn't believe something said by George Papadoupolos, Michael Flynn or whoever and they went off to jail. When the heat was on, Papadoupolos deleted his Facebook account. He was told that he would be charged with obstruction if didn't cop a plea to lying. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that what both men are really guilty of is working for Trump.<br/>The media neatly avoids any consideration of Mueller's misconduct by focusing on impeachment. At his latest appearance, Mueller told us that he couldn't recommend impeachment or even charges against Trump because the Department of Justice has a policy against charging an incumbent president. By this logic, making accusations informally would be unfair since Trump can't defend himself in court as long as he is president. But there is an obvious way out of this paradox: issue sealed indictments that get unsealed when Trump leaves office. More to the point, Mueller is being a total hypocrite. The entire "Part II" of his report is about hinting what it is that Trump can be charged with.[https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/29/mueller-just-proved-his-entire-operation-was-a-political-hit-job-that-trampled-the-rule-of-law/]<br/>This isn't the first time Mueller has bent the rules to avoid going to court. The FBI told the lawyer of anthrax suspect Bruce Ivins' that they would leak a claim about how Ivins was obsessed with a sorority. The only evidence for this "obsession" was a few rather uninteresting edits Ivins made on Wikipedia. All the same, Ivins promptly overdosed, thereby avoiding the need for a trial. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:53, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:No. 3 quotes (then debunks): “Meanwhile, a widespread decline in churchgoing and religious affiliation had contributed to a growing anxiety among conservative believers.”  ''The Atlantic'', January 2018. This is what passes for journalist leadership these days (''The Atlantic''). It's not a description, it's an instruction for their hostile liberal-reader-wannabe-journalists.
:Put him under oath, then let's hear his partisan trash talk.
+
  
:Mueller is obstructing justice by refusing to answer House Judiciary Committee questions.
+
:And now they have Gallup polls lending a hand, who we're supposed to believe don't know about non-denominational Christians.  They don't even pretend they have something positive to put forward, which makes me even less concerned about conservative believers, who can put their anxieties on the Lord, even if they believe the lies, than sinners of whatever variety camouflaging their sins by diverting attention toward non-existent problems, instead of stopping their behavior. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 15:16, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Ace (the New Zealand atheist), is either a liar, not very bright or stubborn (or a combination of 2 or more of these attributes).  It not that hard to understand. The nominal Catholics and liberal Protestants die out while the more committed Christians with higher birth rates grow. Eventually, there are fewer and fewer nominal Catholics and liberal Protestants to die out.  And among the [[nones]], most are [[theism|theists]] (at least in the USA). By 2043 for the USA (or sooner) and by 2050 in Europe (or as early as 2021), the secular population plateaus followed by a period of decline. In short, atheism has a bleak future. It's not rocket science. If Ace still doesn't understand this matter, it is a matter of willful ignorance.  
  
:John Durham will get him singing like a canary. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:09, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::I think the reason why Ace has a bee in his bonnet and is obsessed with me is because all of my predictions concerning atheists have come true. If Ace wants to deny the [[atheist movement]] is dead, he is free to do so, but unfortunately for him, he will lose what little credibility he may have (see: [[Decline of the atheist movement]]).[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 15:35, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Ace, by the way, I have never said that "atheism is a second rate belief system".  It is far below second rate and we both know this. There is no proof and evidence for atheism. In addition, you have atheists like [[PZ Myers]] and [[Peter Singer]] indicating that bestiality is morally acceptable under certain conditions (see: [[Atheism and bestiality]]). And while the Mormons certainly have their faults and I disagree with their theology, at least they weren't responsible for [[Atheism and Mass Murder|about 100 million deaths in the 20th century]] and at least they don't run an oppressive regime like the Chinese, communist atheists (and most atheists are East Asians with a very large portion of them being Chinese. See: [[Asian atheism]] and [[China and atheism]].  But the good news is that in China, Christianity is seeing explosive growth. See: [[Growth of Christianity in China]]).
  
:Oh, and the "12 Russian GRU agent indictments" ain't gonna wash to excuse his failure to perform the task he was appointed to. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:14, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Ace, I hope this further clarifies matters for you.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 15:58, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Lastly, Rosenstein's Memorandum of May 8, 2017 rebuking Comey had this line:
+
==Canadian election==
::''[https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/rosenstein-letter-annotated/526116/ we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation. Derogatory information sometimes is disclosed in the course of criminal investigations and prosecutions, but we never release it gratuitously. The Director laid out his version of the facts for the news media as if it were a closing argument, but without a trial. It is a textbook example of what federal prosecutors and agents are taught not to do.]''
+
In the recent Canadian election, the Conservative Party got 34 percent of the popular vote while the Liberals got only 33 percent. Yet Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau will continue as prime minister all the same. I hope that puts some perspective on the Electoral College issue. Trump got 46 percent of the popular vote. Not many British or Canadian prime ministers can claim anything like that level of popular support. See "[https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/canadian-federal-election-2019-liberals-justin-trudeau-win All time low share of popular vote is enough for Liberals to win power]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 14:56, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
:Mueller just did a Comey. But Mueller resigned before he could be fired for doing the exact same thing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:23, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
:Yes, this is normal in Canadian/British politics -- parties can win well under 40% of the vote and win a solid parliamentary majority. Look at the UK Labour Party's election results in the 1990s, as an extreme example. The Electoral College still has a good purpose -- to preserve the federal aspect of the U.S. government, one that preserves the importance of state government. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 15:38, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::PeterKa, I already reported that, remember?
+
Our system is more democratic. No head of state is directly elected in a parliamentary system. Trudeau is elected party boss by Members of Parliament, who in this case sit a Electors. The voters of Canada do not have an opportunity to vote for or against Trudeau. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:32, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:IMO, the problem with the Canadian system is that power is concentrated in the hands of the prime minister, who can use said power to implement social engineering schemes aimed at pleasing himself. The one that comes to mind is bilingualism, the pet project of the elder Trudeau. It is quite obviously unsuccessful in the sense that no significant number of Canadians are learning a language because of it. Yet it has created a bilingual elite and disadvantages the monolingual majority. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:07, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::"RobS, why didn't you tell me Nancy Pelosi intimated Bill Barr might have perjured himself after he wouldn't show up to Congress to explain why he wouldn't start a second investigation into Trump on obstruction and debate it on the merits? That's not news?! Those 20 pages Mueller wrote in Mueller Report Volume II dedicated to defending his interpretation of statute: 18 U.S.C. § 1512 subsection (c)(2) were already bloody epic, and his legal perspectives were sure to prevail! I disavow bla bla bla..."
+
== Atheists are badly losing. Conservative Christians are victorious! ==
  
::The interpretation of the statute was about the scope of a sitting President's culpability for obstruction beyond evidence impairment; there was ''way'' more than just what you called "hints" [it offered a whole legal justification]. That's why Bill Barr was ''hired'' for Pete's sake!  [https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/June-2018-Barr-Memo-to-DOJ-Muellers-Obstruction-Theory-1.pdf PDF:THE Statute Interpretation written by Barr]
+
The big picture of the view of the world which certainly is important given sub-replacement level of fertility in the developed world, the sub-replacement level of births of the irreligious (see: [[Atheism and fertility rates]]) and the fact that religious people often immigrate (see: [[Religion and migration]]):
  
::Other than that that was very informative, as was the thinkpiece that you inspired RobS to write. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:31, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
"By comparison, there were 138 million atheists around the world in mid-2019 – slightly more than the 137 million in 2000 but less than the 165 million in 1970. Atheism’s annual growth (.04 percent) is less than that of the population, and the number of atheists worldwide is projected to decline to 132 million in 2025...
:::There are three phases to the current investigation:
+
::::1. [[Obama FISA abuse]] from June 2012 (when Comey was FBI director) to March 2016;
+
::::2. Obama and UK interference in the 2016 election, c. November 2015 to November 2016;
+
::::3. The cover-up (which includes Mueller) and Coup plot, October 2016 to May 2019. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:51, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
*Rosenstein is Hillary's guy. His memo plays to her self-image as a victim. He was scheming to bring back Mueller as FBI director when he wrote it. Judicial Watch has established that Hillary sent out quite a bit more confidential material than Comey admitted. His claim that "no reasonable prosecutor" would have indicted her was nonsense. Comey was lying to protect Hillary, not issuing derogatory information. My guess is that the DOJ leadership was afraid of McCabe, who apparently thought nothing of blackmailing Sessions.<br/>Aside from being full of lies, Comey's statement usurped the authority of the prosecutors. But I don't buy Rosenstein's argument that the DOJ cannot issue derogatory statements concerning people who were not indicted. It is supposedly open season on people who are indicted? I don't see the logic. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:04, 31 May 2019 (EDT)
+
**You were among the few to not be influenced by what came from what was really only Rosenstein's lips, teeth, cheeks and gums.  The rest of us got carried along by his fine words and didn't feel it when we did a faceplant of admiration an embarrassingly many yards beyond the credit that was actually due them. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 14:19, 31 May 2019 (EDT)
+
**May I try to describe the grounds for the leadership's fear of McCabe?  I think Comey was in a bind: McCabe slow-walked acting on the new Hillary e-mail trove, and that fact would have come out had Hillary won, putting McCabe in legal jeopardy (and in prolonged and serious hot water with the public for rigging the system) and also thwarting their revenge plot on citizen Trump. He couldn't follow procedure by giving the case to Lynch because McCabe had violated procedure. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 14:42, 31 May 2019 (EDT)
+
====Cory Booker to the rescue====
+
  
"Robert Mueller’s statement makes it clear: Congress has a legal and moral obligation to begin impeachment proceedings immediately." 4.3M Twitter followers —Wednesday, May 29, 2019.
+
Among Christian traditions, evangelicalism (2.19 percent) and Pentecostalism/charismatic Christianity (2.26 percent) are growing faster than Protestantism (1.61 percent) and Roman Catholicism (1.02 percent)."[https://www.christianheadlines.com/contributors/michael-foust/christianity-booming-atheism-declining-around-the-world-report-says.html]
  
Cory Booker in Democrat sweepstakes: 143:1 —Thursday, May 30, 2019.
+
And of course, while atheism lacks proof and evidence that is true, Christianity has an abundance of proof and evidence that it is true (see: [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]]).
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 03:51, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
[[Onward, Christian Soldiers]], marching as to war...[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 16:22, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
:Hmm, let's see in two or three weeks if his courageous  Spartacus stance moves his poll numbers or number of twit followers. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:55, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
::Are you kidding?  Who among his supporters has an attention span that long? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 18:32, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==The United States' largest mass killing up to that point in 2019==
+
:Wikignome72, I hope you don't mind my wikilinking that song to its lyrics here; I'm thinking it would encourage the troops! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:32, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I don't mind.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 18:38, 23 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Eight people, including a 12-year-old girl, were found dead in Sumner County over the last weekend of April in what the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is calling a string of homicides linked to Michael Lee Cummins.
+
:::Say hello to [https://news.grabien.com/story-comey-trump-winning-2020-ill-be-my-new-home-new-zealand New Zealand's newest asylum seeker]], seeking refuge from [[John Durham]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:41, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Why don't you know about this?  Because there was no gun involved. If killers resort to other methods when they don't have a gun, there's no need to confiscate the guns of citizens, who are then free to pass...inconvenient legislation that sweeps in that aspiring actress a Disney executive knocks up on the casting couch.  Is that offensive to you?  I can't disagree.  Know about it? It needs to be hidden at any cost! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 01:02, 1 June 2019 (EDT)
+
=="A favorite lie" resurfaces—in Ann Coulter column.==
  
== How to get suspended on Twitter ==
+
Conservative political phenomenon [[Ann Coulter]] ran one of her satirical columns Wednesday, where she poses hypothetical follow-up questions to the Democratic candidates.
  
Erick Erickson tweeted: “Elizabeth Warren set to introduce the Wrecking American Prosperity Under Marxism, or WAMPUM act, wherein she gives everything away for free.”[https://dailycaller.com/2019/05/31/twitter-censorship-conservatives/?utm_medium=email] Pretty hateful, man. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:14, 1 June 2019 (EDT)
+
The "favorite lie" I mentioned a few weeks back that appeared in an [[Elizabeth Warren]] debate answer, this time appeared in [[Julián Castro]]'s Twitter feed, a lie which exploited the sad fact of transsexual domestic disharmony or participation in prostitution, together with other non-bias homicides, by falsely portraying it as an epidemic of bigots targeting sexual dysphorics to the magnitude of a Presidential-level crisis, while the actual statistics reduced it to ten people total in comparable statistics in 2018, their cataloguer even noting "Trans homocides are underrepresented compared to non-trans groups."
  
== Democrat conjunction ==
+
Ann Coulter's satire of the political exploitation (because you don't know whether to laugh or cry about it), revealed a distinguishing characteristic of the offender of one of the remaining actual hate-crime homicides (which could very well apply to the others), pointing to how it would have been preventable by sane federal policies:
  
A Democratic officer in Congress mouthed some legal gibberish about the Mueller Report today, and a Trump supporter noted that she most probably couldn't have done that without the approval of Pelosi.  You and I can note further that it might be co-ordinated.
+
:Question for Julián Castro (D-Texas):
  
For Biden gave a speech today.  The gaming industry hasn't done a whole lot to improve political discourse, and Biden has a political technique that takes the form of a "super-power" you could call a "flash stupidity bomb" where he uses a description of some improbable event that affects his serious political opponents by making underlying assumptions that are as blindingly stupid as possible. For some reason he likes to aim these against blacks.
+
:You recently criticized your successor as Housing and Urban Development secretary, [[Ben Carson]], for his remark that “big, hairy men" were trying to gain admittance to women's shelters. You tweeted: “19 Black trans women have been killed this year because comments like Ben Carson's normalize violence against them.
  
I warned you about this when I said Biden could be expected to repeat a kind of political disruption that paralleled his "they want to put 'you-all' in chains" remark years back. Today he noted that five trans-gender blacks had been killed this year.  For all we know, they each could have been killed in a domestic tragedy by their partner, but that's not going to stop Joe Biden. He goes on immediately to say that the best way to stop this is to put an end to the Trump Administration. Hysterical leaps like this are usually confined to the mentally unstable, but if so in Joe's case, who are we to judge?
+
:Just a few weeks ago, a black transgender woman, Daniela Calderon, was shot six times in the abdomen, hip and chest in Dallas by a man yelling homophobic and transphobic slurs. The accused shooter is an illegal alien from Mexico, who had been deported in 2010 and was committing a felony by re-entering this country. He was released on bond and has now disappeared.
  
I would suspect that it would be a good way for Democrats to set the standard (of no pretense to rationality) of what's to come. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 01:35, 4 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Question: Which would you say contributed more to the transphobic attack on Daniela Calderon — Ben Carson’s “comments” or our policy of refusing to control our borders?
:Here's the key: You saw how Black apathy was responsible for Hillary's loss when blacks held her responsible for her husband signing the Superpredator crime bill. How will Blacks react when they learn Biden wrote the bill?
+
:ABC 20/20 recently spent two hours on the 1991 Central Park jogger case just to call Trump a racist; ABC left out the fact that the Central Park 5 were the Superpredators Hillary spoke of and who inspired Biden's 1994 crime bill.
+
:All this is predicated on the notion, as Candace Owens says, that Black people are stupid. Black women are credited with winning back the House (I attribute it rather to the [[Mueller probe]]'s obstruction of Congressional investigations). That's why so much homage and attention is paid to [[Stacey Abrams]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:09, 4 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
===Central Park jogger case===
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:42, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
::I'm talking about impeachment, but since you brought up the Democratic primary, Buttigieg, who you called an "idea" (iow he wouldn't win, but the successes and failures of his campaign would be the model for an improved version in 2024) is now tied for second, but I have to admit only four-tenths of the same people who think he can win the primary also think he can win the general election, just like Conservative doesn't.
+
:Castro is near death and his days are numbered. Look at this chart under [https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_election,_2020 Democrat reports]. You can learn a lot about the American presidential election process.
::I don't think the crime bill will stick to Biden, as he's not dumb enough to use words like super-predator. And the Central Park Five being written up in editorials last year and in 2014 falsely settled for millions by NYC based on the potential award for false actual or punitive damages on account of their falsely described "malicious" prosecution had a specific purpose.  And that purpose was precisely to "punish" those like Trump and make an example of him by placing a trap door under him because he bravely spoke out against the vicious teens early on.
+
  
:CENTRAL PARK RAPISTS: TRUMP WAS RIGHT
+
:In analyzing this chart, you can see the most marginal candidates have a staff of three who are paid between $1000-$2000 per week, and spend about $10,000 per week which includes flying around the country.
:July 25, 2018
+
  
:The city of New York released thousands of documents from the 1989 Central Park rape case last week, provoking more weeping and gnashing of teeth over Donald Trump's full-page ads in four New York newspapers taken out soon after that attack with the headline:
+
:Right now, most of the disbursements go for paid staff. Later, media adverting will dwarf those disbursements. So you have three tiers: those sitting at home doing nothing and trying to rake in donors; those with paid full time staff in Iowa ''or'' New Hampshire; and those with paid full time staff in Iowa, New  Hampshire, and South Carolina. The size of those staffs vary from 2-3 to a dozen or more, hence the variation in disbursements (ranging from $250,000 to $2.5 million per quarter - which includes media advertising).
  
:"BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY.  
+
:These paid full time staffers work the campuses, trying to get idiot, unpaid volunteers (that's usually how Democrats work). Hence, much of the media advertising (and debate schedule as well) is targeted at college-age students. The media advertising directed at students is intended to convince students that the candidate has big momentum and to get them to volunteer to be part of something. Steyer is probably the worst offender, and Castro a big failure, demonstrating once again white privilege and the institutional racism of the Democratic party, and  that the 18-25 year old group ain't buying Castro's extremism, which is very telling when you examine his rhetoric on the issues on a point-by-point basis.
  
:"BRING BACK OUR POLICE!"  
+
:Bottom line, "Money talks and BS walks." What I can't figure it is what did John Delaney spend $26 million on (putting him in the same league as Biden, Warren, Buttigieg and Harris, and above O'Rourke, Booker and Klobuchar) and have nothing to show for it - other than the fact that 18-25 year old Democrats are bigots who judge a white man by how much hair he has on his head. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:32, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:His ad never mentioned the Central Park rape, but talked about New York families -- "White, Black, Hispanic and Asian" -- unable to enjoy walks through the park at dusk. Of muggers and murderers, he said, "I no longer want to understand their anger. I want them to understand our anger. ... They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes."
+
::Ahem.  Do you ''still'' maintain that the large donors will surround one of the back-bencher Democratic candidates and provide them fuel to blast to the front of the contenders, that is, if they don't crater on the way there like Kamala Harris?  ''Skeptical political amateur'', Rodney Bigot (talk) 00:00, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Hard to say what will happen. Maybe Hillary, Bloomberg, or Kerry will get into the race. Maybe Steyer will rise to the top. It's gonna be a bloodbath when voters have their say. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:16, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::To illustrate the point, Beto has money coming out of his ears (see chart link above), [https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2019/10/25/beto-for-americas-plea-for-campaign-volunteers-is-making-people-cringe-so-hard-it-hurts/ but can't get any traction for volunteers on campus.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:14, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::So, what does this mean, the failure of Beto to gain any traction on campus? It means Hope. It means young Progressives understand the meaning of, and the need for, the [[2nd Amendment]]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 08:25, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:According to the media, the five convicted boys were INNOCENT — and Trump would have executed the poor lads! This is nonsense. They wouldn't have been executed because the rape victim miraculously survived. Also, they weren't innocent.
+
== Hillary 2020! Let's get ready to rumble!  ==
  
:Let's look at the facts of the case.  
+
Clinton Advisor Philippe Reines: Hillary Has Not Closed The Door On 2020.[https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/10/23/clinton_advisor_philippe_reines_hillary_has_not_closed_the_door_on_2020.html]
  
:On April 19, 1989, investment banker Trisha Meili went for a run through Central Park around 9 p.m., whereupon she was attacked by a wolf pack looking for a "white girl," dragged 100 yards into the woods, stripped, beaten with a pipe and a brick, raped and left for dead.
+
I thought she might run given Biden's weakness as a candidate.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 05:56, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:I think she needs to stop wearing pantsuits though and perhaps given the upcoming rematch, wear something similar to what Apollo Creed wore in Rocky II.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 07:03, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:By the time the police found Meili, she'd lost three-quarters of her blood. Her case was initially assigned to the homicide unit of the D.A.'s office because none of her doctors thought she would make it through the night.  
+
::That is ''not'' funny. Let me explain why: Hillary was a Senator and a Secretary of State and is a very ''serious'' candidate. If you don't support her in her quest, it ''proves'' you don't like women.  And if you think women would be in bad shape if she were really the best woman candidate, you're obviously someone who has terrible taste for not agreeing with liberals in general, who are experts on the latest new ideas that always work out.
  
:Of the 37 youths brought in for questioning about the multiple violent attacks in the park that night, only 10 were charged with a crime and only five for the rape of the jogger: Antron McCray, Yusef Salaam, Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson and Korey Wise. All five confessed -- four on videotape with adult relatives present and one with a parent present, but not on videotape.
+
::You also didn't italicize the movie title "Rocky II" in your essay.  More evidence of bad taste!! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 18:49, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Two unanimous, multicultural juries convicted them, despite aggressive defense lawyers putting on their best case.  
+
:::Please tell me you're joking... There are plenty of women politicians, some of whom did a much better job than Hillary. Like, I don't know, [[Karen Handel]]. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 19:05, 24 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::"There has never been a man or a woman, not me, not Bill, nobody more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America." - Barack Obama.[https://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/12316646/hillary-clinton-qualified]
  
:But the media have a different method of judging guilt and innocence. They don't look at irrelevant factors, such as evidence, but at relevant factors such as the race of the accused and the race of the victim.  
+
::::In addition, it's her turn.[https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/turn-now-hillary-clinton-makes-case-presidency]
  
:Unfortunately for Meili, she was guilty of being white, while her attackers belonged to the Brahmin caste: "people of color." So, after waiting an interminable 13 years, the media proclaimed that the five convicts had been "exonerated" by DNA evidence!  
+
::::If it weren't for: the Russians, the terrible shape the DNC was in when she ran, sexism, submissive women voting the way their husband's voted, the mainstream media no longer being able to control the narrative and the electoral college system, she would have won. It wasn't her fault! She needs to be given a second chance!
  
:DNA evidence didn't convict them, so it couldn't "exonerate" them. This was a gang attack. It was always known that other rapists "got away," as the prosecutor told the jury, and that none of the defendants' DNA was found in the jogger's cervix or on her sock -- the only samples that were taken.
+
::::The logic is inescapable - Hillary 2020![[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 14:12, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:While it blows most people away to find out that none of the suspects' DNA was found on Meili, this is a sleight of hand. The trick is that we're looking at it through a modern lens. True, today, these kids' DNA would have been found all over the crime scene. But in 1989, DNA was a primitive science. Most cops wouldn't have even bothered collecting samples for DNA tests back then.
+
==''New York Times'' floodwall breached==
  
:The case was solved with other evidence -- and there was a lot of it.
+
No one spied on Trump--it's good they spied on Trump!  There's no such thing as the Deep State--the Deep State is a good thing!
  
:On the drive to the precinct, Raymond Santana blurted out, "I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel the woman's t*ts." The cops didn't even know about a rape yet.
+
Corollary: Then--How dare you attack our law enforcement community? Now--Justice Department is Trump's lap dog!
  
:Yusef Salaam announced to the detective interviewing him, "I was there, but I didn't rape her." Even if true, under the law, anyone who participated in the attack on Meili is guilty of her rape.  
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 15:12, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Remember a few years ago when the study came out that [https://time.com/3858309/attention-spans-goldfish/ goldfish have a bigger attention span than humans?] ''NYT'' editors predicate everything on that scientific fact. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 04:29, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Two of Korey Wise's friends said that when they ran into him on the street the day after the attack, he told them the cops were after him. "You heard about that woman that was beat up and raped in the park last night? That was us!"
+
::This is pertaining to what? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:38, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Taken to the scene of the crime by a detective and a prosecutor, he said, "Damn, damn, that's a lot of blood. ... I knew she was bleeding, but I didn't know how bad she was. It was dark. I couldn't see how much blood there was at night."
+
:::Ok, ok. You got me. It only took me a few days to figure it out. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Wise also told a detective that someone he thought was named "Rudy" stole the jogger's Walkman and belt pouch. The jogger was still in a coma. The police did not know yet that a Walkman had been stolen from her.
+
==Chuck Grassley caught sending code to RobS==
  
:Wise told a friend's sister, Melody Jackson, that he didn't rape the jogger; he "only held her legs down while Kevin (Richardson) f---ed her." Jackson volunteered this information to the police, thinking it would help Wise.
+
This is obviously some kind of "fist-bump" compromising ''both'' of their appearance of withholding skepticism at suspicious government acts!
  
:The night of the attack, Richardson told an acquaintance, "We just raped somebody." The crotch of his underwear was suspiciously stained with semen, grass stains, dirt and debris. Walking near the crime scene with a detective the next day, Richardson said, "This is where we got her ... where the raping occurred."
+
:All of the delays and excuses why the Horowitz IG FISA report isn’t public yet after several months of anticipation of its issues leads me to the suspicion it’s going to be “deep six” by the deep state (Chuck Grassley, October 21, 2019, 5:59 pm)
  
:Santana and Richardson independently brought investigators to the precise location of the attack on the jogger.  
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 18:18, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:It's probably in excess of 800 pages and won't be out til after Thanksgiving.
  
:Recall that, when all these statements were made, no one -- not the police, the witnesses, the suspects, or their friends and acquaintances -- knew whether Meili would emerge from her coma and be able to identify her attackers.  
+
:More recent developments are:
 +
:#McCabe turned down a plea deal, which means it goes before a grand jury now (Comey and McCabe are already at odds over whether Comey approved the leaks that got McCabe fired);
 +
:#Brennan swore under oath the ''Steele dossier'' had nothing to do with his January 3, 2017 ''Intelligence Community Assessment'' on Russian meddling; Comey has an email telling staff that Brennan insisted they include it.
 +
:#Comey's "I hope you can see your way to let this go" memo alleging Trump was trying to obstruct justice by interfering in the Flynn investigation is BS cause the DOJ cleared Flynn of allegations two weeks earlier.
 +
:#Flynn will walk.
 +
:#Mueller prosecutors may be reprimanded.
 +
:#Clapper's gonads are in a vice over two leaks now, one to Jake Tapper over the news hook to report the pee-pee memo, and secondly okaying the kill shot on Flynn.  Clapper already gave the [[Nuremberg Defense]] on CNN, "I was just following Der Fuhrer Obama's orders."
 +
:#[[Mifsud]] and [[Halper]] have been trying to frame Flynn since 2014, probably on Brennan, Clapper, and Der Fuhrer's orders, cause Flynn knew about Obama's order to Brennan to arm ISIS.
 +
:#FISA abuse had been occurring since June 2012, when Obama was running for re-election, and after they got caught using the IRS to target political opponents.
 +
:#The same names of American citizens (i.e. Republicans and the Trump campaign) were illegally entered over and over and over again in the FISA database to provide real time monitoring between November 2015 (when Mifsud and Halper first started working on Papadopoulos) and May 2016 (when [[Adm. Rogers]] shut it down and Hillary, Obama, and the DNC hired FusionGPS).
 +
:All in all, the break-in at the Watergate Hotel, where the burglars got caught before they planted a wire, looks like a church picnic compared to Obama/DNC spying on the opposition and corruption. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:27, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::The views on this page are going nuts...on a Saturday night.  Imagine that.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:23, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::The "wiretapping" not ending until May 2016 was thus during the entire Republican nomination process. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:54, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::That's why Fusion GPS took over, cause Adm. Rogers of the NSA cut them off from access to the database. FusionGPS' job was to develop supposed information so they could go to the FISA court and get legal authority to wiretap. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:14, 27 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Lol. Creeps. I had guessed from the incomplete timeline I put together in my head the administration came up with the snooping idea at some point in the campaign, having been startled at some point.  Not this continuous series of spying abuses, start to finish.  I guess Obama took the idea he talked about wanting to be Spiderman (being able to use all those hi-tech gadgets Peter Parker came up with) too much to heart (to the point of massive illegality)! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 08:37, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:
 +
::::Or: Obama got away with Benghazi, so, he thought, dig deeply enough to stand under Trump and give a big enough push, and any of Trump's center of gravity beyond legality will carry him over the fence into criminality. Except Trump was clean.  This calls for some crowing, but I'm not going to give Obama's corrupt buddies any more of my clever idea-pictures to rally against! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 08:56, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::I think the "Oconus lures" episode ([[Obamagate_timeline_2015#December_2015|December 2015]]) shows the Obama administration was prepared to frame a "Russia collusion hoax" against ''whoever'' the GOP nominee would be (Rubio, Cruz, etc.). They were hoping it would be Trump, cause in everyone's estimation at the time Trump would be the easiest for Hillary to beat. You will recall, it was reported in March 2016 (before primaries ended) that [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html Trump had received $2 billion in free publicity], as he was being heavily promoted by CNN at that time. This implies collusion at a deeper level.
 +
:::::Much of that collusion followed Nixon's model in 1972; Nixon's "ratf*****s" job was to sabotage the campaigns of Nixon's more serious rivals, such as Ed Muskie, and promote a radical fringe candidate - George McGovern.  As this fact became known in 1973, deliberate meddling in the opposition parties internal primary process, became more of a public outrage than the actual Watergate breakin, which was actually a failure cause they  got busted before a wire could be planted. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 12:42, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
== Why right-wing populism will triumph ==
  
:Sarah Burns, who co-wrote and co-directed the propaganda film "The Central Park Five" with her father (whose reputation she has now destroyed), waved away the defendants' confessions -- forget all the other evidence -- in a 2016 New York Times op-ed, explaining: "The power imbalance in an interrogation room is extreme, especially when the suspects are young teenagers, afraid of the police and unfamiliar with the justice system or their rights."
+
*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-behind-the-rise-of-radicalism-here-are-some-theories/2019/10/09/d88f4c62-eac2-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html What’s behind the rise of radicalism? Here are some theories] By Megan McArdle, ''Washington Post'', Oct. 9, 2019
  
:Far from trembling and afraid, as Burns imagines, the suspects were singing the rap song "Wild Thing" for hours in the precinct house, laughing and joking about raping the jogger. One of the attackers said, "It was fun."
+
*[https://quillette.com/2019/05/27/how-progressivism-enabled-the-rise-of-the-populist-right/ How Progressivism Enabled the Rise of the Populist Right], [[Eric Kaufmann]], ''Quillette'', 2019
  
:When a cop told Santana that he should have been out with a girlfriend rather than mugging people in Central Park, Santana responded, "I already got mines," and laughed with another boy from the park.
+
*[https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/08/shawn-rosenberg-democracy-228045 The Shocking Paper Predicting the End of Democracy], By RICK SHENKMAN, ''Politico'', September 08, 2019
  
:One of the youths arrested that night stated on videotape that he heard Santana and another boy laughing about "how they 'made a woman bleed.'"
+
*[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/10/the-rise-of-populism-shouldnt-have-surprised-anyone/ The rise of populism shouldn’t have surprised anyone], ''Washington Post'', 2017
  
:They sound absolutely terrified!
+
*[https://www.businessinsider.com/global-recession-could-boost-far-right-populism-in-us-worldwide-2019-8 Trump rode an 'us versus them' populism all the way to the White House. A global recession could take it to dangerous levels], ''Business Insider'', 2019
  
:In Burns' defense, she knows so little about that case that she called the prosecutor by the wrong name in her op-ed.
+
*[https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/interview/civic-tech-expert-the-alliance-between-new-media-and-anti-establishment-forces-is-powerful/ Civic tech guru: Trump, Breitbart and populism are ‘the new normal’], 2017
  
:The actual evidence doesn't matter. Again, the victim was a privileged white woman (BAD!) and the perpetrators were youths of color (GOOD!). So the media lied and claimed the DNA evidence "exonerated" them.
+
It seems like the media elites are starting to come out of their denialism and are beginning to recognize that right-wing populism is not a temporary blip on the radar.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 14:21, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:This allegation was based on Matias Reyes' confession to the attack -- and his claim that he acted alone. His DNA matched the unidentified DNA on the jogger -- proving nothing, other than that he was the one of the others who "got away." He is also the "Rudy" who stole her Walkman, as Wise said at the time. How did Wise know Reyes -- or "Rudy" -- had taken a Walkman?  
+
:Shouldn't I get a virtual private network before I click these? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 20:28, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:A cellmate claims Reyes told him that he heard a woman screaming in the park that night and ran to join the fun.  
+
:Which "right-wing populism" do you speak of? The America-centric version that Trump promotes? The National Globalist version that Putin promotes? Or the version that followers of Ron Paul promote? Those are very different -- and incompatible -- versions. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 11:57, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:The "exoneration" comes down to Reyes' unsubstantiated claim that he acted alone. Years of careful investigation, videotaped confessions, witness statements, assembling evidence, trial by jury and repeated appeals -- all that is nothing compared to the word of an upstanding citizen like Reyes, a violent psychopath who sexually assaulted his own mother and raped and murdered a pregnant woman while her children heard the attack through the bedroom door.
+
::"right wing populism" is a pejorative term coined by leftists to mean "proto-fascist". [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 12:09, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:That's the sum total of the "exoneration": the word of a psycho.  
+
==Site metrics==
 +
:Hello Andy, what page hit metrics do you have lately on a per-page basis?
 +
:What single page over the last 15 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:What single page over the last 90 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:What single page over the last 180 days has gained the most; what dropped the most?
 +
:If you don't have metrics, how hard is it to install/upgrade?[[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 01:17, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Upgrading to newest version of Wikimedia would mean losing the view counters on the bottom of pages. So Andy does not want to do it. Many editors like to see the view counters.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 09:33, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::So the only way to get single page metrics is a newer version of Wikimedia? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 09:49, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::For the record, I also like the view counters since they're very useful, so I would want any new Wikimedia version to keep that feature. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:37, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::I am not a Wikimedia expert. I just know the last version of the Wikimedia software that had view counters is the version we have. We upgraded to the version we have because it is mobile friendly in terms of site visitors.[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 11:54, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::I also think the view counters is useful in total, it just doesn't help in any other way.  Sure that page has 120,000 page views but 119,000 of them were before you even made edits to the page.  I guess the three questions I have are these:
 +
::::::1) What '''other''' way is there to get metrics besides the Wikimedia software.  I hadn't assumed that upgrading the entire site was the answer at the outset.  Sounds like a whole lot of work and headache if a simple modular snap-in isn't available.
 +
::::::2) Where does the assumption come from that the total view counters go away?  Total views is in itself a metric, and anything that didn't have that number would be equally just as useless.  You just now have a much more comprehensive tool for metrics, including total views.
 +
::::::3) Nobody sees the value in internal trends? [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 13:29, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:Note that Reyes faced absolutely no penalty for his confession -- the statute of limitations had run out years earlier. Before he confessed, Reyes had been moved to Korey Wise's cellblock. He requested a transfer on the grounds that he feared Wise's gang. All he had to do was confess -- with no penalty -- and he got his prison transfer!
+
:::::::All that information is available at [https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:PopularPages Popular Pages]. A page needs 75,000 views to be ranked in the top 500. If it hasn't done it in the first year, it may take 10 years. Popular pages gives you more information to analyze - what pages a particular article or subject is competing with. For example, right now [[Dinosaur]] ranks just ahead of [[Jesus Christ]]; [[Hillary Clinton]] has been closing in [[Joe Biden]] since Biden announced his candidacy; [[George Soros]] has passed up old staples like [[Joe McCarthy]] and [[Alger Hiss]], etc.
  
:Not even this monster's self-serving "confession" can explain away the five attackers' other crimes that night -- vicious beatings that left one parkgoer unconscious and another permanently injured. These attacks, the "Central Park Five" never disputed, and frequently admitted.  
+
:::::::You find opportunities, as well. For example, [[Revolution]] is ranked No. 42 w/418K views. The article stinks. It's just as pale and thin as [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution Wikipedia's Revolution]. So obviously there is much interest among readers in this subject which is not being served by either Wikipedia or Conservapedia.
  
:The SJW's verdict: Award the criminals $41 million. Trump's idea: Punish them.  
+
:::::::The top 100 (of 45,000 articles) shows where viewer interest is at. There are pages moving up fast (Soros, Obama administration,  Clinton body count, etc. Donald Trump is about to overtake [[Kangaroo]], which was a big hit in the early days. Some are stagnant; [[Al Gore]] has sat at #69 for a full year now. Others are fading from view (FDR, New Deal, etc. no longer rank in the top 100). These indicators give a sense of reader interest and trends. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:56, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:And you still can't figure out how he became president.  
+
::::::::Hello Rob, how are you?  That helps, but its not quite what I mean.  For example, Main Page‏‎ (41,928,459 views) may increase by 3000 or 300,000 over the next week or month.  So the number may change to 42,228,459, but it won't tell you that it increased by a difference of 300,000.  That would require taking out a calculator and having the old frame of reference.  Maybe a screenshot or something.  You would have to actually know that the old number was 41,928,459 to begin with otherwise the month's metric of 300,000 is lost.  Well, not that I see anyways.  If I missed it, let me know. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 17:51, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::Oh yes, you have a good point. Does Wikimedia have something that does that? I'm a regular reader of the Popular  Pages page, but the only way to discover the ''rate'' at which a page is advancing is by copypasting the data somewhere (usually on the articles Talk page ) with a time stamp. That's quite cumbersome. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:16, 19 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::Yes, this is what they have.  It is super easy to use and see that the total page hits for "Cat" is a little over 12 million.  In the menu over on the left click the Dates/calendar, then click "all time".  Done.  That simple.  And two pages can also be compared.  [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-20&pages=Cat]
  
::I would only add that the hit songs "Wild Thing" and "Funky Cold Medina" played on the radio in 1989 acted as a kind of authority figure that mirrored and validated what became the nearly fatally irresponsible desires of teens back at themselves.
+
Another good example is [[Ocasio-Cortez]] has 29,000 views and was started in July 2018; [[Elizabeth Warren]] has 22,000 views and was started in 2010. This type of information is invaluable for the amount of time and attention an editor should give to a page. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:16, 20 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:If we had site metrics, we could target higher traffic pages and bring them even higher to the surface.  As to the two pages you mentioned and in particular Elizabeth Warren, that's less than 3000 per year.  What this suggests(and we can't prove without metrics) is that nobody reads this page without first coming to the Conservapedia home page and browsing around.  That page isn't "accidentally" being seen from outside on the interwebs. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 20:16, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Consider this scenario.  The page "Conservative Bible Project" caps the bottom of the most viewed pages.  But what if (for example) prior to one of these final debates the page for Jay Inslee starts surging over a few week period because some phrase in it is catching some search terms.  If that page never eclipses 1.6+ million(which is easily a reality), it will never become known to us.  The surge ends sometime shortly after the debate, it doesn't see new activity here by our contributors, so the end result is that the page never has the opportunity to move out of obscurity in the wider internet when it is surging.  We lose opportunities on a regular basis around here because of this blindness.  The opposite is also true about pages that drop off, considering some of the one-off editors that make their way through here. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 20:26, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Maybe we all need a tutorial: What it is, How does it work, and How do we get it? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:39, 25 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Six years ago I wrote a computer program to enable me to take a snapshot of activity to see which entries were being visited most, without relying on intrusive [[Google]] software. In response to the above I just updated and ran it.  Here are the top 20 entries visited this afternoon on Conservapedia:
 +
:::#Main_Page
 +
:::#Atheism
 +
:::#Clinton_body_count
 +
:::#Obamagate_timeline
 +
:::#Donald_Trump
 +
:::#Alger_Hiss
 +
:::#Katie_Hill
 +
:::#Bernie_Sanders
 +
:::#Barack_Hussein_Obama
 +
:::#Donald_Trump_achievements
 +
:::#Eddie_Rispone
 +
:::#United_States_presidential_election,_2020
 +
:::#Homosexuality
 +
:::#Russiagate_timeline_2017
 +
:::#Essay:Greatest_Conservative_Movies
 +
:::#Liberal
 +
:::#George_Soros
 +
:::#Muellergate_timeline_2019
 +
:::#Democratic_Party
 +
:::#Liberal_hypocrisy
 +
--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:32, 26 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:It appears as if the Conservapedia [[atheism]] article is the second most popular page on the website. Please see: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3paAT8AO2Gk Viral article deals major blow to atheism] by [[PNN News and Ministry Network]].[[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 00:17, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
  
::And that Candace Owens the black conservative also makes points like saying not all blacks would support Planned Parenthood just because Miley Cyrus did (not stupid), but at the present, according to my observations, they may just be sensitive to the thinking of others like Hillary that leads to words like "Super-predator". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 07:58, 5 June 2019 (EDT)
+
==Site metrics, continued==
:::IMO, Biden won't survive the primaries, barring the DNC rigging the nomination ''ala Hillary Clinton 2016''. Once the public starts voting, Progressives who dominate the Democrat party will reject Biden. The situation is reminiscent to 2016, in that anti-establishment activists won in the GOP, but lost to the DNC. It is now the Democrats turn to pass the torch to a new generation.
+
I would like to see this discussion continued.  Andy indicated that he has some ability to put together scripts which can facilitate some of what is needed.  I would like to know how far we can go. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 19:54, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:I like your idea on Conservative media, as well (I think that discussion is now archived). Perhaps we can meld these two projects together. I have quite a bit of free time at the moment (awaiting the FISA abuse report which may take me away for sometime afterwards). But let's get both these projects started. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:49, 28 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::Sanders only sticks around, as he did in 2016, to drive the dabate and agenda. At the appropriate moment he we will back out and support Harris. Alternatively, Buttigieg is considered an "establishment" candidate - he ran for DNC chair - but his white privilege worked against him. His [[intersectional]]ity now is a plus.
+
==Nada==
  
:::ABC ''Good Morning America'' reran the Central Park 5 hit piece this morning. The 2016 election is too fresh in peoples' mind to forget. Biden & Hillary's Superpredator crime act was created out of the Central Park jogger case. Trump has a full page ad to answer for. Biden and Hillary were policy makers who created racist laws and the incarceration of 2.5 million Blacks. (What Democrats, liberals, and the white-dominated [[MSM]] don't understand is, Blacks view issues such as the Central Park 5, the Superpredator comment, and the 1994 crime bill very very different than mainstream media, whites, and Democrats; it's not just hitting a speedbump on the road to the presidency, as Democrats think. It's a key issue for Blacks. And the more educated Blacks are, the more decisive it is).
+
I have to admit I'm been fascinated by emotional dismissals.  But mostly for the humorous (or as the Commonwealth puts it, humourous) component. Like maybe you blame a poor delivery of a joke you wrote for someone else the audience didn't understand for giving you "nothing" to work with—whether it really happened or not. This hasn't actually happened to me, but it might have to you. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 06:20, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Happens all the time. That's why the search for a universal language (interesting, how the Spanish menu on my TV uses the word 'idioma' for 'language' rather than 'lingua' or 'tongue').
 +
:Trump knows this better than anyone cause his twitter jokes seem to go over the commie media's heads (you'd think they would understand the idioms, having grown up in the ''Saturday Night Live'' school of satire for decades). The guy is enormously hilarious; their constant taking offense is either deliberate ignorance and hypocrisy or symptoms of being plain brain dead. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:54, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::In responding to this ABC smear attack, you will see the political genius of Trump at work. He already took the initiative on prison reform - undoing the damage Hillary, Biden, and Democrats did to Black families and communities - and lowering Black unemployed through immigration restrictions. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:45, 5 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== Who is the whistleblower? ==
  
::::Ann Coulter goes into this at length in ''Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama'', if you want to know more. However, I myself haven't read it. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 17:44, 5 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Washington's greatest secret revealed: "[https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/10/30/whistleblower_exposed_close_to_biden_brennan_dnc_oppo_researcher_120996.html How 'Whistleblower' May Be Outed: Ties to Biden, Brennan, Schiff's Staff, Etc.]." His name is Eric Ciaramella (char-a-MEL-ah). He graduated from Yale and worked with Biden on Ukraine in 2015-2016. He was an NSC staffer in 2016-2017 and thus worked closely with Susan Rice, the unmasker in chief. There was a huge problem with leaks early in the Trump administration and Ciaramella was a suspect. So of course he was transferred to the CIA in mid-2017. They don't have any secrets worth keeping over there, apparently. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:29, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
:::::And a big factor - the commie/lib MSM ''is not'' in the tank for Biden as they were for Hillary, given viable alternatives. I suspect they'll go with another woman, whoever shines in the debates and survives in February. In the end, Biden's headed for Jeb Bush territory. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 23:37, 5 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Don't forget the other big story - Republicans were blocked from asking Vindman yesterday, ''Did you have any contact with Ciaramella'' after the July 25 phone call? ''Did you have any contact with Schiff's staff?''
 +
:
 +
:Other question could have been, ''Did you leak Trump's early 2017 phone calls to the Mexican and Australian presidents?'', which are felonious national security leaks.  
 +
:
 +
:Oh, and Susan Rice dumped all the blame on [[Samantha Power]], who unmasked over 300 names beginning in late 2015. John Bolton unmasked 2 while he was UN Ambassador. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:37, 30 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Hey Peter, this "secret" was already revealed in [[#Golden Fleece Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2016 dinner guests]].  It turns out they all had a fancy dinner together before the election.
 +
:
 +
::And hey, why didn't we get a report of your role as a military ''attaché'' in Hong Hong on Talk:Main Page?  That is much more interesting than Schiff's two goons.  What are we, chopped liver? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:35, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:
 +
::And RobS, lol! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:20, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
=== Linda Fairstein ===
+
:::We're linking [[Ciaramella]] to [[Alexandra Chalupa]] right now (in real time), which is gonna blow thiexs thing wide open. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:32, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Although the conservative media is full of Ciaramella buzz at this point, no one in the mainstream media has even reported on the story. If it wasn't true, somebody would have debunked it by now. It seems that liberal journalists don't believe in reporting the news anymore, at least not news they don't like. I hope Barr makes an example out of this guy and sends him to prison for a good long time. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::If and when the minority in Congress ever win any participatory rights, and if the Democrats ever again respect constitutional due process and the rights of the accused, Matt Gaetz is gonna call Adam Schiff as his first witness: ''Did you collude with Eric Ciaramella?'' ''Did you collude with Vindman?'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 08:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::::In fairness to me, Peter Ka is like the Elvis Presley of declassification, only matched by Donald Trump, whose declassification of the picture of the dog who apprehended Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi netted 568K likes. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
Back in 1989, feminists were still very much opposed to rape, believe it or not. Linda Fairstein thought she was being a good liberal when she prosecuted the Central Park Five. Few can boast a better liberal legal pedigree. Fairstein worked for the legendary Robert Morgenthau, appointed head of SDNY by Bobby Kennedy himself. She was also the inspiration for ''Law And Order: SVU''.[https://www.vibe.com/2019/06/linda-fairstein-was-an-inspiration-for-law-and-order-svu] It is not like there is any question that the accused were guilty. They were convicted in two separate jury trials. These trials were upheld in four separate appeals. That's a lot judges and juries who would have to wrong for them to be innocent. This was a hugely publicized case in New York City, capital of the legal industry.<br/>Then came Clinton's impeachment, and liberals no longer thought so highly of women who claimed harassment or rape. The weaselly Morganthau got the convictions vacated in 2002. The city agreed to pay the rapists $41 million in 2014. Trisha Meili, the victim, still thinks the Central Park Five are guilty.[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5973363/Central-Park-jogger-raped-1989-doesnt-believe-police-forced-confession.html] Fairstein is the villain of Netflix's ''When They See Us'' and liberal America is ostracizing her. See "[https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2019/06/12/the-wilding-of-linda-fairstein-n2548118 The Wilding of Linda Fairstein]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:26, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
==Conservapedia Talk:Main Page recent wild success==
:Yes, we need more research and discussion along these lines. With Trump and possibly Biden in the race, the Central Park jogger case will definitely be an issue in 2020.
+
:Interestingly, the Manhattan DA's office has been dominated by the children and grandchildren of [[Henry Morganthau]] and [[Cyrus Vance]] for generations now. JFK Jr. was working in the office before the Clinton's whacked him to head off a primary contest in Hillary's Senate bid. ''The Morganthau Diaries'' is a US Senate Report based on an investigation spanning 21 years under both Democrat and Republican chairmanships documenting corruption and policy subversion in the FDR administration which I am well familiar with (related to the case of [[Harry Dexter White]]).
+
:I'd like to move the subsection up to our discussion on the Central Park jogger case, if you don't mind. Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:49, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Two (brave) new major templates ==
+
3.6% of the total visits to Talk:Main Page have occured in the last 29 days.
  
User:Conservative's commitment to excellence has inspired the same from his Conservapedia compadres.  His article of the year for 2019, [[Atheism and human rights violations]], displayed on Main Page Left along with a well-chosen picture related to the featured article contributed by Rob Smith, highlighted the need for two templates that were lacking, in that they were required to make that excellent article the best it could be, with its formatting seeking the elevation of its broad and reliable set of sources and its well-organized and persuasive arguments and illustrations.
+
Okay, that's it, I don't have any more information! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 01:43, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
[[Template:Reflist1904]] is probably the first Conservapedia template that allows for separate sections of both references and notesAs early as June 2016, [[User:AK]] implemented this useful pair of sections in the [[Albert Einstein]] article, but as far as I know, a notes section has never been activated at Conservapedia using a dedicated template until now.
+
:So in CP's 144 month existence, that's about 500% above the average; I think the Deep State is spying on us to see what our priorities (and the style of rhetoric used) in preparation for the [[2020 presidential election]].  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:15, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
I first became interested in introducing this type of template when I saw it used in an article on another wiki within a range of my interests, extra-terrestial planets and planetoids, about our own solar system's planetoid Pluto.  The memory of that clever arrangement became my touchstone as I sought to reconstruct the organizing effect of that template in the article containing Conservative's paragraphs-long reference commentary.
+
::Spying?  Perhaps a better description would be "reading the pages that we put on our public web site".  The priorities and rhetorical style of the various contributors to this site are out there for all to see.  Including all the "atheism and apricots" stuff.  I doubt that any of this will influence the 2020 election. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:18, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
  
The template was named Reflist1904 after the year and month (2019, 4th month April) of its origination in case it need to be completed or improved at a later dateIt is employed by a simple modification of a parameter called "group" in the ref tags of the references desired to be collected as annotations (<nowiki><ref name=qq, group=note></nowiki>) and a corresponding reference list command to select the notes within the template <nowiki>{{Reflist1904|group=note}}</nowiki> which introduces a reference link beginning with the word "note" (like<ref group=note>test</ref>)
+
:::What are you talking about, we delivered the one-two knock out punch to [[Katie Hill]] ([[Equality Act]] & [[White Supremacy]]). We made her the poser child for bothI've seen at least a dozen articles today of her supporters trying to pick up the pieces. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:48, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
  
'''Notes'''
+
:@Rob: ''"So in CP's 144 month existence, that's about 500% above the average"'' I'm not so sure: The counter is reset whenever the page is destroyed and recreated - the current version was created on  June 5, 2014 by User:Conservative. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] ([[User talk:AugustO|talk]]) 19:18, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
{{reflist1904|group=note}}
+
::Don't spoil his fun, man. He's righteously LARPing for Trump, Jesus, and the American way. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:59, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
  
If you're like me, you've probably never pictured yourself using such astounding features on a wiki before. So maybe you can imagine how I felt having written them (with only a bare minimum of plagiarism)!
+
== Hong Kong elections ==
  
'''Monday''': ''The stirring tale of a template derailed by bullet points and how it was put back on track''.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 23:44, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
On VargasMilan's advice above, I will update the [[User:PeterKa#Back_from_Hong_Kong | report on Hong Kong that I wrote a couple of weeks ago]]. The election of the city's 18 district councils is not usually anything to get excited about. But my informants tell me that everyone plans to go to the polls in the next election, scheduled for November 24. In 2015, 55 percent of the vote went to pro-government parties while 40 percent went to the pro-democracy parties. How does that happen? In a low key election, a significant percentage of the vote consists of people who go to the polls simply because their bosses told them to go vote. Public opinion was evenly divided last time around. Since then opinion has shifted dramatically to the pro-democracy side. It's all rigged in the sense that the election judges can disqualify as many candidates as it takes to make sure the pro-government parties get a majority. Those judges are already hard at work, according to today's ''South China Morning Post'': "[https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3035481/blocking-joshua-wong-standing-election-hong-kong-just-driving By blocking Joshua Wong from standing for election, Hong Kong is just driving protesters back to the streets]."<br/>The government has made several concessions to the protestors recently. For example, it was reported that Carrie Lam, the city's hated chief executive, will step down by March. Lam's "local government" is just window dressing and power rests with the Communist Party, or "Liaison Office" as it is called in Hong Kong. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:19, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:As an administrative head, she's already a member of the Central Committee, I think. The next step up is the Politburo Standing Committee, as understand it. She can't fail, she can only be promoted out of a job. Time to bring in some fresh blood into a tough job. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:08, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::[http://www.xinhuanet.com//english/2017-10/24/c_136702936.htm Here is a list of current Central Committee members]. Lam is not on it. But notice that Wang Zhimin, head of the Liaison Office, is a full member of the Central Committee. Wang reports to Zhang Xiaoming, head of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office. Zhang is also a Central Committee member. None of these people are on the Politburo or the Secretariat, so they may not be all that high ranking in terms of the national party. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:02, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::Then she must be up for a job on the Central Committee. Either way, she gets promoted. If there is violence and bloodshed, she gets promoted to some mainland position; if peace and order is maintained, she gets promoted. Their system is not unlike the US civil service system. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:56, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
::::Lam's background is in the Hong Kong civil service, not the Communist Party. The Hong Kong Communist Party is an "underground" organization and its membership is secret. So there is no way of knowing if she is a member. But the party doesn't trust anyone who hasn't been trained from college as a party man. After Tung Chee-hwa was ousted as chief executive in 2005, he was appointed vice chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference. This is an advisory body whose chairman is on the Politburo Standing Committee. It is a place to park nonmembers of the party, the "fellow travelers" as Trotsky would put it. The conference has 25 vice chairmen, so there is even less to this honor than meets the eye.<br/>If you want to compare the Chinese system to the U.S. federal bureaucracy, you should know that a very high number of people are being purged in China all the time, including quite high-ranking people. This is true both in the army and in the party. The reason usually given is corruption. Since Xi Jinping himself is hugely corrupt, at least according to the Panama Papers, there is obviously more to the story than that. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:49, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:::::That's the [[Discipline Inspection Commission]]. i started some work on that many years ago either here or in Wikipedia but didn't get far. Didn't Carrie Lam attend some high level Summer camp meeting with mainland CCP bosses just a few months ago? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:02, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
*What do you know? Only Joshua Wong was disqualified as a district council candidate. So the election could end up being more or less democratic this time around. To review thousands of applications and disqualify only Wong suggests spite was a factor.[https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/11/01/hong-kong-election-candidates-survive-political-vetting-one-exception]<br/>Vetting for candidates was introduced in 2016. It was imposed retroactively in order to disqualify six sitting lawmakers, just enough to give the pro-government parties a majority in the legislature. These legislators fell afoul of a rule against advocating "self-determination." "Self-determination of peoples" is enshrined in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter. (President Woodrow Wilson made it part of international law. He was a big fan of the Confederacy.) [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 02:09, 2 November 2019 (EDT)
 +
::Did you see any protestors take measures to avoid facial recognition? If so, what were they? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 03:14, 3 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Well, they wear masks. Masks have been a symbol of the protests ever since they were banned. It's usually just a piece of cloth. The Guy Fawkes mask is popular as well. They had a masquerade in the Lan Kwai Fong nightclub district for Halloween and the police used tear gas.[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/12/hong-kong-protesters-defy-ban-masks-clashes-with-police] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 01:37, 4 November 2019 (EST)  
  
:I'd like to learn more about this.  Do others have any comments on this?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:24, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
===Side comments===
 +
Organization of the CCP is an important and fascinating topic, for two reasons (1) The immediate necessity of Americans to understand the Chinese system, and (2) to clarify and rectify many misunderstandings Americans have about historic totalitarian regimes, i.e. the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
  
::Try clicking the "Note 1" superscript and then the up arrow in the item under the Notes section back and forth to see it in action. The item should turn blue as the other item turns off.  The template contains 15 logically-expanded lines of code with only 18 unique operators, and it matches Conservapedia [[Template:Reflist]] as 85% identical. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 06:24, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
In both the Soviet and Nazi single party systems, neither the Communist party nor the Nazi party fully controlled the military. The armed military in both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were the only potential internal threat the existence of [[single party control]]. It was for this reason that both the [[KGB]] and [[SS]] were created, to strong arm the military and protect the party.
  
== I have a question (not Trump related for a change!) -- metric system ==
+
By contrast, in the Chinese system, (and its progeny, such as Vietnam and Cuba), the party's center of power was formed around the military, and that is the one institution the party continues to dominate and control, and uses to intimate the traditional civil service.  All this has yet to play out to its tragic finish as it did in both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. In the USSR and the Third Reich, there were elements in the Red Army and Wehrmacht that sympathized with the plight of common people living under a totalitarian system; in the Chinese system, its unclear how any kind of armed dissent could arise within the military - which is the same as the communist party in full totalitarian control.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:25, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Unfortunately, we don't understand the party's internal structure very well. I have a book called ''The Party'' by Richard McGregor. So sources do exist. In Deng Xiaoping's time, the "Eight Elders" would meet each summer at Beidaihe and work out upcoming policy announcements for the Central Committee, Politburo, State Council, and so forth. Was this group a power center or just a collection of Deng's buddies? When the Elders started dying off, Deng lost his authority. So it is possible that they were the power behind the throne all along.<br/>Because the party boss was top dog in the Soviet system, many people assume the general secretary runs China like a dictator. In the 1950s, Deng was general secretary, but he was definitely not the top leader. According to the party's constitution, the Politburo sets party policy while the Secretariat implements it. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:49, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
 +
::I don't want to give the impression I'm speaking with knowledge or authority, but rather just personal impressions' It's almost like there is a dual system: (1) A Politburo and a Politburo Standing Committee, then (2) a Party Congress and the Central Committee. The Politburo and Party Congress seem to be formalities and annual events where party policy is adopted, then the standing committees are year-round administrators. There is some minor or modest overlap in personal. The big question is, ''Where does the real power reside?'' Theoretically, the standing committees just implement and administer the policies of the Congress and Politburo, but it could also be the annual formal meetings are just honorary positions that rubber stamp policy decisions and directions adopted by the bureaucrats in the course of the previous year. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:03, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
  
How come the US still doesn't use the metric system? I read somewhere that the main reason is because to update all the road signs, measuring cups and everything else from Imperial is too costly. Is that right? (Sorry I don't know any other Americans to ask!) [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 17:58, 6 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::I read the Congressional Research Service's ''[https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41007.pdf Understanding China’s Political System],'' (45 pages) which is what Members of Congress and people in the USG use. It's revised from time to time, but hasn't been revised in 6 years now. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:20, 1 November 2019 (EDT)
:Oh BTW - I ask because I saw a recent clip of Tucker Carslon on Fox talking about it. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 18:04, 6 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::I think this is a guy asking questions about a "conservative" practice whose possible answers he's actually anticipated.  And then hoping that further probing questions beneath its superficial simplicity will be too actually cumbersome to answer in a non-awkward way and even obliquely reflect badly on conservatism in general.  The best answer to the type of captious queries with which I suspect he'd follow is of the kind that takes place before they start, along the lines of "hard cases make bad law". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 23:47, 6 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Homebuilding is the No. 1 manufacturing industry in the US. Asking millions of carpenters to re-learn a trade so they can cut off 3/8 of an inch on a 2x4 in cms just to please the rest of the world is too much to ask. Heck, the rest of the world hasn't paid us back for World War I yet.
+
:::And globalization hasn't helped, either. When the French firm, La Farge, bought out a local stucco factory, they wanted everything recorded in metric tons. Accounting was a nightmare. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:00, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I don't know why, exactly, the U.S. doesn't use the metric system, but I'm glad it doesn't. Not only does the imperial system work just fine, but it also (and more importantly) helps prevent the U.S. from becoming too integrated into the "global system" -- similar as to how a unified currency, open borders, and economic globalization have accelerated the loss of sovereignty in European nation-states, standardized weights and measures also promote further integration and unification. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 01:31, 7 June 2019 (EDT)a
+
:::::Conversion will of course cost money, that didn't stop Europe or Latin America from converting. The U.S. has an economy large and self-sufficient enough to be able to ignore the rest of the world. The U.S. Constitution provides that congress establish a uniform system of weights and measures. Washington thought the task urgent and assigned it to Jefferson. Jefferson came up with his own decimal system of weight and measures. This idea was obviously impractical and Congress took no action. The U.S. was at war with France when the metric system was established in 1798-1799. John Quincy Adams wrote a comprehensive ''Report on Weights and Measures'' in 1821. He found that every state had, on its own, already adopt a very similar system. He concluded that federal action was no longer necessary. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 04:59, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::I found [https://video.foxnews.com/v/6045110807001/?playlist_id=5198073478001#sp=show-clips the Tucker Carlson interview]. I agree with the person Tucker interviewed, and he expressed his view more eloquently than I did. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 06:52, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::The current U.S. measurement system, which is based on the Adams report, is called "U.S. customary units." The imperial system is a similar system adopted by the British parliament in 1824. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:48, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Because it is based on 10, the metric system is easier to do calculations with so it would increase productivity. There would also be less kids winding up in ER rooms due to dosage errors. [https://www.vox.com/2014/5/29/5758542/time-for-the-US-to-use-the-metric-system] The metric system wins hands down.
+
  
By the way, long live the Library of Congress library classification system!!! Death to the fans of the Dewey decimal library classification system!!![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:08, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== Israel vs. Ukraine ==
:1990sguy wrote: "Not only does the imperial system work just fine...".
+
  
:Because it is based on 10, the metric system is easier to do calculations with so it would increase productivity. There would also be less kids winding up in ER rooms due to dosage errors. [https://www.vox.com/2014/5/29/5758542/time-for-the-US-to-use-the-metric-system] "The standardized structure and decimal features of the metric system made it well suited for scientific and engineering work."[http://www.us-metric.org/origin-of-the-metric-system/] We live in an increasingly technical/scientific age. It is time to acknowledge this fact and move to the metric system.
+
It's useful to note that while Democrats are complaining about "quid pro quo" with Trump and Ukraine, they openly support the same policy with regard to Israel: [https://www.wsj.com/articles/democratic-candidates-debate-using-aid-to-israel-as-leverage-in-policy-disputes-11572519601] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:55, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
 +
:Subtitle in your article: "Bernie Sanders says Israel would have to ‘fundamentally change’ its relationship to Gaza to receive aid if he is elected".
  
:There is good, better and best. The imperial system is "fine"/good, but the metric system is best. "Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win." - The Apostle PaulMake America have the greatest measurement system - the metric system![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:18, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:A socialist who had a heart attack recently talking about what is going to happen to US/Israel policy if he is elected to be president of the United States. I think Bernie Sanders needs to create greater self-awareness within himself"A man has got to know his limitations" - Dirty Harry, Magnum Force[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uki4lrLzRaU][[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 10:11, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
::The metric system is far easier. 10cm x 10 = 1 metre. 10 x 10 metres = 100 metres. 100 metres x 10 = Kilometer. very very simple. Much easier to divide and add and measure than 5280 feet equals 1 mile. Also weights are the same base 10. Simple and easy. Same goes for Celsius vs Fahrenheit. Water freezes at 0 and boils at 100 at sea level. Easy. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 21:22, 7 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::No one disagrees. However it would take at least a generation. In 1978, when the American auto industry still was vital, my brother had to buy two sets of wrenches - standard and metric - to work on his 1978 Ford Mustang cuz the body was built in the U.S. but engine built elsewhere. This was a generation before NAFTA. And we've seen the result - destruction of vital American manufacturing jobs.
+
  
:::America is self contained - we don't need any foreign imports. Until the rest of the world starts buying from America, we have no reason to change. Now it can be argued, they don't buy from us cuz they all have metric tools and can't work on American cars. But today you can't even change a wiper blade outside a factory dealership cuz it voids your factory warranty. Globalization (and technical improvements - the advent of so-called "disposable cars"), have destroyed the secondary auto repair market - jobs among so-called non-union "fly-by-night" mechanics. Again, the only "benefit" is job loss.
+
::Point of fact: there was only ever a ''potential quid pro quo'' between the Ukraine and the Trump Administration.  And the phony (Congressional) "House Inquiry" testimony indeed bore out the Ukrainians ''never originated a new policy'' with regard to investigating government or business entities Trump called the president of Ukraine about or even the Bidens, who came later in the conversation. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 10:16, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
:::I sat in a meeting with La Farge executives and their 44 employees of a stucco manufacturing firm. They were straight up and honest about the reason for their investment in purchasing the company. They asked the 44 workers to help the multinational global firm destroy their own jobs ([[creative destruction]]) so as to reduce the number of employees to 4 with the same daily output in a fully automated robotic factory (they didn't say it was on a two year timetable). The only immediate beneficiaries were accountants and inventory control clerks, whose daily tasks were duplicated and redundant, converting ounces of color additives into metric tonnes of total output.
+
== Revival of pictures of New York City gaslights ==
  
:::So even high school drop outs and ex-felons who can't find employment elsewhere other than as a fly-by-night auto mechanic or grunt worker in a stucco factory understand that globalization and a fixed rate between the dollar and the Euro works against their health and best interests. [[Andrew Yang]]'s proposal to turn America into a nation of paid obese couch potatoes seriously threatens America's mental, emotional, spiritual and physical health. As to turning America into another sh*thole with the metric system, ''Viva l' deferance!'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:10, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
+
I forgot how pretty these looked!  I like all the funny names of the different brands. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 11:05, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
=== Why Metric is better ===
+
[[File:NYT Gaslighting 1970-2018.jpg|float right|625px]]
  
I saw this posted and it makes sense as to why metric is far superior to imperial. I have removed the foul language from the original post though.
+
:Shame it just shows the frequency relative to the peak so you can't compare each word. It would be interesting if there was a similar graphic showing what percentage of articles contained that word at that time so you could get a better overall picture as well as some more non-woke words. Still fascinating though. [[User:FredericBernard|FredericBernard]] ([[User talk:FredericBernard|talk]])
:''In metric, one milliliter of water occupies one cubic centimeter, weighs one gram and requires one calorie of energy to heat it up by one centigrade - which is one percent of the difference between its freezing point and it's boiling point. An amount of Hydrogen weighing the same amount has exactly one mole of atoms in it.''
+
::Let me remark, I found this upload fascinating. I wish we could find a mainspace to put it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:19, 5 November 2019 (EST)
Metric is easier and better. But I can understand how difficult it would be to introduce to a huge country with a population of about 380 Million people. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 01:44, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:And we in the States have no problem with imperial.  We can tell at a glance the size of a quarter-acre, or a half-mile; a cup of water, or a teaspoon of vanilla; a 5/8-inch wrench; how long a blue whale is in feet, or a hummingbird is in inches.  And a cubic foot has 1728 cubic inches, containing 62.4 pounds of water.  Simple! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 04:16, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Once you stoop to using decimal pounds you're already 57/64 of the way to the metric system. A cubic foot of water properly weighs 62 pounds, 6 oz, 13 dr, 15 1/4 grains, plus a little more, because there is no direct relationship between volume and weight. Before you say 'a pint's a pound the world around', please remember that a US pint of water weighs 1 lb, 306 1/4 grains and a gallon is 231 cubic inches.--[[User:Brossa|Brossa]] ([[User talk:Brossa|talk]]) 09:39, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::It's not "imperial"! It's the "United States Customary System."[https://www.britannica.com/science/United-States-Customary-System] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:16, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:How many Troy ounces to a Pound Sterling? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:03, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::When the baby boomers die off, the USA will probably adopt the metric system.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:00, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Remember, the Metric System is a product of atheistic revolutionary France -- the same people who also tried to implement a more "rational" calendar which included a ten-day work week (as did the USSR). There's actually a strong parallel between how we calculate time and the imperial system -- sixty minutes in an hour, 24 hours in a day, 30/31 days in a month, 52 weeks in a year, etc., similar to 5,280 feet in a mile, etc. -- neither are simple. But both systems are not a problem for us because we need to know it and thus memorize it. I like how the Imperial System uses numbers like 12 and 60, which can be divided many ways into whole numbers.
+
:::More importantly, I oppose adopting a new system of weights and measures -- particularly one with the secular humanist origins of the metric system -- in order to get in line with other countries. There's no pressing need to adopt the metric system, as the imperial system works fine for us (irrespective as to which one is "better"). The only "pressing need" I can think of is to integrate the U.S. further into the world economy (accomplished through the web of international organizations/treaties, which reduces its sovereignty and threatens its constitutional freedoms -- something which isn't desirable). I see this as similar to how the U.S. is the only country that isn't part of the Paris climate agreement, hasn't ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, or which has an amendment protecting the right to self-defense. The U.S. should not take actions which reduce its sovereignty or which make it dependent on other countries, including economic integration (a powerful force at getting countries to change their political policies -- look at China's investment in the third world, for example). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:36, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I'm not sure a system of measurement has anything to do with "secular humanist origins". DO you oppose numbers because they are Arabic? It's a silly position to take. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 00:14, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::We in this country are used to doing things by inches, miles, pounds, etc; others around the world are used to metrics. Whether or not it's "secular humanist" is debatable (and a silly debate at that), but to myself both are mere units of measurement and nothing more. And that's the way it should be. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 01:40, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::@JohnSelway: Obviously, it's not secular humanist to count in metrics -- what I mean is that the metric system, unlike Arabic numbers or anything else like that, was originally created to uproot tradition and embody the secular humanistic ideals of the French Revolution. Thus, I don't like the symbolism of adopting it, especially if current system works well for us and the best reason people can give for changing is "But everybody else is using metrics!" -- similar to how I would oppose changing [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+20%3A10-11&version=ESV the number of days in a week] if a viable calendar alternative were created. Is symbolism a poor reason to oppose metrics? Maybe, but once again, I haven't heard any good reasons why we need to change it in the first place. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 07:44, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::The only incentive or economic benefit the US has to adopting the metric is to compete in the export market of manufactured goods, which at this point is still a ways off. As the US brings jobs home from China to rebuild our manufacturing base (which appears permanent at this point), shifting to metric may be something to consider. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:08, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Exporting is not the only benefit - especially in the long run. Because it is based on 10, the metric system is easier to do calculations with so it would increase productivity. There would also be less kids winding up in ER rooms due to dosage errors. [https://www.vox.com/2014/5/29/5758542/time-for-the-US-to-use-the-metric-system] "The standardized structure and decimal features of the metric system made it well suited for scientific and engineering work."[http://www.us-metric.org/origin-of-the-metric-system/]  We live in an increasingly technical/scientific age. It is time to acknowledge this fact and move to the metric system.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:17, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:See also: [https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20150501/NEWS/150509993/a-gram-of-prevention-providers-urged-to-go-metric-to-avoid-medication-errors A gram of prevention: Providers urged to go metric to avoid medication errors].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:20, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Here is an excellent article: [https://www.metric4us.com/why.html 3 major reasons why the metric system is better].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:24, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== Tucker Carlson and the metric system. I like Tucker Carlson, but he is a bit of a Luddite ===
+
== Idea for Main Page Right ==
  
Tucker Carlson is against the metric system. He is also against self-driving trucks because it will put a lot of truckers out of work. I don't know all the pros-cons as far as the future of self-driving trucks, but Carlson is a bit of a [[Luddite]] (Despite this, I still like Tucker Carlson).
+
Today is Reformation Day, the 502nd anniversary of Martin Luther's theses on the church door at Wittenberg.  The rest is, to use a cliché, history. We had a very interesting discussion about it today at our interfaith group!
  
People are going to have to develop their powers of learning/creativity/productivity because robotics/artificial intelligence/automation are coming. And as soon as the baby boomers die off, the metric system will likely be adopted in the USA.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:05, 10 June 2019 (EDT)
+
It goes without saying that the mass media won't mention it. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 20:39, 31 October 2019 (EDT)
  
== 5G and China ==
+
==[[Christine Blasey Ford]] had nothing to gain by testifying==
[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/06/08/beijing-summons-u-s-tech-leaders-to-summit-with-threats-of-punishment-if-they-follow-trump/#more-164831 China has warned U.S. companies not to comply with the new U.S rules sanctioning Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei]. If there is anyone who hasn't heard of 5G yet, it's a cell phone communication standard that is twenty times faster than the current 4G standard. There are three companies that provide the equipment necessary to set up this type of network: China's Huawei, Finland's Nokia, and Sweden's Ericsson. The sanctions against Huawei are justified by the claim that Huawei-supplied 5G networks are a security concern. IMO, this is like worrying that a foreign car manufacturer will install listening devices. If the sanctions are meant as a protectionist measure, what U.S. company is supposed to benefit? Perhaps they are being used as a bargaining chip in the larger trade war.<br/>There is a long list of American companies that have been driven out of China over the years, so it's hard to feel much sympathy for Huawei. Other than some Apple iPhone shops, no major foreign technology or pharmaceutical company has a retail presence in China. The government has censored Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. off the Chinese Web. As far as operating from inside China goes, the corporate offices of Microsoft, Uber, and other U.S. companies were closed after repeated police raids. China agreed to free trade when it joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. But Beijing's word doesn't seem to be worth much. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:07, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:The [[CCP]] [[economic planning|economic planner]]s have commanded their [[far left]] Silicon Valley [[collude]]rs not to abide by U.S. law. They need their [[Democrat party]] allies and fellow [[human rights]] abusers to overturn Trump's trade sanctions. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup>
+
::Despite the "China threat" coverage that has dominated the U.S. press for many years, China was laid back about it until the Huawei sanctions. Now they are trashing around. Last week, the buzz was about sanctioning rare earth exports. That would be like Trump refusing to sell China soybeans. In the trade negotiations, the "Made in China 2025" program to shut American companies out of the Chinese technology market is apparently the sticking point. If China seriously wants to play U.S. politics, they can place a bet on Biden and create a news network equivalent to Russia's RT or Iran's The Young Turks/Al Jazeera. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 17:19, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::Regardless of the politics, Huawei was in a little hot water a few months back about their routers, which were found to be very insecure, (allegedly) at least partially by design.  I can't speak for their 5G access points, but I wouldn't trust them. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 23:44, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
+
...except non-stop acclamations, awards and receptiveness to her political leadership from multitudes of spiteful liberals (that is, nearly all of them) from that point forward.<ref>Prestigiacomo, Amanda (November 1, 2019). [https://www.dailywire.com/news/christine-blasey-ford-wins-another-award-gives-acceptance-speech "Christine Blasey Ford wins another award, gives acceptance speech"]. Dailywire.com</ref>
::::It sounds like Trump has found a vulnerability: "[https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/3011741/chinas-wrong-us-can-kill-huawei-heres-why-it-wont The trade war could leave Huawei smartphones frozen in time without core technology from the US]." This is from ''South China Morning Post'', Hong Kong's English-language daily. Huawei is clearly a company near and dear to the Chinese leadership. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:51, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:We should subpoena her tax returns and find out how profitable lying, fraud, and subversion is. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:21, 5 November 2019 (EST)
::::::Don't forget the [https://www.wsj.com/articles/huawei-under-criminal-investigation-over-iran-sanctions-1524663728 Huwai-Iran connection].
+
====Reference====
::::::As I've said numerous times, whoever the DNC nominates, they will be onboard with Trump's China policy. There is no going back. China's free ride is over. Trump's tearing up trade agreements with China is permanent, even if he were to be a one-term president. The big losers in America are Family Dollar, Dollar General and Dollar Tree store clerks. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:00, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
{{reflist}}
  
=== Hong Kongers protest extradition law ===
+
==Shaking my head==
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2019/jun/10/hong-kong-protests-in-pictures A proposed extradition law has sparked the largest protest in Hong Kong's history]. The relationship between Hong Kong and China is officially described as "one country, two systems." Five Hong Kong residents dissappeared in 2015 in connection to the book ''Xi Jinping and His Lovers''.[https://qz.com/586323/a-book-linked-to-the-disappearance-of-hong-kong-booksellers-focuses-on-xi-jinpings-six-women/] One was kidnapped while on vacation in Thailand. Otherwise, the communist/ultracapitalist paradox that is Hong Kong has worked reasonably well up to now. It seems unlikely that the protests can stop the extradition law. If the protest movement is defeated again, this could be its law stand, or so the pundits claim. With the new law in place, China will be able to extradite whoever it likes. Unlike Hong Kong, there is no rule of law in China. Even the lawyers of dissidents often get tortured.<br/>''Xi Jinping and His Lovers'' was finally published this year.[http://www.lulu.com/shop/united-editors/xi-jinping-and-his-lovers/paperback/product-24115629.html] The American Library Association promotes various banned books on its Website. None of them have a tale as dramatic as ''XJAHL,'' the book that broke a city. <br/>Hong Kong has never been a democracy, but its citizens have a history of standing up for their city. Mainland China, as well as Macau, fell to Mao Zedong's Red Guards in 1967. The Cantonese of Hong Kong rallied behind their British-led police, faced down a water cutoff, and defeated the Maoists. Determined to one up Mao, Deng Xiaoping declared retaking Hong Kong a priority soon after he came to power in  1978. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 08:18, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:I saw that. One million protesters in the streets. The CCP's big challenge is keeping it hidden from the rest of the populace. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:00, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::I don't think anyone is expecting that. This is more of a sad last stand for Hong Kong's special political and legal status within China. But Hong Kongers haven't given up just yet. Today the protesters have laid siege to the city's legislature, which 50 percent appointed by Beijing. Next they will try a general strike.[https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/hong-kong-extradition-law-fight-1.5132447] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:58, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::The people of Hong Kong have no love for the [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9rDqvSP4AY Peoples Republic of China]. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:21, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::The family of Chinese President Xi Jinping is said to own seven properties in Hong Kong worth tens of millions of dollars.[https://www.heraldnet.com/news/family-of-chinese-leader-xi-rakes-in-millions/] The protesters need to figure out where they are. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:49, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::If Hong Kong can beat Xi Jinping, surely Trump can do the same: "[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/world/asia/hong-kong-protests-extradition-law.html Hong Kong's Leader Is Set to Delay Extradition Bill Indefinitely]." [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 04:45, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
===China trade and North Korea===
+
Fox News reported a Finnish politician is under a 'hate crime investigation' for sharing a Bible verse on Facebook.
China trade deals and North Korean nukes are [https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1TJ31R?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A%2BTrending%2BContent&utm_content=5d09b6f7b1a3150001dd8cc1&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter&__twitter_impression=true inextricably linked.] Looks like President Trump's strategy is paying off, just in time for the G20 meeting with Chairman Xi where talks can be advanced. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:47, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==Democratic field==
+
What a bigot. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 05:53, 7 November 2019 (EST)
Can you imagine being a Democrat and looking at this field of socialists, communists, kooks, crazies and nobodies? then realizing Swamp Creature Joe Biden whose been in government for 50 years and lost bids for the Presidency 3 times is your best hope? That's gotta be depressing. — RockPrincess (June 10, 2019) [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 00:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Hillary was "inevitable" in 2007, remember? until the herd got a chance to vote. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::There is a new Iowa poll that shows that Biden is now below where he was was when he announced.[https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/08/politics/iowa-poll-2020-biden-sanders-warren-buttigieg-harris/] Sanders is also petering out. His former supporters are going to Warren. Warren and Buttigieg are the hot flavors now. Harris's support has all but disappeared in the latest polling. She is this year's Scott Walker: She is the candidate with the best-looking qualifications, but somehow no traction in any recent poll. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 12:36, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Bernie can't be taken seriously. Nobody takes him seriously anymore. They like his ideas, but Democrats want a younger candidate. And the party establishment doesn't trust him cause he's not a Democrat. And Warren is still regarded as a joke. Ultimately we'll see Harris, Buttigieg and Warren as the three survivors, with Harris and Buttigieg as the two most electable. Any other scenario is a losing scenario. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:57, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Biden will win the Democratic presidential nomination. He has greater appeal to midwestern rust belt states than the other candidates and is therefore seen as more electable. Democrats want someone who is electable over all considerations. Second, I doubt that the 1st round of voting in the Democrat convention will yield a winner. And in the second round of voting, the establishment leaning superdelegates will tip the scale and cause Biden to win the nomination.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:53, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::[[Far left]] extremists dominate the voter base. They aren't interested in practical things like electability. They are ideologues. He can't survive the primaries (unless they're rigged, ''deja vu''). The Obama card has no more appeal than it did for Hillary as Obama's Secretary of State. And Biden has ''less appeal'' among Blacks than Hillary; the 1994 Crime Bill was hung around her neck as a guilt by association smear for her husband signing it. Biden is the true culprit who authored it, along with his pal [[Strom Thurmond]]. Don't think (a) Blacks are stupid  about knowing the facts, (b) their issues are No. 4 or 5 on the list when to them, this issue is No. 1, and (3) Trump's Prison Reform Initiative, supported by [[Van Jones]], to undo the damage done by Biden and the Clinton's promises to be a major issue. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup>17:03, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Sanders and Clinton Foundation money donors patched up their differences and committed to Harris a year ago. She (and Klobuchar, who has no money or polling numbers) are flying beneath the radar, trying to avoid mistakes, which Biden, Bernie, and Buttigieg are doing daily. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:08, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::The contest right now is to get 130,000 individual donors of less than $250 to make it into the September debates, it is not for the nomination. Once a candidate achieves the 130,000 mark, it's a matter of maintaining a media profile ''without'' debating issues or provoking controversy. Biden, Bernie, and Buttigieg are failing. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:12, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::[[Superdelegate]] status has been downgraded, giving more power to the communist [[front group]]s. Harris dominates in both. (This is Bernie's legacy, breaking the hold of the establishment elites. We'll see how long his legacy holds). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:21, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
*Warren has surged to frontrunner status. More precisely, she is now second in the polls after Biden.[https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_nv_061219/] I don't think overtaking Biden will be a problem. At his latest appearance in Iowa, Biden's energy kept running low like a wind-up toy on its last coil. As for Warren, the Cherokee Nation has already issued a statement disputing her claim to be an American Indian. Yet as far her supporters are concerned, anyone who brings the issue up is a racist. This is almost as obnoxious as Obama claiming that birtherism is racist. The claim that Obama was born in Kenya originated in his publishers' biography. In all likelihood, Obama wrote the bio himself. ("Ha! Ha! Sydney Blumenthal and those other racists were dumb enough to believe me!") Even if he didn't write it, it was his responsibility to check it. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:19, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::She can never get away from the fact that the reason she's in the position she is today is by stealing [[affirmative action]] funds and denying a qualified recipient a place. This issue will never die. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:18, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Biden just promised to cure cancer if he is elected (The Biden administration is going to cure cancer in 8 years!). A lot of other Democratic candidates promise medicare for all and/or the Green New Deal despite the massive US Federal deficit.
+
  
:::It's really hard to predict who is going to win in Democrat la-la land. In short, the Democrats are insane.
+
== Is Warren taking a dive? ==
  
:::"the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead." - King Solomon
+
After briefly acheiving frontrunner status, Warren's poll numbers dropped dramatically when she proved unable to explain how she will pay for her signature "Medicare for All" proposal. She has also adopted a curious strategy of not responding to criticism. See "[https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/08/elizabeth-warren-campaign-067768 Elizabeth Warren blows up the 'war room']." Obama's people wanted Warren to run against Hillary in 2016. Obama aide Valerie Jarrett leaked the story of Hillary's "homebrew" email server to give her a helping hand. (This is a bit of history the mainstream media has been doing its best to erase lately.)<br/>Warren was apparently afraid of challenging Hillary in 2016. When you think about what happened to Brett Kavanaugh, Don Imus, or others who've crossed the Clintons, she was probably playing it safe. Who thought you could still red bait a Democratic congresswoman like Tulsi Gabbard? It's so old school. Warren can position herself so she can pick up the pieces when Hillary finally realizes that her campaigning days are over.<br/>Or at least that's the way I hope things work out. America has been on the Clintons' enemies list since the 2000 election. Hillary will be in quite a vindictive mood by the time inaugeration rolls around. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:05, 9 November 2019 (EST)
::::Saw that. Need a little more context from Biden before I can paraphrase it into something like, "promises to heal the sick, raise the dead, and cure cancer," or "walks on water and cures cancer" or something along those lines to bring out Biden's Messianic vision. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:13, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Michelle Obama is the only one who could reassemble Democratic voters - minus non-aligned and crossovers. Warren can't get blacks onboard, and looks increasingly like she never will if she can't do it right now in the next 3 months. Warren's other problem is Wall Street, which pledged $70 million to fund the DNC convention but now has second thoughts. Hillary wants to run so bad, but she can't win a two-way contest (her 2 Senate wins were virtually unopposed in the general election), never mind a wide field. Dick Morris, no amateur, lays out a scenario where Warren becomes inevitable. And it's like watching a slow train wreck. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:42, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::I hope Bloomberg is testing the waters just out of vanity. Blacks hate him for being pro-police while progressives hate him for being fiscally responsible. That leaves him competing with Gabbard for the white moderate vote. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:31, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::He's picking up the anti-gun torch from Beto. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:10, 10 November 2019 (EST)
  
===Kamala Harris blows out tire; husband doesn’t help===
+
== Ciaramella vs. Plame ==
Kamala Harris was ambushed by an animal rights activist who climbed up onto a stage at venue where she was being interviewed.  Her husband waited for security to do their job, but was then the last to get up to go make sure the culprit was separated from his wife.  It looked bad, even though the only thing the activist seized was a microphone.  Her poll numbers plummeted.
+
  
Bernie Sanders, for reasons unknown, has been leaking supporters since May at a startlingly constant rate, as if he can do no right. Buttigieg has been treading water since then, and Elizabeth Warren, who hasn’t done anything different, rose 4%.
+
Throughout the Valerie Plame episode, we were free to say the woman’s name all we liked. It was never established whether she was an undercover agent or not. But her status at the CIA, whatever it was, was treated as blown as soon as Robert Novak’s article was published.<br/>Not so with Eric Ciaramella, or “whistleblower,” as the media lovingly refers to him. Although his name is all over the conservative media, it’s out of bounds as far as our mainstream gatekeepers are concerned. See “[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/facebook-scrubbing-any-and-all-mentions-of-alleged-whistleblowers-name-from-the-platform Facebook scrubbing 'any and all mentions' of alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella].” If there is any precedent for keeping a “secret” this way, I am not aware of it.<br/>The logic for keeping a whistleblower’s name secret is to prevent retaliation at his place of employment. But Ciaramella’s various supervisors presumably know all about him. Are we supposed to imagine that after talking to Adam Schiff on Capital Hill, Ciaramella goes back to Langley, puts in a day’s work as an analyst, and his coworkers are none the wiser?<br/>So why can’t the media tell us anything about the man at the center of the hottest controversy in American politics? Well, if we knew who he was, we could examine his track record and determine if he is a credible source. The smart money says this is another production by the Steele dossier crew. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:24, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:See [[Lawfare group]] -- the same guys who wrote Ciaramella complaint are prosecuting the case. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:12, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::To the extent that the media has tried to justify not disclosing the alleged whistleblower's name, they point to death threats. The way they present the issue of threats is thoroughly dishonest. You don't have to be terribly famous to get death threats. I speak from personal experience here. Furthermore, the media is interested in them only to the extent that they serve an agenda. Anomynity for whistleblowers was not created in order to prevent death threats. If potential threats are the standard, you could justify anomynity for almost anyone. What about people listed in Trump's tax returns? There have been boycotts of businesses just for having links to Trump. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:31, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::It makes no sense. How can he get death threats if he's not been named? Today [http://themillenniumreport.com/2019/10/whistleblower-ided-ciaramella-eric-ciaramella/ I found this (published a month ago], October 11, 2019) scroll down to see the context:
 +
::::''"Adam Schiff claimed the whistleblower had received ‘death threats’ without saying '''when''' the alleged threats were received. Perhaps he forgot the whistleblower was anonymous; if so, how could they have been threatened?"'' [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 21:51, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::I didn't realize that Fox News was also protecting this guy: "[https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-contributor-mollie-hemingway-causes-scene-when-she-names-alleged-whistleblower-on-air?ref=scroll Fox News Contributor Causes Scene When She Names Alleged Whistleblower on Air]." Hey, don't say "Ciaramella" or your mother will faint, and your father will fall in a bucket of paint. We need a blimp to go around the country with the message, "Eric Ciaramella is a fraud." Wasn't there a character in Harry Potter whose name you couldn't mention? [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:13, 10 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Watch [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K5dmP4ph3A a few minutes of] this [[Tim Pool]] report. Facebook suspended him for mentioning Ciaramella.  It's his first suspension ever anywhere. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 02:05, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::What about Sean Misko, the second whistle-blower?  We need to run a test on him, especially since he's an embarrassing wrinkle whom Adam Schiff wants to prevent from testifying altogether! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 04:53, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::Misko is a Schiff staffers, isn't he? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:34, 11 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::I think he knew two of Schiff's staff members and was recruited by Schiff in August 2019.
 +
:::Lol, just found out that Ciaramella's name was already mentioned in the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence October 22, 2019 transcripts, published on November 6! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 10:07, 11 November 2019 (EST)
  
The standings as such are now suggesting that Democrats have, like what happened to Trump, resolved into two groups:  Biden or not-Biden (meaning one of the four I mentioned). [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 08:41, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
FLASHBACK October 10, 2019
:Biden will be ambushed by the mob come February, much as the 'inevitable' Hillary was in 2008 and again in 2016. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:23, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Whistle-blower's attorney worked previously as probable soft coup ringleader James Clapper's attorney
::I can't see how Biden will survive the first debate. He looks so over the hill, especially when he does anything unscripted. Of course, you can dismiss all the top candidates this way. Warren has yet to accomplish anything in life notable enough to make us think of her as something other than "that fake Indian candidate." As for Buttigieg, going from small town mayor to president would be quite a stretch. I assume that he is in fact running for vice president. In short, they are all implausible. But someone will get the nomination. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:44, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Not only that, but s/he worked for an unnamed 2020 U.S presidential candidate's campaign.
:::That's why Harris looks like a winner. She can galvanize progressives and blacks for the nomination, as Obama did in 2008. Short of a financial collapse in late October, wiping out middle class white people's 401(k)s, it's uphill for her in the general. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:25, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:
+
:::Face facts: Obama won in 2008 because of the financial collapse in October, not because of lurch leftward in America; Obama won 2012 because of political spying, abuse of the intelligence apparatus, and intimidation of journalists who reported the truth about him. The three million votes he lost in 2012 were people who naively voted for him 2008 thinking he was not a communist. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 01:31, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:
+
:::It's important to note, under the rules if a candidate is attacked by name, the candidate gets rebuttal time. Attacking Biden, whose already slipping, gives him more air time, sucking the oxygen out of the room. Only fools would waste the time allotted to them to make their case by granting Biden more attention. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:29, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::After crunching the Iowa favorability numbers, Nate Silver says Warren and Buttigieg are the candidates to watch.[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/silver-bulletpoints-iowans-seem-to-like-warren-and-buttigieg/] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:36, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::I don't know.  Since Kamala Harris is the best at showing grievance, intersectionality dictates that she be the nominee—or at least the not-Biden. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 03:58, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::I Second the Notion. And she's got the big donors, too. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 09:05, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::On the other hand, she's too much like Obama.  People want to move on. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 17:50, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::Since Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Obama (more than anyone) have proved that no Democrat wins the presidency without Blacks' support. Blacks understand this more than anyone. Harris knows she has the #2 spot locked up; by her logic (and that of most Blacks) if she's qualified for #2, she's qualified for #1. Why should she have to ride the back of the bus for the racist Democrat's #1 pick. Blacks got a taste for power when Obama put racist Democrats in their place in 2008. Harris is Obama's political successor, who carries with her the unpopular  notion (among Blacks) that gay rights are civil rights. But Blacks will trade with their white racist liberal coalition allies their opposition to gay rights for power and recognition. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
=== 1st Democratic Debate: Sen. Elizabeth Warren placed at kids’ table despite rise in her campaign’s popularity due to dip in close competitors ===
+
::Not only that, but Intelligence Committee member, allegedly intelligent, Adam Schiff remarked that s/he was receiving death threats. But how is that possible if s/he is anonymous? VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 01:45, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
  
{| class="wikitable"  style="font-size:98%; margin:left;"
+
:::We'll have the answer to that in 2 or 3 years when nobody cares and she's forgotten. This is how Washington works.RobS De Plorabus Unum 06:43, 10 October 2019 (EDT)
|+1st and 2nd Democratic Debate
+
 
|+to be held on Wednesday, June 26, 2019 and Thursday, June 27, 2019
+
:::::My take: Hiding the (phony) whistle-blower's name is the (phony) media's way of helping the Democrats have more flexibility in ''staging'' or ''choreographing'' the impeachment drama, to compensate for the fact that there is no ''actual'' drama to the substance of what is left to disclose, in this case releasing the (phony) whistle-blower's name and face in a dramatic "reveal", even though, of course, the transcript was released weeks ago, and his testimony is completely unnecessary. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 16:05, 11 November 2019 (EST)
|+
+
::::::Coupled with the ongoing Facebook and Youtube censorship, you see how this is also a trial run for how Facebook and Google will handle the Democrats 2020 [[October Surprise]]. This impeachment coup has already been three years in the planning phase. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:49, 11 November 2019 (EST)
!Candidate
+
:::::::I don't think they planned it this way. When his existance was first announced, Schiff thought Ciaramella would be a great witness. Then something happened that made them think better of that idea. The obvious move for Republicans in the Senate is to call Ciaramella as a witness. I assume he will refuse to testify. I hope the Senate issues a subpoena and puts him in jail. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:04, 11 November 2019 (EST)
!Chance<br>of becoming<br>Democratic<br>nominee<br>Monday,<br>June 17, 2019
+
::::::::Theconsewrvativetreehouse back in December 2018 (before the new Congress was sworn in) outlined House Rules changes, as well as personnel, that were all geared toward impeachment. Among these changes was stripping the minority of any rights in hearings and depositions; striping the minority of the right to be notified that person was being summoned for a deposition; the sharing of information between committee chairs gathered by different committee subpoenas and hearings; the appointment of various Lawfare group attorneys in certain committees, etc. [https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/28/pelosis-house-rule-changes-are-key-part-of-articles-of-impeachment-being-drafted-over-next-two-weeks/ Here's a September 2019 recap of the earlier article]. The two week timetable here was delayed, but even McConnell told Senators a few weeks ago to be prepared for a Senate trial before Thanksgiving. The public not catching on and lack of bipartisan support is basically the cause of the delay (so the MSM will continue hammering). The timetable is still before primary season begins (voting on February 3, 2020) cause at least four Senators will be on the road campaigning then.
!
+
::::::::The December 2018 articles I could retrieve, but that would take time. Usually Sundance of theconservativetreehouse (who sounds an awfully lot like the team of diGenova and Toensing) will link back to an earlier article or cut an paste into an expanded update. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 18:45, 11 November 2019 (EST)
!style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Home state
+
 
!Candidate
+
::::::::[https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/01/02/speaker-nancy-pelosi-outlines-new-rules-for-116th-congressional-session-includes-schedule-for-process-of-trump-impeachment/ Speaker Nancy Pelosi Outlines New Rules for 116th Congressional Session – Includes Schedule for Process of Trump Impeachment…] - Posted on January 2, 2019 by sundance
!Chance<br>of becoming<br>Democratic<br>nominee<br>Wednesday,<br>June 19, 2019
+
 
!
+
== Daily Beast article ==
!Home state
+
 
|-
+
If you read the article, you'll see the Daily Beast exposes nothing.  It reports what is coming up in a TV show.
|align="left"|Sen. [[Cory Booker]]
+
 
|align="right"|1.3%
+
The Anthony Blunt story was explained in great detail back in the 1980s by Chapman Pincher and others.  He was protected by the British Secret Service from the early 60s to avoid any further damage to US-UK relations which had already been strained by the Philby affair.
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New Jersey
+
If you don't know about the Cambridge Spy Ring, this might seem like a revelation. However, it was extensively covered by the MSM back then and it's in a TV show produced by the MSM now....so why is it on MPR?  Come on guys, you can do better.  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 11:56, 10 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Sen. [[Michael Bennet]]
+
:Great example! Initially, it was the "The Cambridge 2". Then a hunt for "The Third Man". Then eventually "The Cambridge 3", which lasted for about 2 decades.  By the 1970s the hunt was on for "The Fourth Man", and people were tired of it. They now have settled on "Cambridge 5" (Wikipedia's title). Great example of confusing historigraphy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 15:09, 10 November 2019 (EST)
|align="right"|0.1%
+
::Despite the fact that real life British intelligence was thoroughly infiltrated like this, the James Bond movies allowed the phrase "British intelligence" to retain quite a cachet. To reiterate what others have already posted, the Cambridge spy ring is a very old story at this point. You could cover the show as news, but what would that headline look like: "Netflix has produced a show about an old British spy scandal."   [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:04, 10 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
:::In reply to Rafael above, what the ''Daily Beast'' reports appears to be missing from the Wikipedia entry about the [[Cambridge Five]].  Why am I not surprised?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 21:43, 10 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Colorado
+
::::The fifth man, John Cairncross, was exposed in the 1980s. Like the other four, his duplicity and trwason was known decades earlier.  Again, there's nothing here that is either a) recent news or b) hasn't been extensively covered by the MSM in the past.  I simply fail to see how a web article about a TV show produced by the MSM about something that has already been extensively covered merits MPR status.  The British elections are far more interesting!  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 16:59, 11 November 2019 (EST)
|-
+
:::::So Lord Rothschild was the 6th Man? [https://espionagehistoryarchive.com/2018/03/27/victor-rothschild-soviet-spy/] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:35, 11 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Sec'y [[Julian Castro|Julián Castro]]
+
 
|align="right"|0.4%
+
==MPL Update: 750,000,000 page views==
|align="left"|
+
[https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Statistics Need an update.] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:57, 11 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Texas
+
 
|align="left"|V. Pres [[Joe Biden]]
+
==Falsifiability==
|align="right"|29.6%
+
 
|align="left"|
+
Is sexism worse than it was before?  Is racism?  Do the misdeeds and weaknesses we are encouraged to avoid in the Bible through obedience to our faith misrepresent what is right and wrong?
|align="left"|Delaware
+
 
|-
+
Unless affirmations of these beliefs, and those like them, include conditions under which they can be falsified, it's impossible for them to have any independent validity.  Because then they could be the product of merely emotional leaps (in this case, as often, perhaps to be used as fig leaves or vehicles for revenge) without connection to reality, having gone unexamined.
|align="left"|Mayor [[Bill de Blasio]]
+
 
|align="right"|0.1%
+
These, otherwise, political pseudo-principles do harm, and are in a sense violence, in that when they are promoted, they distort the thinking of free citizens in their pursuit of what is the best interests of themselves and their country. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 05:35, 12 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
:Sexism is [[social construct]]. I witnessed it happen. It happened when [[white privilege]]d [[feminist]]s hijacked the [[civil rights movement]]. White privileged feminists do not want equality with blacks. They want power. That's what the "glass ceiling" is all about. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:36, 12 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|New York
+
 
|align="left"|May. [[Pete Buttigieg]]
+
::I thought American liberals gave up Marxism after Solzhenitsyn's book as their project and made it women's liberation.  At least one administrator here(!) bore the brunt of opposing what really became a liberation to abuse and be abused by divorce and devaluation of family life.
|align="right"|13.4%
+
 
|align="left"|
+
::Is it wrong for me to suggest that black immigrants reached the point of hijacking the civil rights movement too as they have reached parity with American descendants of slaves in affirmative action programs?
|align="left"|Indiana
+
 
|-
+
::Women's liberation kept the "sexist" label in reserve, then their successors later used it wherever they could, then instead of just applying it to events and people, they to this day apply the allegation to abstract structures of American life, where suddenly a hidden vein of sexism will have been discovered to have escaped (at best, aided by the research of an agency helped by further allegations of their having a non-political or neutral nature) coincidentally during phases of political processes where there is no leisure to study the evidence. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 09:46, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Rep. [[John Delaney]]
+
 
|align="right"|0.1%
+
:::No no no, Solzhenitsyn is an anti-semitic bigot for criticizing communism, haven't you heard? (that's why the Nobel Committee gives awards for climate hoaxers, trying to rehab their reputation with leftists). Women's lib originated as a CIA plot 1957 when the CIA put [[Gloria Steinem]] on the payroll. The theory was that the Cambridge 5 got recruited in college so young people needed an alternative to Marxism to be recruited into, dedicate their lives to, and change the world (since Jesus and the church obviously were failing).  
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Maryland
+
:::NYT reported the other day 40% of all Ivy League freshmen are immigrants or second generation immigrants; it's probably just a plan to [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PRZiFzonUo push wepawations] and encourage immigrants to get professional positions to keep ADOS on the [[Democratic plantation]].
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kirsten Gillibrand]]
+
 
|align="right"|0.4%
+
:::In the late 1960s and early 70s, honestly, when women started tossing around the word "sexism", as blacks benefited from affirmative action, housing discrimination laws, and handouts, most people just laughed when they heard or where accused of it. Which of course only became evidence that it was true and existed, as Hollywood, legislators and immigrant foreign rock stars picked up the torch ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5RuCEhHcG4 Woman Is The Nigger Of The World]). As blacks achieved civil rights, the Vietnam war wound down, and Nixon was driven from office, the liberal left needed new causes to keep violent mobs in the street motivated and bound together. Feminism and environmentalism became the issues. Now that women have achieved "progress" (a few dozen Congressional seats, a majority of college degrees, and zero-population growth) environmentalism or climate change comes to the forefront (oh, the gay rights movement hijacked the civil rights movement from blacks and feminists in the 1990s; the trannies' time has now come but with zero population growth and immigration, nobody really cares cause it doesn't really matter in the long run). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:28, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left"|New York
+
==The plan...==
|-
+
The plan is to dump Trump by February, install [[Nikki Haley]] as Pence's running mate (that's what her pro-MAGA book tour is all about) and Hillary jump back into the race. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 23:36, 12 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tulsi Gabbard]]
+
:Hillary jumping in is just her plan, I assume. If other top tier Democrats thought it was a good idea, she would have done it by now. Doesn't Pence get to pick his running mate? I don't think Hillary and Pence have joined up, at least not yet. Blacks despise Buttigieg and Bloomberg as pro-police. They don't respond to Warren. So I am looking at Sanders at this point. Hillary has a plan to stop Sanders, I'm sure. He went to Moscow for his honeymoon and would presumably be easier to red bait than Gabbard. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:34, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="right"|2.6%
+
::I thought filing deadlines were coming soon for Iowa and New Hampshire?  Or was this a joke? [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 09:48, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
:::This go-round (2020) will be a real test of Iowa and New Hampshire; Biden's strength is South Carolina (where blacks are 60% of Democrats) If Biden runs 4th or 5th in Iowa or New Hampshire, the MSM may use it to dispose of him before South Carolina (that's why [[Deval Patrick]] is being pushed now). One theory since the election of Obama is that blacks are more important than Iowa or New Hampshire, and that identity politics is more important than geographic or regional factors. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:56, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Hawaii
+
 
|align="left"|Sen. [[Kamala Harris]]
+
==Hearings==
|align="right"|11.5%
+
What a farce. (A) The sanctity of NATO: Ukraine ''is not'' a member of NATO; Turkey, a member of NATO, just purchased a Russian missile defense system (presumably to defend against NATO missiles). NATO is dead. (B) Biden ''is not'' the Democratic nominee. Biden ''is not'' Trump's political opponent in a campaign. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:51, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left"|California
+
:The [[Treaty of Brest-Litovsk]] awarded the Ukraine to Germany in 1917; Hitler invaded Russia with the idea to make the [http://www.changingthetimes.net/samples/ww2/more_dangerous_hitler5.htm Crimea the "German Riviera"]. Now, after two world wars and 100 years, do you think Putin and the Russians will sit still for EU and Democrats to make the dream of Hitler and the Kaiser come true? Turn Sevastopol into a NATO naval base? Absolutely ludicrous. And We Americans will cede our Constitution, our Constitutional rights, and impeach a president to do so? Absolute insanity these Democrats, globalist/socialist and Trump haters have been overcome with. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:44, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|-
+
 
|align="left"|Gov. [[Jay Inslee]]
+
::Cool story, Rob. While I'm here, what you want for Christmas? The [https://putin-calendar.ru/2020-calendars/wall-calendar-2/ Putin 2020 calendar] or the [https://www.amazon.com/Weby-Putin-Medvede-Bear-Decorative/dp/B0133GF138 Putin on a bear action figure]? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:28, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="right"|0.3%
+
 
|align="left"|
+
:::After all the tear-jerker stories about how vital Ukraine is to U.S. national security, no one asked the Dems' "experts" How many Americans they think will be willing to die for Ukraine? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:41, 13 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Washington
+
 
|align="left"|Gov. [[John Hickenlooper]]
+
==The subtext==
|align="right"|0.5%
+
 
|align="left"|
+
Mike Cernovich: Evangelical support for Israel is so high (72% or more) that people who claim to be American nationalists and populists while obsessing over Israel don’t want to win elections.
|align="left"|Colorado
+
 
|-
+
Some of you don’t want to give Israel foreign aid. We get it. And this is such a losing issue.
|align="left"|Sen. [[Amy Klobuchar]]
+
 
|align="right"|1.4%
+
@CityBureaucrat: It's not about $. It's about the double standard of the U.S. supporting a nation that controls its borders, protects its citizens w/tariffs & socio-economic entitlements, & guarantees a particular identity & way of life against the market, while denying this to U.S. citizens.
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Minnesota
+
The Dem & Repub parties want to demonize and even criminalize advocacy of these policies in the U.S. while effusively supporting Israel and its policies. Using our tax dollars to fund them is an additional slap in the face. I'm sure evangelicals would agree.
|align="left"|Sen. [[Bernie Sanders]]
+
 
|align="right"|11.4%
+
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 00:13, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left"|Vermont
+
:These are good observations. I'm speechless.
|-
+
 
|align="left"|Rep. [[Beto O'Rourke]]
+
:I recall Israel's 30th birthday, when Israel became a man (according to Jewish tradition). That was 40 years ago. If someone dared utter these sentences then in public, print, or broadcast, they would immediately be branded a Nazi. So, in part, it kinda depends on the ''Zeitgeist''.  Today for example scratching your butt without asking the gods of climate change to stave of the apocalypse makes one a Nazi. So I'm really confused and can't give any meaningful response. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 00:42, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="right"|3.8%
+
::This is a reference to Hosea 11:1? "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." (ESV) [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:25, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Texas
+
:I have a few things to say about this.
|align="left"|Rep. [[Eric Swalwell]]
+
::1. Mike Cernovich is a fraud. He recently was exposed by Lee Stranahan to having accepted money from Saudi sources in exchange for spewing propaganda that al-Qaeda and ISIS are rooted in the Muslim Brotherhood, and '''not''' the Muslim World League. This is significant because this means Cernovich is being paid to lie about which countries are the largest sponsors of Islamist terrorism. Iran, Qatar, and Turkey all do sponsor terrorism, but none hold a candle to the Saudi regime. But in Cernovich Land, those three get all the blame and Saudi Arabia can do no wrong. Go ahead and try to bring up the Muslim World League on Cernovich's Twitter. He won't even try to debate you. He'll straight up block you, even if you mention the MWL in good faith.
|align="right"|0.1%
+
:::Completely irrelevant.  Cernovich just teed up the ball with some conventional wisdom about Israel for @CityBureaucrat to hit. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 02:18, 15 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
::2. I personally think Israel is getting too much flak from people like @CityBureaucrat. Yes, it's hypocritical for our politicians to do that, but that's no reason to tear Israel down. If Israel's doing the right thing, then leave it alone. Plain and simple.
|align="left"|California
+
::3. That being said, Israel is '''not''' doing the right thing. I'm not talking about its immigration policies. I'm talking about its foreign policy. Many young conservatives like myself are becoming lukewarm or even hostile towards Israel because of Netanyahu's obsession with Iran. This is causing Israel to embrace even worse actors like Saudi Arabia, and covertly endorsing policies that could cause the US to get into an armed conflict with one of our own NATO allies. This is unacceptable and it must be called out for the sake of our national security.
|-
+
::4. In hindsight, I believe moving the embassy to Jerusalem was a mistake. In doing so, we have essentially rewarded bad behavior. If the location of the embassy is such a hot button issue for Netanyahu, then perhaps we can use it as a leverage. Perhaps we should give him an ultimatum: reverse your recent foreign policy shifts, or we move the embassy back to Tel Aviv. And if you refuse to do so even after we move the embassy back to Tel Aviv, then we will close the embassy and then there will be no embassy at all.
|align="left"|Rep. [[Tim Ryan]]
+
:I rest my case.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:02, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="right"|0.1%
+
::Iran is hardly a benign entity. Should a PM and cabinet ignore reality and practical solutions in favor of theoretical ideals and the way we would like things to be? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:16, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|
+
:::Netanyahu already is ignoring reality. The reality is that the true nature of our Sunni Arab so-called "allies" in the region have been exposed in the aftermath of the Syrian war, and the American people are not happy. More and more Americans (especially younger Americans) are rejecting our alliances with these countries, and some (myself included) even support normalizing relations with Iran because they believe we're supporting the wrong side in the greater Sunni-Shiite conflict. Eventually, this shift in public opinion will lead to a shift in policy. If Netanyahu expects the Israeli-American friendship to survive, he'd better adapt to these changes. So far, he's not doing that. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 18:38, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Ohio
+
::::Ok, granted, much of what you say is true and makes sense. However Shi'a Iran will (1) never be an American ally in the sense of a vassal state like Germany, the UK, or Japan. It will ally itself with the US to destroy the Saudi monarchy only, then (2) spread its brand of Shi'a hegemony over Mecca and Medina.
|align="left"|[[Marianne Williamson]]
+
::::Israel's chief concern is loosing its nuclear monopoly. Right now the threat of nuclear annihilation allows for reprisals against Gaza or Syrian missile attacks. The missiles are built by the Iranian military industrial complex; we've very recently seen technical improvements in Iranian drone missile attacks launched by Houtis with pin-point targeting to wipe out 50% of Saudi oil refinery capacity and move world oil prices. The same weaponry will show up in Gaza soon and replace the old-fashioned "bottle rocket" attacks.
|align="right"|0.1%
+
::::If Israel looses its nuclear monopoly, it will (1) set off a nuclear arms race in the region between Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt,  Iran, and Israel; and (2) Israel will loose its nuclear leverage in cross-border reprisal attacks against Hezbollah in Syria and missiles coming from Gaza.
|align="left"|
+
::::Barring an Iranian/Israeli rapprochement in the event of the fall of the Saudi regime and rise of Iranian Shi'a hegemony, violent Sunni resistance would likely continue - even if Iran became recognized masters of the region and were awarded a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Israel fears the likely response of Iranian Shi'a becoming hegemonic - the traditional way to promote Islamic unity and quell sectarian difference is to scapegoat the Jews as the source of the world's problems.
|align="left"|California
+
::::An Israeli/Iranian rapprochement seems to be the policy of all three - the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Israel - as the only way to stave off violence and the threat of a nuclear arms race, which becomes more and more likely each day. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:12, 14 November 2019 (EST)
|-
+
:::What's the lesson from all this? Policies built on demonizing individuals (Netanyahu, Putin, Trump, Kim jong un, Gadaffi, Baghdadi, Osama, the Ayatollah, Saddam, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mugabe Castro, Meduro, Duarte, MBS, Erdogen etc etc etc), while enjoying immediate popular appeal, are always fraught with problems. Policy must be separated from the person, and the focus must always be policy. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:20, 16 November 2019 (EST)
|align="left"|Sen. [[Elizabeth Warren]]
+
 
|align="right"|15.4%
+
==Confirmed==
|align="left"|
+
To understand the complete Russia collusion hoax and impeachment scheme, [https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/440730-how-the-obama-white-house-engaged-ukraine-to-give-russia-collusion read this John Solomon article from April 25] this year. Solomon states
|align="left" style="border-right:1px solid gray"|Massachusetts
+
:''"The January 2016 gathering....brought some of Ukraine’s top corruption prosecutors and investigators face to face with '''members of former President Obama’s National Security Council (NSC), FBI, State Department and Department of Justice (DOJ)....U.S. officials “kept talking about how important it was that all of our anti-corruption efforts be united,” said Andrii Telizhenko, then a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington tasked with organizing the meeting." '''
|align="left"|[[Andrew Yang]]
+
 
|align="right"|4.8%
+
Eric Ciaramella signed Andrii Telizhenko (spelled Andrey) into the White House on January 19, 2016, ''per'' White House visitor logs obtained by Judicial Watch. ("telizhenko,andriy,g,U67540,100561,VA,1/19/16 10:57,D1101,1/19/16 12:53,,01/19/2016 12:00:00 AM,1/19/16 11:00,1/19/16 23:59,,1,KH,WIN,1/19/16 10:51,KH,Ciaramella,Eric,OEOB,230A,HARTWELL,KYLE,,,04/29/2016 07:00:00 AM +0000",,,," [https://archive.org/download/WHvisitorlogs_2010-16_surname/White-House-visitor-logs6_Sorr-Zyz.csv] [https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-white-house-visitor-logs-detail-meetings-of-eric-ciaramella/ Judicial Watch: White House Visitor Logs Detail Meetings of Eric Ciaramella.])
|align="left"|
+
 
|align="left"|New York
+
Solomon writes in April of this year:
|-
+
:''Americans’ objectives included two politically hot investigations: one that touched Vice President Joe Biden’s family and one that involved a lobbying firm linked closely to then-candidate Trump.''
|}
+
 
 +
Shut down the Biden case and frame Manafort. It's all right there. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 03:41, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:Aha! So the Obama Administration was worried about the Biden deal in the Ukraine not very much less, if not in fact, more, than Trump was! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 04:50, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::This is beyond the FBI, DOJ, and John Brennan now. Ukrainian prosecutors were instructed by the Obama White House to clear Hunter Biden (or you're not gettin' the cash) and dig up the old 2014 allegations against Manafort, which the FBI dismissed in 2014, to frame Manafort.  
 +
::The Obama White House colluded with a foreign government to interfere in American elections. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:44, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::I guess Mueller's prosecutors were investigating the wrong country.  How about that?  Not that it would've mattered; they only bothered to investigate potential Russian collusion with regard to ''Trump''.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:54, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::Soon we'll learn that Trump's conversation with the Ukrainian President was another FISA leak while the FBI inspector general sleeps on. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 09:58, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::Why is it surprising to learn the Obama White House colluded with a foreign government to meddle in American elections? Globalists don't believe in sovereignty or borders - unless of course it's Ukraine's and not our own. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 10:58, 14 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
==Jim Jordan remarks==
 +
 
 +
"Today the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, Vadym Prystaiko, verified what we already knew: 'I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance.'"
 +
 
 +
Rep. Jordan also said the Ukraine was known for government corruption, and Trump's State Department, including John Bolton, investigated the Ukrainian President while aid was being delayed, and other members of the State Department in the Ukraine paid him visits.  There were statutory requirements passed by the U.S. Congress that U.S. aid be paid within a certain time, so Trump couldn't have indefinitely delayed aid even if he had wanted to.  The delay lasted 55 days. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 02:48, 15 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:"Madam Ambassador, I want to thank you for your opening remarks and the high regard in which you hold yourself." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 11:27, 15 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
== I say, Holmes! ==
 +
 
 +
[https://edition-m.cnn.com/2019/11/15/politics/david-holmes-testimony/index.html That's gotta hurt...] Sondland will have "refresh" his memory once again when he testifies next week. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:03, 15 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:If it's from CNN, it's fake news.  [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 01:30, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::I'm amazed. Does anyone still actually watch CNN? Why? Why would a person do that to themselves? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 07:41, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:"Dem witnesses all seem to think congressional hearings are Queen For a Day tryouts," observed Ann Coulter. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 09:06, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::The Democrats are betting the farm on this one. They've pressured Trump with an FBI investigation since at least November or December 2015 (looks like Comey and McCabe will both be charged), Mueller from May 2017 til April 2019, Nadler and Schiff since January 2019. We have a full year to go before voters can put a stop to it.
 +
::If Trump finally smashes the Black monolith support for Democrats, barring the GOP falling into corruption scandals, the Democrats are toast for decades. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 09:37, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::Aye. The very idea Trump might be the man for that particular job is the perfect illustration of just how divorced from reality you actually are. But back to Sondland... obviously not the sharpest tool on opsec and in ''way'' over his head now. And I don't see anything in his previous political and business activities suggesting he's the kind of fierce partisan who'd be willing to put Trump ahead of saving his own skin. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:03, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:OMG! Vote rigging and stealing in Lousy-ana! Shocking! [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 06:00, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
===Democrat racism===
 +
::::Actually, the fact that Kayne West became a Trump supporter, and various blacks participated in Walk-Away more than shows that, if anything, Trump is, if not the man for that particular job of smashing the Black monolith, then certainly coming very close to it. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:06, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::You should probably talk to more black people. The likes of Candace Owens and Diamond & Silk are widely derided as putting on a minstrel show for the benefit of a white GOP audience. Kanye gets a partial pass on the strength of his earlier albums, and a kind of Michael Jackson-esque sympathy for his increasing levels of eccentricity. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:20, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Actually, there's a few more people besides Diamond and Silk/Candace Owens or even Kayne West who left the Democrats. In fact, many of them even have YouTube videos explaining this. I'd know because my mom watched quite a few of them. Also, let me remind you that Colonel Allen West is for the GOP as well, well before Donald Trump even entered the 2016 presidential election. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:22, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::Well, let's look on the bright side, eh? Trump managed 8% last time out, so in the unlikely event he hits 10% in 2020, he can claim he increased his share of the black vote by a whopping 25%. Winning! [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:52, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::20-25% of people showing up at Trump rallies are Democrats. And many of them are black. Trump is over 40% approval among black men. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:57, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::::You're using "many" in a way I've never come across before. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:27, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::What's unusual about Black Democrats showing up at a Trump rally? They didn't ask their Masters first? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:58, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::::::::Keep rocking the plantation metaphor, man. It's as good a plague sign as any above your imaginary "Blexit" door. Use it as often as possible. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:24, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::::Actually, I like your idea of noting that [[CNN]] called Kanye West an "attention w****", but looks like it got reverted before I could verify The Wrap article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:28, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::::::Essay:Top conservatives on Twitter shows many more blacks than the two you mentioned—should I put labels on them to be sure to satisfy the quota you personally have in mind?  Or maybe it's not so bad, and we just need to answer you one! last! time!  It would fairly easy to do, so if we don't do it it ''proves'' that we're ''afraid!''
 +
 
 +
:::::::::::Or just maybe you won't be satisfied for the umpteenth time, and next week you'll be back spouting off your sour generalizations that you didn't research.  And notwithstanding the lack of knowledge, insisting your view is the correct one, however often your previous assertions got refuted.  And that it's still our job to refute it on your behalf if possible despite the obvious political convenience for you that always seems to be attached to making your bald assertions. If skepticism with prejudice are harnessed to aid your self-advancement rather than the pursuit of the truth, it's really no skepticism at all! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 13:51, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::::::::The racism of JohnZ is exactly the racism of the Democratic party that Blacks are rebelling against - being stereotyped as "liberal" when in fact they are God-fearing churchgoing community loving, pro-family patriots. They resent being taken for granted and used, as Pete Buttigieg just did in Black-dominated South Carolina where he trails magnificently against Joe Biden, despite being a white media darling. Biden is buoyed in national polls by Blacks because he's not perceived as a liberal. And how have Democrats responded with the flight of Blacks? tossing them more bones with "wepawations" - an ultimate insult cause Democrats think Blacks are too stupid to compete in society and too lame to make it without their white liberal Masters' help. JohnZ is playing with dynamite tossing around these racist smears against Blacks. And these same idiot liberals accuse Trump of playing and manipulating people's fears. What balderdash that even <s>poor kids</s> I mean Blacks can see with their own two eyes.
 +
::::::::::::There is a disconnect between white and black in the Democratic party, and it is this - Blacks have become waaaay more sophisticated in coalition building and having influence to serve their needs than white liberals have, who view Blacks as tokens who you mollify by tossing them bones, ever since Lyndon Johnson came up with the idea - which they learn in Black History month. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:41, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
:::::::::::::Aye. Black voters are ''definitely'' going to flock to a conservative movement that denies the [[southern strategy]] was even a thing; where ''[[The Bell Curve]]'' is reported on uncritically; and in which eejits like you casually sling plantation metaphors around. But I sleep soundly in the knowledge that you won't take any of this onboard, and will carry on being a walking, talking prophylactic for your very own cause. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 18:39, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::::::::::::::Congrats, JohnZ, you just proved RobS's point with your condescending response.  You also need to watch your step about insulting other editors because you're already on the brink as it is.  [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 19:38, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
[[Donald Trump]] Poll Numbers SURGE During Impeachment Hearings as Democrats Admit DEFEAT.[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB6OoCWc2Hk]
 +
 
 +
JohnZ,  watch this video and start weeping inconsolably!!!!!  Donald Trump and his supporters keep winning! [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:11, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::A Steve Turley video?  Really?  You expect JohnZ (or me) to weep inconsolably from that?  A Steve Turley YouTube video?  Really?  Have you looked at his videos?  On the other hand, have you tried reading books?  Real books by real authors?  People who know what they are talking about, as opposed to right-wing YouTube people?  And citing them instead of YouTube videos?
 +
::Be that as it may, it's good to see you back, my friend. For a while I was afraid that you were actually going to follow through on your oft-stated resolve to stop your manic editing habits.  Or maybe you were just handing that task off to your friend Wikignome72. So it's good to see, from your 29 edits in 70 minutes this morning, that you are still on-message.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:10, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::SamHB, unlike you [Wrong; see my user boxes&mdash;[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 00:46, 21 November 2019 (EST)], Dr. [[Steve Turley]] is an author.  I have his book on the book ''The Abolition of Man'' who is a book by C.S. Lewis.  And yes, I have seen his videos and like them. Lastly, your continual use of logical fallacies in your "reasoning" is counterproductive (see: [[genetic fallacy]] and [https://www.fallacies.ca/style.htm Style over substance fallacy]). For example,  an informative video is far better than a wrongheaded and poorly researched book.22:51, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::I should have been more careful when I claimed you were not an author. My apologies.
 +
 
 +
::::Secondly, Dr. Turley is a well informed man.  Like most careful scholars, he makes reasonable statements/claims. The one exception to this is his belief that Trump is a shoo-in to be reelected. I do think 2020 is going to be a brutal U.S. presidential campaign and it is not going to be a cakewalk. Given these factors, I do think Trump has over a 50% chance of being reelected: power of incumbency, the current strong US economy may continue in 2020, Trump did a good job of keeping his promises, the weakness of the current Democrats running to be president, Trump's huge campaign chest, etc.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:28, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Aye. Tell that to Eddie Rispone. I'm sure it'll be of great comfort. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 23:27, 16 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::JohnZ, the Allies didn't win every battle, but they won WWII.  The Vietcong lost battle after battle after battle, but now the communist rule Vietnam.  The idea that you have to win every battle to win a war is a very unreasonable position.
 +
 
 +
::Have you read the article [[Decline of the secular left]]?  I especially like the John Feffer quote near the top of the article. The further decline of the secular left is inevitable.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:56, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:JohnZ, read [http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index3046.htm Sorcha Faal] today; for once you can take it 100% at face value - their analysis of the Lousy-ana election. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:43, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
::Hahaha. Fair play, man. That's sufficiently swivel-eyed and spittle-flecked that you seem positively Zen and lucid in comparison. [https://youtube.com/watch?v=vNjiFwukX8M You gotta give me a big win please, OK? OK?] [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:42, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
 
 +
===Vietnam, etc.===
  
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 04:50, 16 June 2019 (EDT)<br>
+
:::Technically, the Communists never even won the Vietnam War, not while we Americans were still in it anyway. What happened was the American left, after exploiting Watergate to get a supermajority in Congress, reneigned on America's end of the deal and cut out weapons shipments to South Vietnam to help them win the war, with Ford being powerless to stop it. Just watch Prager University's explanation on it: https://youtu.be/7hqYGHZCJwk [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 06:03, 17 November 2019 (EST)
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 00:28, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::A Youtube video from Dennis Prager?  Dennis Prager?  The right-wing radio host who runs a YouTube channel that he calls a "University"?  Really?  Have you looked at his videos?  On the other hand, have you tried reading books?  Real books by real authors?  People who know what they are talking about, as opposed to right-wing YouTube people?  And citing them instead of YouTube videos?  By the way, the Vietnam war ended over 40 years ago.  Many many books have been written about it.  Please read some of them. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 16:10, 17 November 2019 (EST)
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 09:32, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::That's exactly what happened. The Mujaheen defeated the Soviets when the U.S. supplied weapons; Iran prevented Saddam from overrruning Kuwait when the U.S. provided weapons. South Vietnam lost when Democrats cut off weapons (and the [[Killing Fields|leftist genocide of South East Asia]] ensued, which any Vietnamese immigrant to the U.S. can attest, and incidentally, [[John Brennan]] voted for).  We're having the same debate now; Obama refused to provide weapons to Ukraine. Trump has done so and communists want to impeach him for it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 16:48, 17 November 2019 (EST)
:She's being spotlighted without having to debate comrade Sanders. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:26, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::RobS was right: Cory Booker doubled his popularity, and the bump remains three weeks after his "Spartacus stance". [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 00:50, 18 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Kamala beats Bernie by a whisker. Looks like she's earning her way onto the ticket. Democrats don't have a prayer without her, either top or bottom. Without Harris on the ticket, a significant amount of Blacks will defect to Trump or remain apathetic as they did with Hillary, [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:44, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Once Bernie is out, Bernie's donors and organization will redound to Harris, doubling her numbers, dwarfing the two jokers Warren and Buttigieg, and approximately equalizing Biden's imploding numbers. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 11:49, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
:::Those numbers reflect the fact that Harris has united the Black base behind her, with the exception of Booker whose numbers are largely local East Coast. Castro numbers are largely Hispanic, which is hurting Beto's numbers which are largely homegrown Texan. Harris wins Booker and Castro's share as well. Yang supporters most likely will sign up with Warren (cause its foremost an economic giveaway program, rather than an [[SJW]] program). Warren and Beto largely represent the Democrat [[racist]] vote that Hillary held in 2008, holding out against the brown onslaught. Buttigieg (and Hickenlooper)'s people will go with whoever looks like a winner. Biden might not make it past the debates without a respirator or wheelchair. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:02, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Pokeria, the communists won in Vietnam.  If a boxer walks out of a fight, he loses the match. The Soviets lost in Afghanistan as will the USA. America is tired of endless wars.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:25, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
=== General election match ups ===
+
:::::No, a boxer walking out of a fight means he walked out of a fight. An actual loss in a boxing match involves a boxer being utterly beaten into submission, ie, either failing to regain consciousness during the 10-second countdown, or otherwise doing a total knockout. And considering America was the one who headed the treaty obligations, as pointed out by Prager University, it was in fact America that won Vietnam when we left. Unfortunately, the anti-war, anti-American left sabotaged the South Vietnamese allies after Watergate. As far as being tired of endless wars, want an end to endless wars? Drop a nuke on all hostile countries and forcibly depopulate them. That eliminates the enemy and thus ends any reason to even have a war, even if it means turning the world into charcoal as a result. And I'm pretty sure even you realize that's a very awful way to go about it, far worse than participating in endless wars. Until Communism and Islam is completely annihilated, we have to fight (and I'm speaking VERY personally due to being all too aware of the Christian persecutions committed by Communist and Islamic governments. In fact, China becoming Communist, as well as Eastern Europe being turned Communist? That blood is on our hands as well, so no we cannot afford to stop fighting, even for the sake of stopping endless wars.). Otherwise, we'll have the blood on our hands when Communists take over and slaughter everyone, including our fellow Christians. You really want that? Then you're no different than the anti-war left, and if I must be blunt, don't even deserve to be called "Conservative". At least with Syria, we already broke the backs of ISIS, so there's no longer any reason to be concerned about leaving Syria. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:23, 17 November 2019 (EST)
If anyone is worried about Trump being behind in general election polling, this is a good article: "[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/should-we-take-these-early-general-election-polls-seriously-no/ Should We Take These Early General Election Polls Seriously? $#!% No!]." In May 2015, Hillary was ahead of Trump 50-32 percent. It is of course way too early for 2020 general election polls to tell us much. Moreover, a generic ballot is generally a better predictor than a matchup. Partisanship is only growing stronger, so that's likely to be even more true in 2020. People are telling the pollsters they want someone who can bring stability as opposed to a radical or a bold reformer. I don't see how that translates into a vote for Warren. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 23:40, 21 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Huh? Why did Obama illegally place troops in Syria without Congressional authorization and in violation of the [[War Powers Act]]? Was it to:
:Do you think Trump's cancelling the launch codes to attack Iran will translate into perceptions by liberal voters of Trump's virtues, in this case taking the form of wise restraint? If you project your own thinking processes and sense of patriotism onto them, you'd expect them to say "Hey, Trump is okay after all!" And you'd be just as shocked and disappointed to learn that many ''aren't'' grateful, and that it even somehow just reminds them of a different sad complaint about Trump to a level of severity that matches the level of the gratitude you would have expected. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 10:02, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::(a) fight and disarm the Sunni forces he created in two Presidential Findings in 2012? or
::I think it's safe to say that it won't help Trump with any actual liberals. Trump has apparently decided to go with computer hacking instead of bombs: "[https://www.stripes.com/with-trump-s-approval-pentagon-launched-cyber-strikes-against-iran-1.587171 With Trump's approval, Pentagon launched cyber strikes against Iran]." Meanwhile, the Iranians aren't buying the "proportionate response" idea: "[https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/437284/Military-If-enemy-fires-a-single-bullet-at-Iran-it-will-receive Military: If enemy fires a single bullet at Iran, it will receive 10]." Who told Trump that military responses should be proportionate? McMaster, the former national security adviser, is widely admired for his book ''Dereliction of Duty''. The book criticizes Defense Secretary McNamara for doing exactly this kind of thing in Vietnam. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:58, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::(b) fight the spread of Iranian hegemony and destabilize the Syrian regime?
:::Trump and the Ayatollah will be singing ''Kumbahyah'' together sometime between the convention and the election. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:08, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:38, 17 November 2019 (EST)
::::I note that Trump has nothing on Obama in the presidential agonizing department. Obama spent nine months deciding whether or not to kill Bin Laden. In that period, he changed his mind three times. What finally forced a decision was the fear that Wikileaks was about to leak relevant material. So I guess we can thank Wikileaks. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:06, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Honestly, I've given up on thinking on why Obama did those things other than just plain old anti-Americanism. I may have had my hesitations of our leaving Syria due to it possibly leading to a redux of Vietnamization, but after the more Palpatine-esque drawing out of a high-ranking ISIS leader to be killed as well as his second in command, I no longer have any worries on that front. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 15:22, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::To be sure, the remnants of ISIS will reconstitute themselves somewhere, sometime (Yemen? Afghanistan?) and recruit a fresh generation of jihadi figheters. But that is for President Ivanka Trump, President Nikki Haley, or President Dan Crenshaw to worry about. The only two immediate problems are (1) Clinton cash (through Saudi and Qatari donors) going to reconstitute the force, or (2) in the event of that failing, ISIS remnants getting back in bed with Iranians to destabilize the Saudi regime. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 17:21, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::Trump often takes a zig-zag approach to his decision-making, and he may be the U.S. President where it's entirely justified due to his being the subject of spying (by the deep state) while still in office. Trump [https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/trump-us-securing-syrian-oil has decided to leave some troops in northern Syria], whom he claims will be there to protect Syria's oil infrastructure. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 22:43, 17 November 2019 (EST)
  
=== Cure for cancer ===
+
== Make Hong Kong great again ==
You guys have a news entry mocking Biden for promising to cure cancer but Trump [https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-promises-to-cure-cancer-eradicate-aids-if-he-wins-another-term has promised the same thing (with the addition of AIDS]). Is this not a double standard? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 02:19, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:I would invite Conservapedia readers to look at the context (helpfully provided on Main Page Right) surrounding each candidate's projections and judge for themselves. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 02:51, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Can you elucidate the difference? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 03:06, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::The Trump Administration has already taken actions to fight HIV and cancer: [https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/inside-trumps-plan-to-end-the-hiv-epidemic-and-what-sparked-it 1],[https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/trump-to-ask-for-substantial-new-resources-to-fight-hiv 2],[https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/443037-trump-says-admin-secured-historic-donation-of-hiv-prevention-drugs-to-help 3],[https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-to-ease-some-cancer-patients-access-to-experimental-drugs-11559566800 4],[https://www.ajmc.com/newsroom/trump-highlights-new-initiatives-for-childhood-cancer-hiv-in-state-of-the-union 5] Biden is talk, Trump is action. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:03, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Then you’re not comparing apples with apples. Biden “we will cure cancer” (not in power) - Conservapedia response is ridicule. Trump “we will cure cancer” (has full control of the economy) “it’s different when he says it”. You see how you are applying a totally different standard? Is no one on Conservapedia capable of being honest? [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 01:11, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Wow, you really get hopeless when you're not spoon-fed the explanation you want. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 02:19, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Look, I realize  the  guy is in mourning for the loss of his son to cancer. But don't let his impaired mental abilities affect his judgement in a position of responsibility to the rest of us. Most objectionable is his translating his personal loss into pandering to cancer victims and families of victims. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:04, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
What double-standard applies here?  Trump said the word "we", as in the American people, i.e. what has happened so far is that he made sure the conditions were set up to allow a growth in research and development of potential treatments, without government intrusion and / or heavy taxation of the corporations or of the people responsible.  Biden said "I" , and his message was clear: "Elect me, and I will cure it!". Trump was involved in politics since 2016; Biden was in politics for over 30 years, including the previous 8 years under Obama, with one of the worst economies and unemployment on record.  Sorry, Jonny, but Trump gets the nod.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 04:25, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::That’s some really fine hair your splitting there. Conservapedia is so dishonest and hypocritical. I came here hoping for proper conservative and Christian values but all I see is dishonesty and hyper-partisanship. If any liberal favoured North Korea dictatorship over their own people you’d be outraged. But not with Trump. There are no standards being held here. Disappointing. [[User:JohnSelway|JohnSelway]] ([[User talk:JohnSelway|talk]]) 20:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::You're right. We'll concede the point, Al Gore invented the internet, and he did it without being president. Can we presume Joe Biden will  share his miracle cure for cancer with humanity in the next four to eights years without being president?
+
::::'Hypocrisy' in commie/lib parlance means leftists called out on facts. You should change your vocabulary or find new material. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:08, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Obama mocked Trump about his pledge to help bring back factory jobs to America and snidely asked if Trump was going to wave his magic wand to make it happen.
+
  
:I think it is very clear now that Trump has a magic wand and that he can use it to cure cancer! :) See: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2018/10/16/the-trump-manufacturing-jobs-boom-10-times-obamas-over-21-months/#27b8841b5850 The Trump Manufacturing Jobs Boom: 10 Times Obama's Over 21 Months], ''Forbes''.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:01, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
[[File:Make Hong Kong great again.jpg|thumb|Poster for Hong Kong district council candidate Phillip Khan]]Police and protesters are gearing up for an epic rumble on the campus of Hong Kong Polytechnic University, just a few blocks away from where I am. I got as close as I could until the cops shooed me away. All I got to see were rows of police vans and firetrucks.
::Seriously, I think politicians often overpromise and underdeliver. In addition, they often have misplaced priorities. For example, the idea of America putting a man on Mars should be abandoned - especially given the USA's current national debt.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 11:11, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::And who would want to live there, anyway?  It's like Antarctica! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Thursday, 17:53, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::To be fair, living on Mars is actually a bit more logical than living on the moon, at least Mars has an atmosphere, not to mention its ice caps with the right work would allow us to terraform it to be more hospitable, while the moon lacks any known water resevoirs. And I wouldn't abandon it, more like put it on hold for the time being, at least until the national debt is resolved (of course, then again, the national debt shouldn't be too much of an issue in either case. If we could put a man up on the moon despite the fact that, according to Jonathan Leaf anyways, such was a massive waste of money, I'm pretty sure we can do something with Mars regardless of a national debt). [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:00, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Yah but, How many Democrats endorse spending money on research projects to send a man/woman/person/thing/or any number of 58 genders to Mars in the year 2040 while endorsing the [[Green New Deal]]? It is impossible to transport 7 billion people, or even just 320 million Americans, to Mars before 2030 when the planet is scheduled for final destruction. Scrap the Mars program, and focus on saving the planet before 2030. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:16, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Abandoning Mars (or a border wall) won't solve the debt -- reducing/reforming entitlements and significantly cutting unnecessary/wasteful spending, especially for domestic programs and the State Department, will. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:25, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::It's an academic question Congress is wrestling with right now on the budget. How much money do we spend on research scientists (such as those researching the George Bush and Dick Cheney slime mold beetle)  for Mars research vs save the world from climate change with the Green New Deal. Now, assuming the Green New Deal is successful (IOWs, forget the national debt), the Mars emergency escape program is of less importance. If the Green New Deal fails, then we definitely need to colonize Mars. So, given all the inherent possibilities, we need a commission to study and write a report on the appropriate level of funding for colleges and universities for Fiscal Year 2020, to recommend the funding level for the Mars contingency. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Biden's cancer program may threaten the survival of the Mars project. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 18:44, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::You haven't been paying attention.  If we've learned anything it's that the best of the public beats a panel of eggheads any day. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Friday, 14:45, 21 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Pokeria isn't always right, and this is one of those unfortunate occasions.  In fact there ''are'' deposits of water on the moon—at the bottom of craters, at the poles, in the form of ice.  So I would cancel all those plans for living on Mars, build colonies at the poles and burrow underground to avoid the direct heat of the sun. Not that the moon is anymore pleasant than Mars.  The lunar surface I hear is covered in dust, rocks and flat crystalline formations of glass strands bunched together that break into sharp pieces when you step on them.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Saturday, 09:31, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::Okay, I stand corrected there. Guess the moon truly is as viable as Mars in that case. Well, save for the fact that the moon lacks an atmosphere, and all the stuff VargasMilan pointed out. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 10:52, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::::Radiation outside the Van Allen belt is much more intense. Robots are becoming more and more capable. So there needs to be a pretty good reason before we send more humans into deep space. But we do have the prospect of inevitable disaster to spur us on: the Earth's plate tectonics will stall in about 1.5 billion years. Geologically speaking, Mars died long ago while Venus remains hyperactive. The main problem with Venus is that the atmosphere is too thick (92 times the thickness of Earth's atmosphere) due to all the volcanic activity. But this is a problem that can eventually be solved with terraforming. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 10:26, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::How do you "terraform" away 90 bars of pressure? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:28, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Jesus will probably return before America puts a man on Mars (Israel becoming a nation again was a major prophecy being fulfilled and it seems like it points to [[Second Coming]] potentially being in our lifetime). By 2035, a major financial crisis will probably hit the USA and put the kibosh on a manned mission to Mars. And if the USA keeps having ethnic/class disharmony, it may break up.  
+
  
In the shorter term, the challenges associated with an aging population and increasing economic competition from abroad will damper enthusiasm for a manned Mars mission.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 10:46, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
On a more positive note, I noticed some clever advertising by district council candidate Phillip Khan: "Make Hong Kong great again." How's this for a savvy constitutional approach: "universal suffrage...under the Basic Law." Hong Kong girls tell me he is the best-looking candidate. The district council elections, scheduled for November 24, are the way early first step in the election process, the city's Iowa primary. Hong Kong's last round of elections were shamelessly rigged by the Communist Party, leading to the current crisis of legitimacy.
:But that's the problem. Increasing economic competition leads to more consumption of non-renewable resources, which is why we need the [[Green New Deal]]. Sure, when the aging population dies off we can do away with farting cows and feed everybody Michelle Obama's school lunches, but it'll past 2030 when the planet is due to expire. We need to transport at least a remnant (say Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, etc) to Mars before that to insure survival of the species. Alternatively, we could launch some artificial intelligence and robotics to Mars (funded by a 2% wealth tax). Who needs the human species, anyways? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup>
+
[[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:28, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Sort of like the Gresham's Law of democracy - where Democrats and communists control things, you have rigged elections. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 05:54, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It seems like the best time to protest would've been when the British handed over the city. But why now? --Jpatt 13:33, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:[promoted by VM] Very good question. Here's a plausible response: 1997 was still in the immediate shadow of Tiannanmen (1989) but with the promise of the CCP joining the [[WTO]] (2002) everyone thought free trade would cure communism and promote democracy, as East Germany and the former USSR and other Soviet satellites were experimenting with then.
  
===Don't let them do it===
+
:Time has shown that free trade did more to promote the spread of corruption than it did democracy, as [[Hunter Biden]], [[Joe Biden]], [[Bill Browder]], and the Ukraine are just a few living examples that can we can use as examples. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 13:49, 17 November 2019 (EST)
The narrative spin is beginning to counter Biden's segregationist past. The excuses are, "bi-partisanship" and "working across the aisle". No. No. And No. Biden was working with Democrats in his own party. This narrative lie should be countered at every turn. Period. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:36, 21 June 2019 (EDT)
+
[promoted by VM] I took a stroll down Nathan earlier this evening and the commie-cops fired tear gas at me. That’s a sentence you don’t get to write every day. With the cloud closing in, I hightailed it down a side street. A few minutes later, I pulled out a handkerchief to protect my face. An EMS worker saw this and rushed over to put water on my face. The police announcer switched to English when she noticed me: “Don’t stay here! Don’t stay here! The police are coming!” I guess white privilege is a thing after all.
  
===Oh, the humanity... Boot-edge-edge is going down in flames ===
+
I scouted the area around PolyU. The police have the campus sealed off now. The headlines warn of "lethal force."  I think we are looking at a predawn raid, which would be in just a few hours.
[https://youtu.be/mjT5MlOoUUI Buttigieg is done]. Imagine, we have another 2 dozen "Howard Dean" meltdown moments to look forward to. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 19:19, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Buttigieg was always a white liberal's white liberal. Christian bashing was never going work in the black community. Obama tried it only after he was safely reelected. Buttigieg's supporters are former O'Rourke backers. So I guess it's Biden time now. Boy, is it gonna be tough to get anyone excited: "He may be a vegetable, but he's our vegetable!" [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:25, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::The wolf in sheep's clothing [[Pete Buttigieg]] claimed to be a Christian. The liberal/left communities are filled with fake Christians, [[fake news]], fake science, etc.  
+
  
::After all is said and done. The bottom line is that Mayor Pete Buttigieg could be doing a better job to represent black voters. Mayor [[Rudy Giuliani]] made the police force more closely resemble the populace racially so the whole white cops vs. the black community was not an issue. He also had the police force better tackle crime which disproportionally affects the black population in terms of everyday life (hard to establish businesses in high crime areas, etc.). This is not rocket science. Good mayors learn from the examples of effective mayors. Buttigieg is a smart man. He is either being willfully ignorant or very negligent/lazy when it comes to the black community.  
+
As far as the history goes, there were massive protests in 2003 when the government tried to impose Article 23. At that time, the Hu Jintao government backed down. Communist rule was reasonably popular in Hong Kong for the next decade or so. The faction of the party that Xi Jinping belongs to has always thought that Hu made a mistake. When Xi became president in 2012, one of the first things he did was to make the Hong Kong "local government" subordinate to the local branch of the Communist Party, or "Liaison Office." In 2016, they disqualified several opposition politicians so that the government could retain a majority in the legislature. The current protests started after an extradition bill was proposed in March. This bill would have given the Communists the authority to extradite Hong Kongers to the mainland. Xi is known to be pretty upset about the publication of anti-Communist books, among other things that are legal in Hong Kong but not tolerated on the mainland. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 15:18, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:So, you're reporting from Hong Kong? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:50, 17 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::It's Monday the 18th afternoon (2:55p) right now in Hong Kong. I hope Peter doesn't live on campus and was captured by a big Chinese police raid at dawn. I wonder if ''[[habeas corpus]]'' requirements are still in effect, because maybe you wouldn't expect a civil disturbance to be still ongoing at dawn. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 01:55, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
Yes, I am in Hong Kong. No, I am not on the PolyU campus. The police didn't take my "predawn raid" advise. A large group of students surrendered Monday morning, saying that food on campus was about to run out. There are just a few holdouts at this point.
  
::Maybe there is no easy/perfect solution. Maybe Buttigieg is having the best qualified candidates be police officers (education, work history, etc.) and those candidates are disproportionally white. America is still paying the consequences for slavery/[[Jim Crow]]/etc.  Electing the divisive, community organizer and left leaning [[Barack Obama]] obviously was not a great solution in creating societal harmony.
+
Today, the High Court ruled that Carrie Lam's ban on masks is unconstitutional. The police haven't been enforcing the law much up to this point. But they came down hard on a kid who was standing right next to me. I don't think he was doing anything suspicious aside from wearing a mask. We were both waiting for the light to change. Twelve officers, one with an AR-15, ran up from behind, grabbed him, and knocked him against the wall. This was right next to a police station, so the arrest was a pretty convenient one from their point of view. I guess they need to make some mask arrests before the law expires. Meanwhile, the city is in chaos with bricks and barricades blocking the major streets. Everyone is a protester. I saw a pretty girl in a nice dress kicking bricks into the street. Did she ask the shop attendant, "Which color do you think goes best with vandalizing a public thruway?" [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 03:58, 18 November 2019 (EST)
  
::I don't think civic nationalism is going solve racial/ethnic/religious friction in the USA. Maybe a brokered/negotiated peace like [[Singapore]] is better solution. Over the long term, maybe intermarriage may ease racial friction. [[Hawaii]] and the [[Philippines]] don't seem like places where there is a lot of racial friction and there has been a lot of racial intermarriage in those cultures. [[Civil rights]] activists wore Hawaiian leis during the Selma to Montgomery civil rights marches.[https://tagtheflag.co/trivia/why-did-martin-luther-king-jr-wear-a-hawaiian-lei-during-the-selma-to-montgomery-marches/]  If I am not mistaken, in ancient times, rulers used to intermarry with foreign wives sometimes to cement relations between countries. Maybe that is one of the reasons why Solomon had so many wives. See: [https://everything.explained.today/Royal_intermarriage/ Royal intermarriage].
+
In response to Jpatt's point about why there were comparatively few protests in 1997: It was already too late and it would have looked like colonial nostalgia. Hong Kongers should have been on the streets demanding democracy back in 1978-1984 when the Joint Declaration was being negotiated. At that time, the city's business leaders were cowed by the 13-year-mortgage issue and a currency crash. Hong Kongers with money were the only ones the British listened to. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 18:34, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Shortly before 1997 the US (I think UK and dominions, too) passed a special immigration asylum bill for Hong Kongers, mostly police and law enforcement, to come to the US and elsewhere. They were virtually guaranteed jobs and to continue their careers as cops and investigators. The fear was they would be the first targeted for arrest and reprisal. The CCP had no problem with this, cause they could re-staff law enforcement and the criminal justice system with their own cronies without much public attention. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 19:36, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
[promoted by VM] I joined the cleanup crew this morning on Nathan Road. After yesterday's day of rage, the entire road was covered with debris. We picked up bricks and tiles left by the protesters. It was a proud moment when the first taxi made it through and the driver gave us a thumbs up and a heartfelt ''hǎode'' (good). [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:19, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Is it true the trains and subways pick up and depart every two minutes? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 20:51, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
[promoted by VM] The stations in my area have been closed for the last few days. The protesters have a grudge against the subway provider that is complicated to explain. Hey, MTR doesn't rig the elections, attack the campuses, or try to extradite anyone. In normal times, the Hong Kong system is a wonder to behold. The announcements are given in English, Chinese, and Cantonese (the local language in Hong Kong). I don't necessarily understand them any better than I did the "English" language announcements in New York City. But they have an app that tells you what you need to know, including when the next the train is coming. The train to the airport leaves every ten minutes and the one to Disneyland is every five minutes. Just to take a subway line at random, the Island Line is every four minutes. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:46, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Wow. When I hear white people from Hong Kong speak English, it's almost like a second language for them. You notice that too? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 22:45, 18 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::You mean white people who consider themselves Hong Kongers? I didn't realize this was a thing. Han Suyin wrote books about the agony of being "Eurasian," but you don't hear this word much in modern times. I suspect the government would object and refuse citizenship. Phillip Khan was born and raised in Hong Kong and so was his father. But he is still a Pakistani national as far as the government is concerned. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::The CCP has in recent years partnered with Hollywood to make full feature bilingual films. Most appear to be filmed in Hong Kong. They usually bring one big name Hollywood star, but still need a few white people for speaking lines. It's pretty funny, listening to these white people trying to speak fluent English while trying to hide a Chinese accent. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 01:24, 19 November 2019 (EST)
  
::The demography/racial/religion/politics scholar [[Eric Kaufmann]] (who was Canadian born and his himself multi-racial), projects there is going to be a lot of racial intermarriage in the 21st century and there is evidence to suggest this (low birth rates in developed countries which can be hard to reverse, immigration, second generation immigrant intermarriage, etc.). See: [https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative/Political_and_religious_news#Racial_demographic.2Fpolitical_shifts Racial demographic/political shifts].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 09:20, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
===U.S. Senate vote===
  
:::[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhlJntrzrD8 This 43 sec. clip] comes from ''his'' own website. Contrary to previous reporting, he's not very bright. This clip serves as Buttigieg's "Sister Soulja" moment - Butttigieg standing up to black radicalism, straight out of the Clinton playbook. I'm still processing how a 37 year old white Millennial who ran for DNC chair and speaks 7 languages can be so naive, stupid, and simple. This racist punk thinks by being rude to black activists in the midst of an emotional crisis is going to win brownie points among white voters. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:01, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
The Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act won unanimous approval in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday. With this victory in the Senate, as well as the recent High Court ruling that declared the mask ban unconstitutional, I can report that Hong Kong is a happier city than it was on Monday. After the death of student Chow Tsz-lok on Friday, there were several days of intense protests and protesters adopted the chant, “Hong Kongers, get revenge.The Senate vote hits the Communists where it hurts far more than any protest action could. It is the first good news the city has had in six months.
:::Wikipedia even has an article on a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_Souljah_moment Sister Soula moment]; someone needs to insert the above Youtube clip from Buttigieg's own presidential website into that article. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:08, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::The WP article says:
+
::::''"a key moment when the candidate takes what at least appears to be a bold stand against certain extremes in their party"[2] and as "a calculated denunciation of an extremist position or special interest group."[3] Such an act of repudiation is designed to signal to centrist voters that the politician is not beholden to traditional, and sometimes unpopular, interest groups associated with the party..."''
+
::::(a) Buttigieg skipped a big South Carolina event with other candidates to rush home and deal with a police shooting of a black man; (b) Buttigieg read from a prepared script and baited the emotional crowd; (c) then posted what ''he'' thought would be a winning sound byte on ''his'' Presidential campaign website. We have a Sista Soulja and Howard Dean moment combined into one. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:18, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::A Democrat can't win without Blacks. Here's how [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZNHUzPzGMY Pete Buttigieg 2020] will be remembered. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 12:30, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Just because Buttigieg won't mollycoddle and grovel before black activists in the midst of their grievance politics, doesn't mean he is a racist. The police officer should be afforded due process. In addition, it is reported that the deceased black man was approaching the officer with a knife. Of course, it is better to let the investigators/courts do their jobs rather than make snap judgments about the whole matter.
+
  
:::::At the same time, it is true that a Democrat cannot win the presidential nomination/presidency without the black vote so Buttigieg should have developed good relations with the black community in South Bend before running for the presidency if he truly wanted to win. But I doubt he thought he could win. It is just about advancing the [[homosexual agenda]] and getting a SJW participation trophy award for running. Plus, he is now a national figure.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 19:49, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
The physical damage from the protests gets repaired surprisingly quickly. My local subway station reopened this morning after being closed for several days on account of protests. The bricks and bamboo poles have already been cleared from Nathan Road. We still have bare spots on the sidewalks where the protesters took the bricks. I guess Hong Kong will have to make do with ugly cement sidewalks from now on. The protesters are gone and the shoppers and hawkers are back. Private car owners are still skittish about entering the Nathan Road combat zone. No doubt they remember those videos of burning hulks that were shown over the weekend. My advice to the protesters is to use the Senate vote as an opportunity to proclaim victory, make their peace with the subway system, and focus their energy on Sunday’s election. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 06:44, 20 November 2019 (EST)
::::::I read a lot more into this. The video on Buttigieg campaign site clearly is his Sista Soulja moment, well calculated. It shows what he really thinks of blacks and black issues. And the 37 year old Buttigigeg is the "best and the brightest" of his generation, very simple minded, and thinking that following some textbook prescription of bigoted stereotypes about Blacks the key to White House. Blacks don't see it that way. Blacks have seen through Buttigieg since day one. He's wasting his time going after their vote, and he knows it.
+
:You're only saying that because ''you'' have to ride those same subways, politics or no! [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 06:01, 26 November 2019 (EST)
::::::What we may be witnessing is the break-up of the Gay-Black alliance that's decades old. Obama brought it to fruition wirh gay marriage, but Blacks have never been on board with the hijacking of the [[Civil Rights]] movement by gays.
+
::"From Christian hymns to Canto-pop hits, Hong Kong protesters have been expressing their solidarity through song.
::::::Black Democrats always called themselves "Kennedy Democrats". There are no Johnson, Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton or Gore Democrats. Today there only remains Obama Democrats, but they see themselves in a leadership role. While loyalty to Obama's legacy is strong, there's an underlying resentment of gays taking over their party and movement. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:37, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Huffington Post: South Bend Officer Who Fatally Shot Black Man Had History Of Racist Comments.[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/south-bend-officer-shooting-racism-allegations_n_5d09163fe4b0f7b74427a997] If this is true, Boot-edge-edge's candidacy will go down in flames even faster.  
+
  
This is good news. This means Pocahantas will soak up Boot-edge-edge votes even quicker and be more competitive against Sleepy Joe Biden.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:43, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::"Lyrics like 'still I am still free/still I am independent/Forever loudly singing my song' embody a movement that shows no signs of slowing down."
:Kamala Harris has [[Marc Elias]] on the payroll. The fix is in. Buttigieg just rousted himself as a contender for the No. 2 spot. Sleepy Joe's on meds.  [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:51, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::My guess is that a police union may have protected South Bend police officers who engaged in racist comments and they may have been relatively unfireable. I know it is almost impossible to get bad teachers fired in NYC thanks to the teacher's union there. Democrats love unions. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:16, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
==[[Global warming]] (second) makeover==
+
::When I am yet unsuccessful at something, I sing sad songs much as they do.  I am the saddest when I sing.  So are those who hear me.  They are even sadder than I am.
  
Honest liberal: "First it was global warming. Then it was [[climate change]].  Now it has advanced another level of abstraction so it can assume the form of nearly every meteorological event (in whatever way it should prove useful to carrying out our designs of targeting and assigning blame to the most prominent conservatives somehow connected with energy consumption)—extreme weather!
+
::Yeah, right pal. Don't give up your day job, but way to cash in on the misfortune of your fellow citizens caused by the rise of Chinese occupation forces in your homeland. I'm sure your pop song stands astride the two nations on the same level that those forces ''do'', ready and able to face down, by means of bad lyrics and music, exactly the kinds of problems that those forces ''pose''. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 08:14, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::It's all too true. Hong Kong residents are more likely to use the bus, which the protesters haven't attacked. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 19:06, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
"I can see two other benefits from the new name 'extreme weather'.  Kids since the 1990s have used the adjective 'extreme' to anything fast, fun, exciting and new, and the name would elicit an interest from those now young adults and kids.
+
=== The Chinese Communist Party will lose power. Hong Kong will be great again ===
  
"Secondly and related, it would be easier to associate pictures and videos of powerful or scary weather events to a phrase describing the phony CO<sub>2</sub> problem as "extreme weather" than as "climate change". Warning placards set up by critics pointing out the cynicism of such a move would be stampeded and then trampled by everybody else as they got caught up in the appeal of those exciting weather docudramas." [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 02:32, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
The Chinese Communist Party will lose power. Hong Kong will be great again. See: [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2019/09/21/the_coming_crisis_of_chinas_one-party_regime_486934.html The Coming Crisis of China’s One-Party Regime]. [[User:Wikignome72|Wikignome72]] ([[User talk:Wikignome72|talk]]) 04:58, 26 November 2019 (EST)
:"Extreme whether," I like it. The possibilities are endless. For example, moderates oppose extremism. And "whether terror" can be held for another day. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 10:56, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:The popular vote in Sunday's district council election was 57 percent for the pro-democracy parties, 42 percent for the pro-Beijing parties. Voter turnout was Hong Kong's best ever. It was through the roof compared to any previous district council election. It was also higher than any legislative council election, although the legislature has far greater powers than the district councils do. The pro-democracy parties won 86 percent of the contested seats and control of 17 out of the city's 18 districts. Before the election, every district was controlled by the DAB or by another pro-Beijing party. Next up on Hong Kong's political calendar is the election for a legislature scheduled for September 2020. Historically, the pro-democracy parties have done better there than in the district councils. The legislature will write rules for the 2021 chief executive election. Hopefully, these rules will be more democratic than the ones used last time around. Former Financial Secretary John Tsang and protester ''wunderkind'' Joshua Wong are the men to watch. Tsang was private secretary for Chris Patton, the last British governor. Wong is a protester favorite, but Beijing has made it clear that he is beyond the pale.<br/>Looking over the official results, what struck me was, how is it possible that 42 percent of the vote went to pro-Beijing candidates? I never met any pro-Beijing Hong Kongers and none of my Hong Kong friends think this number is plausible. I went around Hong Kong on election day and saw no evidence of any support for Chief Executive Carrie Lam's sorry crew. Every poster and every volunteer I saw promoted a reformer. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 07:32, 26 November 2019 (EST)
::The terminology in this area is already quite bizarre, the product of repeated politicization. If anyone asks, I am a climate realist. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 11:21, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== MPR: USA v. Thailand ==
+
=== Why are we supporting these protests? ===
  
Thailand might be one of the weaker teams in the tournament, but their [https://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/ranking-table/women/ current FIFA ranking] has them listed as 34th out of 155 countries, so they're definitely not one of the weakest in the world.
+
I'm very iffy about supporting these protests. They started over an extradition bill, which has now been withdrawn. The original goal has been achieved. So why are they escalating now? I personally believe Deep State elements are encouraging the protesters to make progressively heavier demands, in hopes that it will spark an armed conflict that will ultimately drag in the US. They want regime change in China as soon as possible not because the current regime is communist, but because it's challenging the current unipolar world order.  
  
As far as "impoverished" goes, Thailand is actually pretty wealthy (in the [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) top 30 by nominal GDP]). That takes a fair hit if you go [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita per capita], but they're still comfortably in the top half, even on this measure. We're not talking DR Congo here. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:43, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Such an approach to China is not only selfish, it is also extremely dangerous. We're doing this at a time where enough fentanyl to kill everybody in the country is being brought into the US from China. I believe these illegal exports are being done in hopes that the fentanyl could be used as a WMD against our citizens, perhaps by a terrorist cell that takes orders from Beijing. Now is literally the worst time to be poking the hornet's nest. We need to avoid taking measures that could start a war, all the while rooting out this fentanyl trade and the terrorist cells they are going to (if they exist). Failure to do so could literally mean the end of this nation.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 17:22, 2 December 2019 (EST)
:It's rigged; we let anybody beat us in soccer. It makes them feel good and they love us for it. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 20:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::What are you on about? Your lasses just gave Thailand a 13-0 howking. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:22, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::Blood in the water. We're raising women to be like men here in America. They lost their feminine side. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 21:24, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::You been drinking, Smith? [Holds up three fingers] Focus. How many do you see? [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:31, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::We raise our girls to be aggressive, competitive, and independent, and our boys to be soy boys. That's why the country went off the rails. This isn't rocket science. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 22:09, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
I don't think it would have been good if the USA team didn't play to the best of their ability. Thailand needed to raise their game. The USA didn't need to lower their game - leadership is by example. And I would think Thailand players could learn better from American players who are playing at the best of their ability.
+
  
In addition, failure teaches lessons in life. And the bigger the failure, the bigger the lesson learned.
+
:Honestly, I just want Communism to be deader than a doornail, so I'm backing the protestors for that reason alone (I could care less if the current unipolar world order collapses as a result of China's Communist party's collapse, and if anything, I'd probably welcome it if it destroys Communism once and for all.). I'm NOT supporting democracy for China, however. Actually, I see democracy as being absolutely no different from Communism and Socialism (and I don't mean that in a good way, obviously), thanks largely to the French Revolution. Once the Communists are destroyed, I'm making sure that in its place is a Christian theocracy, a Catholic Christian theocracy at that. Jesus (heck, his father, in fact) wanted an Empire in God the father's name after all. Why else would he tell his followers to spread the gospel to the four corners of the world? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:46, 2 December 2019 (EST)
 +
::What is Hong Kong protesting about? The protesters have been making their "five demands" for some time. See "[https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/13/asia/hong-kong-airport-protest-explained-hnk-intl/index.html Why Hong Kong is protesting: Their five demands listed]." It's not Hong Kongers who picked this fight. They were satisfied with the "high degree of autonomy" and "one country, two systems" that they had back in 2014. In the last few years, Beijing has started rigging the city's election system, kidnapping people who publish books critical of Beijing, and threatening extradition. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 20:22, 2 December 2019 (EST)
  
The main reason why failures are painful to people is that they let their ego get in the way rather than treat their failure as a learning experience. Many people never fail because they never go beyond their comfort zone and test their abilities. “If you want to increase your success rate, double your failure rate.” - Thomas Watson Jr. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:40, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
==Barr==
:Indeed. Could someone fix the headline, though, please? To reiterate: Thailand is not one of the weakest teams in the world, nor is the country notably "impoverished". Thanks. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 21:45, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Pretty funny guy. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeMwdtbPR6g Watch the 2 minutes beginning at 18:00]. Toward the end he get's int the Resistance pretty good, too. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 07:56, 17 November 2019 (EST)
::I removed the word "impoverished".[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:53, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::But they are impoverished, as JohnZ cited above. His point was, that to be in the 30 of 180+ competitors doesn't make them among the "weakest." [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 13:46, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::I haven’t watched soccer in six years, but I saw this game.  My brother remarked that the tournament rules were such that the lead by which a team beats its opponents determines that team’s standing in the competition.  This may be one of the rare cases where the conservative lesson presented on MPR doesn’t apply to the story that it presents as fully known. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 14:22, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::Okay, let's give participation trophies all around. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:00, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
RobS, I think you misread what JohnZ wrote above. For example, JohnZ wrote above "As far as "impoverished" goes, Thailand is actually pretty wealthy (in the [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal) top 30 by nominal GDP]). That takes a fair hit if you go [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita per capita], but they're still comfortably in the top half, even on this measure. We're not talking DR Congo here."[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 14:30, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Thailand is much, much poorer than the U.S.  Thailand is also 95% Buddhist, which means women's soccer is not a high priority.  Some sportsmanship is better than running up the score and then gloating about it afterwards.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:25, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::For the record, I don't see any sportsmanship issues in the margin of victory, and Vargas is correct that [https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/world-cup-group-stage-tie-breakers-rules-what-happens-when-teams-/olh39ph3hunh1w1zdmhp3osft goal difference, and then goals scored], is used to determine teams' standings if they're level on points at the end of the group stage.
+
  
::However, I'm not sufficiently invested in this to labour the point further. For the reasons given above, I support the removal of "impoverished", and if someone could amend "weakest in the world" to "weakest in the '''tournament'''", then I'm done. Thanks. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 16:13, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
==Bolton's back==
:::Here Here! eliminate the word "weakest" and they can be seen as equals. May the Best Women Win! [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 16:21, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
And he's trashing Trump on social media. He has accused the President of attempting to silence him by suppressing his private Twitter account.[https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1197946364669370368] At this point, it's apparent that he's gone full #NeverTrump and (probably) supports impeachment. Time to get the popcorn as more of his (Bolton’s) former allies turn on him, like they should've done a long time ago. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 15:20, 22 November 2019 (EST)
Thailand law requires its king to be an adherent of the Theravada school of [[Buddhism]] which is a nontheistic type of Buddhism.  
+
:B.S. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:08, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:If Fiona Hill is going to immigrate to the United States and get job with the State Department, the least she could do is learn to speak English. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|De Plorabus Unum]]</sup> 14:29, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::I'm very happy that Bolton has gone #NeverTrump. Neoconservatism must be totally discredited. If Bolton can make that happen with his antics, then more power to him. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 22:21, 23 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:Geopolitician, are you trying to discredit ''yourself''?  Bolton, a Top Conservative on Twitter, said the ''White House'', not President Trump, tried to block his access to using his account.  You said the opposite twice, and you can't prove it by anything Bolton said on his Twitter account since his departure. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Sunday, 18:51, 24 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::Yes, he did use the words "White House" in his tweets. I won't deny that. But do you honestly believe that wasn't intended to be a rhetorical attack on the President? --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 00:44, 25 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::I never realized my honesty was in question.  Yet, here we are, I guess. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 23:37, 25 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::I wasn't questioning your honesty. It was just a "yes or no" question. Based on your reply, I'm guessing your answer is "no." Let's agree to disagree, then. I see his tweet as an attack on Trump, but you don't. --[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 12:37, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
And... Trump just called Bolton a "patriot."[https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1199352973568151552] Even now, he fails to understand how insidious neocons really are. If he's trying to keep neocons and real conservatives together as one big happy family under the Trump banner, then he will fail in the end. Neoconservatism and true conservatism are fundamentally incompatible.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 13:06, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::How do you know Bolton and the president didn't agree that they would menace Iran as a [[Parthian shot]] by sending a carrier to the Persian Gulf?  That way, before Trump started implementing his isolationist foreign policy, he signalled he could break away from it if he needed to against Iran.
  
The American women's soccer team overwhelming victory over the Thai team might be further confirmation that theists tend to be more athletic than nontheists (see: [[Sports performance: Religious faith vs. atheism]]).  
+
:::Because of Trump's strategy, he now needs someone with a lot more experience in diplomacy rather than someone more experienced in coercive measures like Bolton. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 15:11, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::''If'' Trump decided to go along with Bolton's warmongering as part of a "coercive measure" strategy, he made a serious mistake in doing so. We are in no position to try to coerce Iran about anything right now. If the events of the last decade have proven anything, it's that we're backing the wrong factions in the region, and that an alliance with Iran would be necessary to counter the actions of even worse actors like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and their al-Qaeda/ISIS-affiliated proxies. We need to acknowledge that and abandon our current anti-Iran policies. Completely.--[[User:Geopolitician|Geopolitician]] ([[User talk:Geopolitician|talk]]) 16:22, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::Honestly, if I must be blunt, even if you're right that we shouldn't back Saudi Arabia, why the heck should we back Iran? Why not just nuke both of them out of existence and wipe out Islam, which if you ask me is probably the better strategy knowing that both Shia and Sunni variants are pure evil? [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 16:35, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
::::::No one shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. There would have to be a trial first, unless, of course, you don't believe in the rule of law.  For anything less would be ''unconstitutional''. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 17:28, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::When fighting in a war, due process of law really doesn't work. Otherwise, our even nuking Japan to prevent Operation Downfall from slaughtering Americans in a land invasion of Japan would have been considered reprehensible due to it being a blatant violation of due process of law, not to mention the deprivation of life, liberty, or property, even though it was done specifically to prevent more American casualties. And don't get me started on how Obama tried to implement "due process of law" to terrorist groups via civilian courts, and how that was a complete disaster. And yes, what's going on in the Middle East is a war. In fact, the Muslims are ultimately no different from the Japanese in tactics, including a blatant disregard for lives, whether their enemies lives or even their own. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 17:44, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
Consider the essay [[Essay: Christianity and its margin of victory over atheism|Christianity and its margin of victory over atheism]].
+
::::::::The simple and correct answer to your question ''Why not just nuke both of them out of existence...?'' is "because that would be '''mass murder on a scale beyond even the Holocaust, you absolute cretin'''. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:23, 26 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::::::::So are you going to criticize our decision to drop bombs onto Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Not really all that different, especially considering that Islam as an enemy engages in similar tactics to the Japanese, with neither Shia nor Sunni really deserving to be our allies. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 20:28, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
Christendom kept racking up victory after victory over [[militant atheism|militant atheists]] until the [[atheist movement]] died in the [[Western World]] (see: [[Decline of the atheist movement]]).
+
::::::::::Your autism does not excuse calls for genocide. You are categorically wrong on this point. Desist. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 20:53, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
And now Donald Trump is about to bring the Chinese atheists who engage in unfair trade practices to their knees via his trade war with China. Furthermore, Christianity is seeing explosive growth in China (see: [[Growth of Christianity in China]] and [[East Asia and global desecularization]]).
+
:::::::::::Who said anything about my having autism, let alone it being used as an excuse? Also, I was citing actual history, like, oh, I don't know, the fact that we dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki specifically to end the war. And quite frankly, the Muslims often strapped bombs onto themselves to take out their enemies in Jihad, and have even used airplanes in suicide bombings, just like the Japanese. I guess by your logic, we were genocidal during World War II. I suggest you really rethink your rebuttal. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 21:50, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
The margin victory of Christendom over militant atheists will widen and widen and [[desecularization]] will accelerate in the 21st century.
+
::::::::::::I suggest you consider your position on this wiki. I guarantee you that the owner does not wish to be associated with users calling for the extermination of millions of innocent people, whatever their religion. My sincere advice is to delete your most recent comments on this thread, and you have my permission to do the same for mine. I can't speak for Vargas, but I suspect he would agree. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 22:07, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
Keep it up American women's soccer team! USA! USA! USA!
+
:::::::::::::Innocent? Muslims are not innocent by any stretch. In fact, I suggest you read up on several articles where it compares Islam to totalitarian ideologies such as Nazism or Communism, and also makes clear that they rape and massacre multiple Christians. And let's not forget a key tenant of their faith is the practicing of Taqqiyah, which means lying to a non-Muslim specifically to advance Islam, and even having a variation that dealt with false conversions. And let's also not forget that we've already got plenty of Muslim attacks occurring right now, from CAIR, ISIS, Muslim Brotherhood, and the whole shebang. And quite frankly, going by your blocked status, I'm suspecting the admins of Conservapedia ultimately agree with me. Then again, I might be wrong about that. I'd prefer sparing the muslims, but their practicing taqqiya and their overall actions made me reconsider that approach. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 22:20, 26 November 2019 (EST)
  
Deus vault![[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:42, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::::::::::JohnZ, you need to be reminded of a couple things here. First, you know next to nothing about American history, for if you did you would have run right into the very first war ever declared against us as a nation, and it was done by a bunch of Muslims.  Second, why don't you try looking at your own country's problems, like the euthanasia bill that was just passed.  And before the ink dries on that piece of paper, one of your doctors is going to be the first one sued for refusing to help a patient kill himself. Just who are the real cretins now?  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 22:28, 26 November 2019 (EST)
:Weakest in the tournament edit made.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:55, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Cheers. [[User:JohnZ|JohnZ]] ([[User talk:JohnZ|talk]]) 17:06, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:You have no evidence the US Women's Soccer Team is Christian. How do we know there are no Muslim converts, secularists, yoga flakes, or Progressive atheist daughters of Clinton era soccer moms? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:14, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:In fact, one of these [https://www.theblaze.com/news/soccer-star-snubs-national-anthem Trump-hating psycho commies] refused to participate in the national anthem. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:18, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::In the USA, atheists/agnostics are a minority (see: [[American atheism]]). In the United States, numerous studies report athletes to be more religious than nonathletes (Fischer, 1997; Storch, Kolsky, Silvestri, & Storch, 2001; Storch et al., 2004). See: [http://thesportjournal.org/article/strength-of-religious-faith-of-athletes-and-nonathletes-at-two-ncaa-division-iii-institutions/ ''Strength of Religious Faith of Athletes and Nonathletes at Two NCAA Division III Institutions'']
+
  
::Muslims are theists. As far as yoga, Hindus are theists too.  The article is titled [[Sports performance: Religious faith vs. atheism]]. It is not titled [[Sports performance: Christianity vs. atheism]].[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:19, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::(edit confict) Are there any still-current official ''jihads'' on the United States by any muslim sectSources say that may not be war.
:::We're speaking specifically of the US Women's Soccer Team, as representative of the United States. What evidence do you have that they are not majority Trump-hating progressive commie lib atheists? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 17:52, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::Comments by other soccer stars are rolling in, in agreement with our criticism. The US Women's soccer team should adopt some sportsmanship for a change, by apologizing, instead of acting like a bunch of self-centered liberals.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:33, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::If this were Canada, and specifically the Canadian Parliament, you'd be ostracized for not using the correct term, 'sportspersonship'. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:00, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::::We need a [[Gender mainstreaming]] article. [https://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/gendermainstreaming.htm] [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 14:12, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
I agree that sportmanship does not include gloating. But it does not include a team playing more poorly when facing a weaker team - especially when a team's ranking includes its margin of victories.  And sports fans go to soccer games to see goals being made. They don't go to see goals not being made.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:58, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:Unsportsmanlike conduct includes running up the score.  If the tournament rules encourage it beyond reason, that should be corrected and is not a justification. At any rate, the gloating showed it was done for self-aggrandizement.  One player even selfishly held up fingers for each goal she had personally scored.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:55, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::Exactly. Blowouts and shut outs used to be fairly common in the NFL, scores like 35-0. It was the sort of thing that could get a coach fired. It created vendettas, with players being severely injured who had nothing to do with the game that caused his coach getting fired  years earlier and had to struggle to keep his career and be re-hired elsewhere. IOWs, in a rematch between coaches, one coach would be looking for revenge and willing to risk and abuse the health and safety of players on both teams to make a statement. With free-agency, your opponent today is your team mate tomorrow. Coaches belong to a fraternity whose job is to teach players it's sport and entertainment, not cut-throat competition. In the NFL today, coaches go out of their way to avoid a shutout. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Deep Six the Deep State!'']]</sup> 15:46, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:::When the 1980 USA Olympic hockey team was facing the Soviet team they decided to quickly adopt a new hybrid style of play combining the Soviet/Canadian styles which required the height of training/excellence.  Of course, the coach/team was taking a risk - namely that his team could not develop a whole new style and would face another big loss like they did in the previous Olympics.  In the prior Olympics, the USA Olympic team had a 15 to 1 loss against a weak team - namely the Czech team. 
+
  
:::Of course, taking the aforementioned risk required/developed character in the 1980 USA Olympic hockey coach/team. Under the "no run up" way of doing things that character development and risk would have never occurred.  
+
::::::However, there are apparently Muslim gangs all around the world committing murders on a large scale on the order of hundreds per year. The Chinese see that that kind of gang violence, with no one responding to stop it, could be claimed as a stepping stone or sanction (like a kind of consent) for more agitation over new or increased imaginary grievances.
  
:::Here is another example: The NFL quarterback Frank Reich "had the distinction of having led his team to the biggest comeback victory ever in both the college and NFL ranks, including a 32-point comeback for the Bills in 1993."[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Reich] Under the "no run up" rule, Reich would have never achieved this tremendous victory. Furthermore, it would deny someone to achieve an even greater comeback victory than Reich.
+
::::::China may have sent many spies to mosques, because instead of destroying all mosques, they only destroyed half of them (over building or fire codes), and one might think it would have paid the Chinese government off well to be selective with regard to intelligence reports of the mosques' members' revolutionary zeal in demolishing the buildings.
  
:::The no run up way of doing things teaches people that: big risks are not to be taken and great comebacks in the face of big adversity is not possible. Also, it pampers players egos and teaches them that big losses are not learning experiences. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:46, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::I think I read over a million Muslims were deported to prison camps too, and the argument above might apply here too.
::::When I was demonstrating the immorality of the atheist population via my various articles, I was accused by the atheist Trent Toulouse at a certain atheist/agnostic website of being "cutthroat" despite the fact that my articles were factual and well-sourced.  That was his way of indirectly saying that I running up the score.  
+
  
::::From the period of 2003 to 2014 Americans sharpened their negative views towards atheists according to a large university survey (see: [[Distrust of atheists]]). Was that a bad thing? Should I and other Christians have been less critical of atheism after the launch of the now dead movement [[New Atheism]] (New Atheism was a militant form of atheism in terms of its rhetoric)? Did we run up the score too much? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:13, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
::::::If one starts to believe Muslims have reformed, that so many of their places of worship are also functional military fortresses deserves to be considered in any analysis along those lines. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Tuesday, 20:46, 26 November 2019 (EST)
Losses are feedback. And big losses in sports are feedback that you have to train much, much harder. Depriving teams of that feedback is not a good practice.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:27, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:"Some states, such as Georgia, have implemented a “mercy rule” in designated sports at the high school level, where if certain point differentials occur, the length of the game is reduced."[http://thesportdigest.com/2011/01/running-up-the-score-is-it-ever-acceptable/]
+
  
:While I think this can be a suboptimal solution in some cases (see my examples of the 1980 USA Olympic team and Frank Reich), at least the winning team isn't asked to lower their level of excellence. And you could argue that it causes teams to play hard throughout the game and not count on some spectacular comeback.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 18:07, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== Happy Thanksgiving fellow Conservapedians! ==
::The reason I took a run up the score philosophy is I am tired of the stupid participation trophies and other liberal, wimpy claptrap related to competition/hard work/achievement.
+
  
::If you are not going to work hard and prepare in life, you shouldn't be surprised when you fail or fail spectacularly.  And if you did work hard and still failed (or even failed in a big way), then learn from the experience and don't easily quit or become discouraged because of it.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:12, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Today may we all take time to reflect on everything God has blessed us with. [[User:DMorris|DMorris]] ([[User talk:DMorris|talk]]) 12:36, 28 November 2019 (EST)
:::It's the combination of running up the score against the weakest team '''''and''''' the over-the-top self-aggrandizement as though something was accomplished '''''and''''' the favoritism by the [[liberal media]].  If they seek competitive achievement against world-class athletes, they should run in a marathon or compete in Olympic skiing, gymnastics or figure skating.  But I doubt they'd get very far.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:04, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
+
  
== Wendy's news topic (or more accurately, Burger King). ==
+
== London Bridge terror attack ==
  
Hi. Good work promoting Wendy's support for adoption. However, shouldn't we change Burger King's support for at least gays to "supported" instead of "supports"? Technically, Burger King only seemed to support gay marriage in 2014, and it's not clear if they still do, so it's technically dishonest to claim it continues to support it when evidence hasn't emerged that they still do. Now, if you've got a source dated 2019, then we could continue using the present tense for "support" regarding that. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 11:44, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
You might like to go back to your sources.  The terrorist was restrained and disarmed before the armed police arrived.  They shot him because they believed he had a suicide belt. [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 20:19, 29 November 2019 (EST)
:Maybe BK smartened up and decided to be a "neutral Switzerland" in the culture wars. There is no sense alienating a sizable portion of the public when you are engaging in mass marketing on a global scale (Burger King is in some Middle East countries, etc.). My guess is that they didn't smarten up, but that is merely speculation. Most big companies in the USA are run by straight, white men and so I am guessing that some would prefer to avoid the culture wars, if possible. The SJWs generally try to infiltrate the HR/marketing departments of big companies.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:33, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
:It would be very difficult without a gun to restrain and disarm a terrorist.  If he were truly restrained and disarmed, then there would not be any reason to shoot him multiple times.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:41, 29 November 2019 (EST)
::"Human Rights Campaign recently released its guide to the businesses with the best work environments for gay employees. The Gap, Johnson & Johnson and Apple come out on top, while John Deere and Loews score near the bottom."[http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/282765]  
+
::Rafael, is a customary in Britain for the authorities not to reveal a suspects name?  Like so as not to prejudice the jury? Or is it more likely due to some terror suspects having Muslim names and the authorities engaging in [[political correctness]]?  I know that Muslim terrrorist attacks probably help fuel right-wing populism and pro-Brexit voting. This is not a provocateur question. I just want to know.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:19, 29 November 2019 (EST)
 +
:::It's also difficult to get hold of a narwhal tusk but, along with a fire extinguisher, it's what five members of the public and one unarmed Transport Police Officer used to take the man down. As I mentioned earlier, the terrorist appeared to have a suicide belt on so the armed police did the only thing they could.  They pulled the civilians away and shot him.
 +
:::It has been standard practice to withhold the names of people hurt or killed in any incident until the families have been notified.  No matter how evil a person is, his family is normally innocent.  Given the predatory nature of the media, they don't deserve to hear about it from a bottom-feeding "reporter". There are also moves her, and abroad, to not use a terrorist's name.  It's a way of denying them their moment of infamy.  To borrow a phrase Margaret Thatcher used about censoring the IRA, it "denies them the oxygen of publicity".  That's not to say the name is not available.  It just means it isn't shouted from the rooftops.
 +
:::For the record, the terrorist was called Usman Khan, aged 28, UK born British citizen, convicted jihadi terrorist, on parole and tagged. This comes after the recent downgrading of Britain's security status and during debate about cuts to the police. If Boris Johnson and Pritti Patel don't play this right, it's going to blow up in their faces two weeks before the election.  [[User:Rafael|Rafael]] ([[User talk:Rafael|talk]]) 08:56, 30 November 2019 (EST)
  
::I did a search on "John Deere and LGBT" at a search engine and sure enough the white, straight male executives at John Deere corporation whose company sells to people in rural areas could care less about LGBT issues. Shocking! :)[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 15:42, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== Supreme court will hear a case on firearms ==
:::I predict that as right-wing nationalist gain in power in Europe/world and as evangelicals/Muslims grow in Europe/world, many corporations will stop pushing the [[homosexual agenda]]. I think this will start happening in about 5 to 30 years (see also: [[Desecularization]] and [[European desecularization in the 21st century]]).
+
  
:::Consider: Attacks on homosexuals in the UK rose 147% in three months after Brexit vote.[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/08/homophobic-attacks-double-after-brexit-vote] Part of it is no doubt due to Muslims increasing in numbers/influence, but there are nonreligious or nominally religious right-wingers who no doubt engage in beating up homosexuals and they see the secular left is losing power. The nonreligious right can definitely be violent (see: [[Essay: Anders Breivik is the canary in the mine showing that right-wing politics could become much more violent]]).
+
New York has for some time shown that it is eager to defy the second amendment. It sounds like they took it too far this time.  They tried to backpedal to get the supreme court to dismiss a case against them, but it didn't work.  A decision is expected in June on this matter. [https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-court-gun-rights-case-decade] Hopefully Gorsuch and Kavanaugh will have the guts to take a stand on this. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 19:41, 1 December 2019 (EST)
 +
:Roberts is the one to watch, not Gorsuch or Kavanaugh. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:41, 1 December 2019 (EST)
 +
::Yeah, Roberts is iffy for sure. Kavanaugh caved on something a few moths back too though... I forget now what it was. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">DavidB4</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:17, 2 December 2019 (EST)
  
:::In addition, SJWs make corporations less profitable because they are more concerned about engaging in politics rather than making their companies more profitable. In addition, they can alienate a sizable amount of the public (ESPN, CNN, etc.). So this will eventually thin out the herd of SJW companies. Also, secular leftists are well-known for infighting and this is never good for a company (see: [[Atheist factions]] and [[Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence]]).[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:22, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
== Lisa Page ==
::::The Guardian: "David Isaac, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: “Currently, the law and sentencing policy create a ‘hierarchy of hate crime’ and send the message that some groups are more worthy of protection than others."[https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/08/homophobic-attacks-double-after-brexit-vote]
+
  
::::Apparently, the Muslims have more voters than the homosexuals.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 16:38, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
+
Lisa Page just released her first tweet.  In the responses, someone who had written a book about Russia-gate claimed Page was a CIA officer whose FBI job was a cover. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 02:26, 2 December 2019 (EST)
  
== High-speed Democratic cliché collision ==
+
In a one-sentence excerpt I saw of an interview she gave, it shows Page is still hanging on to the claim that the FBI ''did'' have a predication for investigating Trump.  This can only be through the two-jump rule of investigating [[George Papadopoulos]] and then Trump by association.  This all goes back to the Australian incident again, where Papadopoulos repeats a news story to some Australian official that the Trump campaign was contacted by Wikileaks before they released the DNC leaks, which had already been claimed by major media outlets earlier.
  
"If no one is above the law, then why are Democrats so opposed to President Trump ordering the deportation of millions of illegal aliens?" — Charlie Kirk, June 18, 2019. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Wednesday, 03:19, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
+
She is trying to stay out of jail by treating dealing with the weight of the records of her manipulative activities like a personal empowerment story and off the bat is seen employing obsolete defenses instead of making a clean break and using CIA associations as a defense.  Does this mean the Russia-gate book author is spinning a tale? I don't know. I just really want to put this story out of its misery before it bites anyone who tries to take it at face value. [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 03:17, 2 December 2019 (EST)

Latest revision as of 19:22, 2 December 2019

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal

Archive Index


Contents

Who will win the Democrat presidential primary?

See also 2020 presidential election
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Chance of becoming
Democratic nominee
Candidate CA
ND
.
SO
RT
Home
state
End of
month
June
26
8:57
pm
EDT
End of
month
Mon-
day,
Jul.
29,
2019
End of
month
Mon-
day,
Aug.
26,
2019
End of
month
Tues-
day,
Oct.
1,
2019
Mon-
day
Oct.
28,
2019
Mon-
day
Nov.
4,
2019
Mon-
day
Nov.
11,
2019
Mon-
day
Nov.
18,
2019
Mon-
day
Nov.
25,
2019
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE 28.5% 20.2% 23.6% 18.0% 19.2% 19.6% 20.4% 21.5% 22.0%
Mayor Michael Bloomberg Blo NY 5.1% 2.9% 7.3%
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 11.1% 8.3% 6.1% 5.1% 9.8% 14.3% 12.2% 16.4% 17.4%
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 2.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.2% 1.3% 1.3% 0.7%
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 12.5% 27.4% 10.8% 4.3% 1.8% 1.3% 1.2% 1.0% 2.1%
Amy Klobuchar Klo MN 1.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 1.3% 2.0% 1.7%
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 11.2% 7.5% 13.4% 7.8% 7.5% 12.1% 12.7% 12.2% 11.5%
Sen. Elizabeth Warren War MA 15.9% 21.5% 31.5% 46.7% 43.7% 33.1% 32.0% 23.0% 18.9%
Sec'y Hillary Clinton Cli NY 1.7% 1.5% 2.0% 5.7% 6.1% 5.4% 4.1% 5.6% 5.3%
Andrew Yang Yan NY 5.5% 3.3% 4.0% 4.4% 3.0% 3.4% 3.5% 3.3% 3.1%
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Twitter followers
Candidate CA
ND
.
SO
RT
Home
state
Accts
as of
June
29
New
accts
July
30
New
accts
Aug
26
New
accts
Sep
16
New
accts
Oct
1
New
accts
Oct
16
New
accts
Nov
1
New
accts
Nov
18
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE   03.6M:1 +19,000 +64,000 +36,000 +45,000 +98,000 +48,000 +27,000
Sen. Cory Booker Boo NJ 04.4M:2 +28,000 +39,000 +12,000 +9,000 +12,000 +16,000 +6,000
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 01.2M:2 +72,000 +101,000 +80,000 +26,000 +30,000 +34,000 +34,000
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 00.6M:2 +34,000 +118,000 +25,000 +27,000 +27,000 +141,000 +11,000
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 03.6M:2 +245,000 +119,000 +56,000 +48,000 +61,000 +48,000 +32,000
Rep. Beto O'Rourke O'R TX 01.4M:1 +4,000 +116,000 +44,000 +24,000 +22,000 +13,000
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 17.8M:2 +134,000 +264,000 +136,400 +93,000 +140,000 +146,000 +108,000
Sen. Elizabeth W