╌>

Failed, weak and dangerously liberal

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  3 months ago  •  192 comments

Failed, weak and dangerously liberal
“This is America’s Border czar, and she has failed us,” the 30-second clip opens, alongside footage of Harris dancing at a 2023 event celebrating the 50th anniversary of hip-hop.

Link to Quote: New Trump campaign attack ad rips Kamala Harris over border crisis (nypost.com)


The Trump campaign is coming at Kamala Harris, and it is coming at her in the best way possible. A new campaign ad, fresh off the development floor attacks the extreme positions of Kamala Harris:

trump-campaign-s-first-television-86437353.jpg?w=1024

The attack ad ended with by branding Harris “failed. Weak. Dangerously liberal.”

The ad campaign opened with:



During a campaign rally in Minnesota on Saturday, Trump pointed out how the media has worked overtime in trying to reinvent her. He asked a crowd recently if they noticed that the cackle was gone? He started out by calling her the "border czar." Pathetically USA Today called that a lie. It is in fact true :

Yet another  Axios article from that April, meanwhile, stated as fact that “Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar, said she would be looking at the ‘root causes’ that drive migration.”

Axios Accuses GOP of Fabricating Kamala Harris’s ‘Border Czar’ Title — 3 Years After Reporting She Was Biden’s Border Czar (msn.com)

The media gave her that name and they can't take it back. Trump told the truth.

Trump went on to say: 


"Kamala Harris' deadly destruction of America's borders is completely and totally disqualifying for her to be president. You can't have a person like this as president."

'She's evil': Trump attacks Kamala Harris at Minnesota rally (usatoday.com)

The Harris views are all on camera and occurred not that long ago. Trump must stay the course.




In the news:

Ukraine, after months of fighting, recently lost two villages in the southeast to Russia.

The drug lord known as El Chapo abducted a fellow cartel leader and forced him onto a plane bound for the US delivering him to American officials.

The U.S. and several Latin American countries said that Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, could not claim victory in last weekend’s election without releasing the full vote count.

Joe Biden proposed radical changes to the Supreme Court. He said the justices had undermined civil rights protections with “extreme” rulings on issues including voting rights and abortion. The left has never accepted that a right to abortion never existed within the Constitution. The proposals require congressional approval. The House speaker, Mike Johnson, called the plan “dead on arrival.”


The Israeli military detained nine reservists over the suspected sexual abuse of a Palestinian detainee. Crowds supporting the reservists broke into two military bases in protest sparking an internal crisis.

Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s Democratic governor, has withdrawn from consideration as Kamala Harris running mate.

The corrupt Justice Department plans to monitor today’s House and Senate primary elections in Arizona.




Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

Good morning.

william-calley-d10e65a8-33a4-4741-ae96-d5f444c18f9-resize-750.jpeg

William Calley, the only American convicted in the murder of hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians in the atrocity known as the My Lai Massacre , has died at the age of 80. His name was one of the lightning rods for the 60's radicals.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 months ago
The Trump campaign is coming at Kamala Harris, and it is coming at her in the best way possible.

... since the general consensus within the trump campaign is that he's too inept and cowardly to debate her.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @1.1    3 months ago

She'll have to work out a debate deal.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 months ago

trump has already flipped twice on a debate in the last 24 hours.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    3 months ago

The only person that Trump promised to debate was Joe Biden.

Biden was overthrown by members of his own party.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.1.4  Greg Jones  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    3 months ago

Big whoop! Kamala has flip-flopped on fracking, since she realizes she has to win Pennysylvania.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
1.1.5  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    3 months ago

Just like Biden, Trump will now only debate if he has to; and it will be on terms he dictates.

Right now there is no reason to debate Harris.

Chances are the decision will be made after the DNC national convention and everyone sees who the VP pick is; and the glow of the being the first minority woman nominee wears off. 

Bitching about it will not change it; but we all know Democrats will never stop.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.6  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    3 months ago
The only person that Trump promised to debate was Joe Biden.

no one is expecting anything less than blind partisanship by maga for their hero's cowardice. every day he refuses are polling points for democrats.

Biden was overthrown by members of his own party.

thrashing around in conspiracy only makes one sink faster into reality. so sorry that the maga anticipated '68 style convention in chicago got cancelled, but trump standards of racism and misogyny are still in play...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.7  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.5    3 months ago
Right now there is no reason to debate Harris. Bitching about it will not change it; but we all know Democrats will never stop.

oh, the irony...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.8  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.1.2    3 months ago

Why should she have to work out any kind of deal with the convicted felon and rapist?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @1.1    3 months ago

,,,and impotent

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
1.1.10  MrFrost  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.5    3 months ago
and it will be on terms he dictates.

Why? Because he's a fucking pussy. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.10    3 months ago

And Biden is a Lion …..

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.12  devangelical  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.11    3 months ago

biden is no longer a candidate.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.10    3 months ago

I like wussy  - wimp/pussy - which is what the 'man' child former 'president' is.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
1.1.14  Sparty On  replied to  Sparty On @1.1.11    3 months ago

Yep, funny rapidly things change in the land of loons

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.2  Kavika   replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 months ago
His name was one of the lightning rods for the 60's radicals.

His name was a lightning rod for anyone with a conscience.

trump-campaign-s-first-television-86437353.jpg?w=1024

Was Trump talking about himself?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 months ago
William Calley

... war criminal.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.4  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 months ago

It was very hard to know who the enemy was in Nam.

A kid who would say "GI #1" on one day would frag you the next.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
1.4.1  Snuffy  replied to  cjcold @1.4    3 months ago
  • Adrian Cronauer : [ impersonating an Intelligence Officer ] We've realized that we're having a very difficult time finding the enemy. It isn't easy to find a Vietnamese man named "Charlie." They're all named Nguyen, or Tran, or...
  • Adrian Cronauer : [ as himself ] Well, how are you going about it?
  • Adrian Cronauer : [ as Intel Officer ] Well, we walk up to someone and say, 'Are you the enemy? And, if they say yes, then we shoot them."

Good Morning, Vietnam (1987) - Quotes - IMDb

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.4.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  cjcold @1.4    3 months ago

You know, when I hear that, and I believe you, I have to believe it was the saddest time for the US military.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2  JBB    3 months ago

original

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

Oh yes, the CA election which pitted one radical vs another.

How extreme was her opponent?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    3 months ago

why not try explaining the contribution instead of deflecting ...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @2.1.1    3 months ago

I think I just did.

Who did Harris run against in the San Francisco District Attorney election?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to    3 months ago

What would be worse is attacking your opponent's supporters and the greater American electorate.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
2.1.9  Greg Jones  replied to  devangelical @2.1.1    3 months ago

Why not try to explain the significance of something that happened 10 years ago.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Expert
2.1.16  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Greg Jones @2.1.9    3 months ago

I removed most of this thread for no value, taunting, and all around nasty talk. Knock it off or I will hand out big tickets. Only warning.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
2.2  George  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

I guess trump knew he could buy her cheap just in case he needed a prosecutor on the payroll. From the amount on the check, I guess he put a higher value on Stormy's services than Kamalas.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

Another self own by progressives…..

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

Gee, that's a lot more than the $15 that the 'attempted assassination' attempter gave to a Democrat cause.  

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
3  George    3 months ago
The House speaker, Mike Johnson, called the plan “dead on arrival.”

And when President Biden was asked about Speaker Johnsons response, he said Speaker Johnson was dead on arrival, I hope this stupid fucker isn't trying to ger another political opponent killed.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  George @3    3 months ago

They may have stopped. It appears that they have replaced comparing Trump to Hitler with calling Trump and Vance "weird."  Yesterday just about every left-wing media pundit used the word "weird."

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
3.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 months ago

Yesterday just about every left-wing media pundit used the word "weird."

yeah, the coordination was pretty obvious. 

The memes created in response from the right were pretty funny.  A very target rich environment to choose from.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
3.1.2  George  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 months ago

And a new email will come out daily until they find the term that polls the best. pathetically simpleminded people. They read someone else's thoughts off a teleprompter and people value their opinion for some stupid reason. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  George @3.1.2    3 months ago

I’m just enjoying people who think it’s completely normal to attend “white dudes for Harris” or “white women for Harris” (with men wearing women face involved) zoom meetings calling anyone else weird. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 months ago

I think incel was a new apt descriptor of them and some of their cult members

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
3.1.5  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 months ago

Comparing Trump to Hitler will never be inaccurate.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  cjcold @3.1.5    3 months ago

It defines those who hate him.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
3.1.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @3.1.5    3 months ago
Comparing Trump to Hitler will never be inaccurate.

I don’t think that you’re reicht.  Hitler wouldn’t have stepped down in 2021.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
4  evilone    3 months ago

Hmmm... I think I'll stick with the dangerously liberal Harris over the dangerously authoritarian Trump. Even if only to watch all the MAGA Populist heads explode over the next 4 years. HA!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  evilone @4    3 months ago
I think I'll stick with the dangerously liberal Harris over the dangerously authoritarian Trump.

As I proved yesterday to someone here, the only one who has demonstrated authoritarian control has been Joe Biden.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
4.1.1  evilone  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    3 months ago
As I proved yesterday to someone here

Yup, if Harris pulls it off all the gnashing of teeth and whining online will be fun.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.1.2  devangelical  replied to  evilone @4.1.1    3 months ago

the current levels of fear and desperation are already palpable ...

... full on damage control.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  evilone @4.1.1    3 months ago

Not as much as the ghost town we'll find if she loses.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.3    3 months ago

you cannot stop imagining that people here are afraid to engage with you. 

its "weird". 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4.1.5  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.4    3 months ago

Ya!

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.6  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    3 months ago

[]

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.7  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @4.1.6    3 months ago

[]

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.8  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @4.1.6    3 months ago

(deleted)

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.9  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @4.1.8    3 months ago

[]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

Breaking:

T he US intelligence community has “observed” Iran trying to influence the 2024 election — and keep former President Donald Trump from a second term in the White House, according to a Monday unclassified briefing.

An official at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence told reporters that intelligence agencies have “observed Tehran working to influence the presidential election, probably because Iranian leaders want to avoid an outcome they perceive would increase tensions with the United States.”

US intel agencies: Iran trying to influence election, keep Trump from winning in 2024 (msn.com)

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.1  Ronin2  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 months ago

They might as well add China to Iran.

China can't afford to have Democrats out of the White House.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ronin2 @5.1    3 months ago

That is a given.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.2  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    3 months ago

And in previous US elections Putin has spent billions to subvert them.

Putin has blackmail on Trump and uses it to great effect. That's what Putin does.

Putin knows Donny for a baby in first grade. Putin is KGB personified.

We need a president who knows Putin and Kim for the evil that they are.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
5.2.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.2    3 months ago
And in previous US elections Putin has spent billions to subvert them.

Where are you getting your numbers?

We need a president who knows Putin and Kim for the evil that they are.

Exactly, like Bush II’s Axis of Evil.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.2.1    3 months ago
Where are you getting your numbers?

A Crackerjack box along with a Kamala talking point decoder ring.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
6  Ronin2    3 months ago
Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s Democratic governor, has withdrawn from consideration as Kamala Harris running mate.

The list of Democrats screaming "not it" to being Kamala's VP grows.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    3 months ago
Kamala Harris says mass amnesty for migrants a priority

So she is following Reagan's policy?  Are you going to bad mouth Reagan now?

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1    3 months ago

You and I made the same point and quoted the same article at the same time.   I did not see your comment until mine posted.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.1    3 months ago
You and I made the same point and quoted the same article at the same time.

Great-Minds-Think-Alike.jpg

P.S. I beat you by 2 minutes...jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
7.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1    3 months ago

No. Reagan fell for Democrat lies about securing the border as part of the deal. And once the amnesty was given, they had one hell of a lapse in memory about what was promised.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.3    3 months ago
eagan fell for Democrat lies about securing the border as part of the deal.

They never mention that and Harris has never qualified her mass amnesty with any border security requirements. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
7.1.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.2    3 months ago

Au contraire. Great minds are critical, independent thinkers. Unlike everyone else.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1    3 months ago

From the first paragraph of the NPR propaganda article:

"As the nation's attention turns back to the fractured debate over immigration, it might be helpful to remember that in 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers."

In 1986 President Reagan made a deal with congress: One time amnesty in return for a secure border.

But democrats reneged:

President Ronald Reagan's "biggest regret" was granting amnesty as part of 1986 immigration-reform legislation and then counting on Congress to secure the border, which never happened.

Ward, a former state senator from Lake Havasu City, and her campaign attribute the claim to Ed Rollins, who served in the White House as an aide to Reagan and who was national director of Reagan's 1984 re-election campaign.

Did Ronald Reagan regret 1986 'amnesty' law? (azcentral.com)

Are you really trying to rewrite history in order to make a ridiculous claim?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.6    3 months ago
Statement on United States Immigration and Refugee Policy

July 30, 1981

Our nation is a nation of immigrants. More than any other country, our strength comes from our own immigrant heritage and our capacity to welcome those from other lands. No free and prosperous nation can by itself accommodate all those who seek a better life or flee persecution. We must share this responsibility with other countries.

The bipartisan select commission which reported this spring concluded that the Cuban influx to Florida made the United States sharply aware of the need for more effective immigration policies and the need for legislation to support those policies.

For these reasons, I asked the Attorney General last March to chair a Task Force on Immigration and Refugee Policy. We discussed the matter when President Lopez Portillo visited me last month, and we have carefully considered the views of our Mexican friends. In addition, the Attorney General has consulted with those concerned in Congress and in affected States and localities and with interested members of the public.

The Attorney General is undertaking administrative actions and submitting to Congress, on behalf of the administration, a legislative package, based on eight principles. These principles are designed to preserve our tradition of accepting foreigners to our shores, but to accept them in a controlled and orderly fashion:

  • We shall continue America's tradition as a land that welcomes peoples from other countries. We shall also, with other countries, continue to share in the responsibility of welcoming and resettling those who flee oppression.
  • At the same time, we must ensure adequate legal authority to establish control over immigration: to enable us, when sudden influxes of foreigners occur, to decide to whom we grant the status of refugee or asylee; to improve our border control; to expedite (consistent with fair procedures and our Constitution) return of those coming here illegally; to strengthen enforcement of our fair labor standards and laws; and to penalize those who would knowingly encourage violation of our laws. The steps we take to further these objectives, however, must also be consistent with our values of individual privacy and freedom.
  • We have a special relationship with our closest neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Our immigration policy should reflect this relationship.
  • We must also recognize that both the United States and Mexico have historically benefited from Mexicans obtaining employment in the United States. A number of our States have special labor needs, and we should take these into account.
  • Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.
  • We shall strive to distribute fairly, among the various localities of this country, the impacts of our national immigration and refugee policy, and we shall improve the capability of those agencies of the Federal Government which deal with these matters.
  • We shall seek new ways to integrate refugees into our society without nurturing their dependence on welfare.
  • Finally, we recognize that immigration and refugee problems require international solutions. We will seek greater international cooperation in the resettlement of refugees and, in the Caribbean Basin, international cooperation to assist accelerated economic development to reduce motivations for illegal immigration.
Immigration and refugee policy is an important part of our past and fundamental to our national interest. With the help of the Congress and the American people, we will work towards a new and realistic immigration policy, a policy that will be fair to our own citizens while it opens the door of opportunity for those who seek a new life in America.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.7    3 months ago

It was coupled with border enforcement.

Repeating it while ignoring that is obvious to everyone.

Why do it?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.9  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.1    3 months ago

It is ridiculous.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.8    3 months ago
Repeating it while ignoring that is obvious to everyone.

Yeah, Vic, nobody is arguing against that.   The point is the Reagan recognized the role of amnesty.   And I agree with him.   There is a role for amnesty in the big picture.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.1.10    3 months ago
The point is the Reagan recognized the role of amnesty.

That is not true.

Reagan recognized a onetime amnesty in return for certain conditions.

Democrats want no conditions.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.1.12  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.11    3 months ago

maga republicans totally whiffed it on the best immigration deal they wrote, and were ever going to get, at the request of a convicted felon and thrice indicted criminal defendant. small wonder trump doesn't want to squander his only campaign issue by facing harris in a debate. her lack of any job experience will shred trump like the common criminal he is, and he and his campaign hierarchy know it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @7.1.12    3 months ago

No sale.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  devangelical @7.1.12    3 months ago

She'll mop the floor with his stupid ass.  Of course, there will be endless whining and excuses as to why he won't debate her.  He's nothing but a chicken shit coward.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.14    3 months ago

Chances are very good that you are correct.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.16  Ozzwald  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.6    3 months ago
In 1986 President Reagan made a deal with congress: One time amnesty in return for a secure border.

So you admit that Reagan granted amnesty, good for you.  Amazing how many right wingers are trying to rewrite that portion of history.

 
 
 
Thomas
Masters Guide
7.1.17  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.6    3 months ago

Funny. 

President Ronald Reagan's "biggest regret" was granting amnesty as part of 1986 immigration-reform legislation and then counting on Congress to secure the border, which never happened.

...and here it is 40 years later and congress still has not done anything. I think think that it is a wonderful campaign tool for both sides to cudgel each other with. Besides that, the amount which it truly matters isn't that much. By all means, keep bashing.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.1.18  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Thomas @7.1.17    3 months ago

If we have learned nothing else, the last two presidents have taught us how much a president can do to secure the border or to undermine its security. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.19  Ozzwald  replied to  Thomas @7.1.17    3 months ago
Funny. 
President Ronald Reagan's "biggest regret" was granting amnesty as part of 1986 immigration-reform legislation and then counting on Congress to secure the border, which never happened.
...and here it is 40 years later and congress still has not done anything.

In case you forgot, under Biden's term, Congress did act and one of the most conservative Senate republicans drafted immigration reform with bipartisan support.  Trump then ordered House republicans to block it.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
7.1.20  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.19    3 months ago

 Congress did act

No. It didn't. 

But the  1986 Act gives the President quite a bit of power, the Democrats/Lankford proposed Senate bill would have weakened that.

You'd think that Biden issuing an EO after the bill's failure that that contained stronger measures than the failed bill would have tipped Democrats off to that, but here we are. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
7.1.21  George  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.19    3 months ago
one of the most conservative Senate republicans drafted immigration reform with bipartisan support.

Can you provide a link to that, obviously if there was a Senate bill you have a link to it right? here is all the senate Bills for this session, U.S. Senate: Commonly Searched for Legislation (118th Congress)  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7    3 months ago

Amnesty is a D policy so it should come as no surprise that a D supports it.    While I personally am against an unqualified amnesty, the concept of amnesty as part of an overall program that shores up the border is logically sensible.  

That said, note that the border problem keeps emerging even though we have worked on it for decades.    

Anyway, remember what Reagan said:

in 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. It was sold as a crackdown: There would be tighter security at the Mexican border, and employers would face strict penalties for hiring undocumented workers. But the bill also made any immigrant who'd entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty -- a word not usually associated with the father of modern conservatism.

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
7.2.1  George  replied to  TᵢG @7.2    3 months ago

If the pieces of shits in the democrat congress could be trusted they might stand a chance, but those worthless fuckers have been lying for decades.

"The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs,” he said during the Senate debate.

In retrospect, the mix of immigrants, legal and illegal, shifted dramatically in favor of   Latin America   and   Asia   – a fact that Kennedy, in later years, would attribute to illegal immigration.

“We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this,”

Ted Kennedy,

I guess when he isn't showing his support for women by abandoning them to die, his legacy is to continue to fuck over the hard working Americans who do service jobs.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.2    3 months ago

But the result was not a crackdown, because the border security part of that deal was not kept. As a matter of fact the final version of the bill was watered down:

An effort to create a national ID system for workers was stripped out of the legislation under a deluge of criticism, including a last-minute speech by Rep. Edward Roybal, D-Calif., who invoked Nazi Germany.

"Obviously the damn bill didn't work. They took the guts right out," said former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wy., a leader at the time.

Memory of immigration reform under Ronald Reagan haunts current debate (tampabay.com)


None of that has anything to do with Kamala Harris calling for amnesty which she does not couple with border security or anything else.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.2    3 months ago
But the result was not a crackdown, because the border security part of that deal was not kept.

See @7.1.7

Reagan recognized that amnesty has a role to play in the greater picture.   As I noted, I am not for wholesale amnesty, it should be part of a comprehensive program designed to control illegal immigration while being practical.  But it is not even noteworthy that Harris, a D, would support a long-term D policy.   And it is incorrect to suggest that amnesty in any form is fundamentally wrong.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.3    3 months ago

You are trying to compare two positions that are quite opposite.


But it is not even noteworthy that Harris, a D, would support a long-term D policy. 

We all know why democrats favor amnesty. California turned blue partly because of illegal migration.


And it is incorrect to suggest that amnesty in any form is fundamentally wrong.

It is wrong if it allows a path to citizenship.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.5  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.4    3 months ago
You are trying to compare two positions that are quite opposite.

No, Vic, I am pointing out that your attack on Harris, a D, for supporting a long-standing D policy is weak.   And pointing out that amnesty in and of itself is a logical portion of the larger picture of illegal immigration control ... and that Reagan saw that too.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.5    3 months ago
No, Vic, I am pointing out that your attack on Harris, a D, for supporting a long-standing D policy is weak.

No, TiG, you haven't proven my case weak. Harris is in favor of amnesty for all with benefits.

In a way they already have amnesty. Do we ever prosecute these people for entering the border illegally. That is a felony. I thought nobody was above the law. Isn't that your battle cry? 

She is to the left of Carter and Biden.

Harris is to the left of Biden in many areas, especially immigration. During her 2020 presidential bid, Harris, a “Medicare for all” backer,  supported  free, taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants. Compare that to Biden, who  wanted  to let illegal immigrants purchase an unsubsidized public option healthcare plan. Both are bad ideas, but at least Biden opposed giving free health insurance plans to illegal immigrants.

A Kamala Harris presidency would be great news for illegal immigrants - Washington Examiner

Having fun yet?

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
7.2.7  George  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.4    3 months ago
It is wrong if it allows a path to citizenship.

Legal status and the ability to work, but they can never be citizens and their children cannot either. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  George @7.2.7    3 months ago

There has to be some penalty for entering illegally.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.2.9  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.8    3 months ago

there has to be a penalty for hiring undocumented workers first.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @7.2.9    3 months ago

That was tried. The bill had no enforcement mechanism.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
7.2.11  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.10    3 months ago

and we all know by whom. go figure...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @7.2.11    3 months ago

If one can read they might know.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.13  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.6    3 months ago
No, TiG, you haven't proven my case weak.

You will never admit that your case is weak.   But trying to criticize a D for support of long-term D policies is weak by definition.   It is a 'duh' point.

Your attempt to bring Harris down to Trump's level is an act of futility.    No matter what you argue, the fact will remain that Trump is an irresponsible, vindictive, loose-cannon narcissist clown who will abuse the power of the presidency for his own whims.   He is an abysmal character who should never be given access to any public power.

As PotUS, he oversaw massive spending, created tax cuts that contributed to inflation, tried to talk down the pandemic in a futile attempt to keep the stock market high rather than directly act on the pandemic, and was an embarrassment to this nation as its voice and face.    


My biggest concern with the Ds has always been fiscal responsibility.    With Trump, the Ds become the party of fiscal responsibility.  

As a GOP PotUS, Trump's spending is even worse than that of a D PotUS since fiscal responsibility was a key point of the historical GOP agenda.   

trump-biden%20fig%202.png.webp?itok=AuhRDty_

trump-biden%20fig%203.png.webp?itok=Qe7RJkyb


The growth in the annual deficit under Trump ranks as the third-biggest increase, relative to the size of the economy, of any U.S. presidential administration, according to a calculation by a leading Washington budget maven, Eugene Steuerle, co-founder of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. And unlike George W. Bush and Abraham Lincoln, who oversaw the larger relative increases in deficits, Trump did not launch two foreign conflicts or have to pay for a civil war.

The National Debt Increased Under Trump Despite His Promise to Reduce It

Daily total national debt from 2009 to present.

20210114-borrowing-increased-under-trump-despite-promise-to-repay-national-debt-small.png

Source: U.S. Treasury   (Lena V. Groeger/ProPublica)
Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump   had become dire even before the pandemic . That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s   own description , the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.” The combination of Trump’s 2017 tax cut and the lack of any serious spending restraint helped both the deficit and the debt soar. So when the once-in-a-lifetime viral disaster slammed our country and we threw more than $3 trillion into COVID-19-related stimulus, there was no longer any margin for error.

Trump was a horrible PotUS and would be worse on a second term.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
7.2.14  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.13    3 months ago

What you forgot is that Speaker Pelosi demanded that Trump spend more:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Saturday that a two-year budget agreement with the Trump administration must include equal increases in defense and nondefense spending, plus additional money for a program intended to improve healthcare for military veterans.

"We all agree on the need to address the debt limit, but we also must reach an agreement on spending priorities based upon the principle of parity as soon as possible," the top Democrat in the House of Representatives told U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin in a July 13 letter.
Pelosi's office said it released the letter after she and Mnuchin spoke by phone on Saturday evening for 12 minutes.

"The two-year budget agreement we are working to achieve should provide equal increases in the defense base and the non-defense base over the next two fiscal years," the speaker said in the letter.
"But it also must provide $9 billion in additional funds for the VA MISSION Act in fiscal 2020 and $13 billion in additional funds in 2021," she wrote.

Pelosi sets spending demands for two-year budget deal | Reuters

That came as Trump was trying to rebuild the military that Obama had let go to hell.

Prior to that the previous Speaker had planned to pay for a tax cut with a replacement for Obamacare, which he thought was in the bag. The problem was that Republican constituents had already been receiving benefits from Obamacare and many Republican reps couldn't vote to replace it anymore, which as we all know led to one spiteful Senator turning his thumb down to what would have made the tax cut equitable.

What else do you have?
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.15  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.14    3 months ago

The PotUS is pegged with deficit spending and national debt.   The blame or credit goes to the PotUS because without his signature (unless overridden) the spending is not authorized.

Been like this forever, Vic.   Trump does not get a pass.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
7.2.16  evilone  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.13    3 months ago
As PotUS, he oversaw massive spending, created tax cuts that contributed to inflation, tried to talk down the pandemic in a futile attempt to keep the stock market high rather than directly act on the pandemic, and was an embarrassment to this nation as its voice and face.    

Tried to sell National Parks to corporations, tweeted top secret info from his cell phone, talked about using a nuke to calm a hurricane, killed trade agreements that politically hurt China, raised tariff's that ended up harming farmers and then had to bail them out with government spending, wanted a military parade with tanks past the White House, used undercover ICE Agents to illegally detain peaceful protesters, cleared out peaceful protesters for a photo op, oversaw the longest government shutdown in history.. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
7.2.17  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.14    3 months ago
That came as Trump was trying to rebuild the military that Obama had let go to hell.

Another fucking fallacy from a non veteran.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7.2.18  Kavika   replied to  Split Personality @7.2.17    3 months ago
Another fucking fallacy from a non veteran.

BINGO

 
 
 
Thomas
Masters Guide
7.2.19  Thomas  replied to  TᵢG @7.2.3    3 months ago
 As I noted, I am not for wholesale amnesty, it should be part of a comprehensive program designed to control illegal immigration while being practical.  

I know you disagree, but the "problem" with immigration is not the number of people but the extent to which they are vetted and cleared by the government. 

Trump is unhinged when he tells of millions of people released for prisons and psychiatric wards... 

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
7.2.20  charger 383  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.2.8    3 months ago

Felony for them being here and for felony for hiring them 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
7.2.21  TᵢG  replied to  Thomas @7.2.19    3 months ago

Our immigration (as with any nation) must be limited commensurate with our ability (and desire) to absorb new citizens.

Trump is unhinged ...

Of course.   Even when I generalize your comment it remains true.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.2.22  Sparty On  replied to  Split Personality @7.2.17    3 months ago

It appears the majority of Veterans, including this one, disagree with you. Most have an unfavorable view of the number Obama did on the military.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2017/01/08/the-obama-era-is-over-here-s-how-the-military-rates-his-legacy/[ ]

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
7.2.23  Split Personality  replied to  Kavika @7.2.18    3 months ago

at the same time "they" will tell you that Obama added $ 8.3 trillion to the national debt

much of that went into military pay, benefits, modernization and nuclear weapons modernization.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Senior Expert
7.2.24  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Split Personality @7.2.23    3 months ago

Yes, the amount for weapons system modernization remained relatively flat from Bush II to the Obama years.  Cost overruns for a aircraft carrier and the Joint Strike Fighter hurt the budget. Both Bush and Obama with both aisles in Congress failed to  offset the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Congress also resisted Pentagon efforts to close excess bases.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
7.2.25  Split Personality  replied to  Sparty On @7.2.22    3 months ago
Most have an unfavorable view of the number Obama did on the military.

In my experience most were Republicans first and always as was I at the time.  No big surprise there.

A five year old survey of 1,664 service members and quotes from the Heritage Foundation doesn't impress me.

Calling the force "hollow", "depleted", are always lies in my opinion.  Borderline treason by Russian standards.

Any flattening of spending was the fault of Congress and sequestration which was a bipartisan poison pill created in 2011

Funding was also down because the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were supposedly over, troops were withdrawn and the force was reduced by, 40,000. 

Condemning a Democratic president for lavishing money on social programs at the expense of national defense is red meat for Republican voters. And compared to the peak of war-time spending at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — and the expectations that Pentagon planners once had for how much spending would grow — the defense budget is down, as Trump charged.

So is the American troop presence in both countries, necessitating far less funding than was needed at the peak of the war. Whether Obama has deployed the "correct" American troop presence or pursued the right overall strategy for those ongoing wars and the newer conflict in Syria, are themselves the subject of separate debates.

Fact Check: Has President Obama 'Depleted' The Military? : NPR

The rest was Goebel's student Donald Trump repeating lies about the US Military to a gullible audience.

U.S. President Donald Trump inherited a "depleted" military from President Obama.
Rating:
rating-mostly-false.png
Mostly False

What's True

The U.S. national defense budget was slightly reduced during Obama's second term, in large part due to efforts by Congress to limit government spending and the withdrawal of troops from the Middle East.

What's False

However, the military wasn't "depleted" under Obama. The military never ran out of ammunition or went "years" without funding, as Trump claimed. The budget for national defense during Obama's term of office totaled nearly $6 trillion.

One claim that has often been repeated by U.S. President Donald Trump is that he rebuilt a military that was "totally depleted" by his predecessor, Barack Obama. Trump's grievance is based on a grain of truth — military spending was reduced during Obama's second term — but Trump's statements on the matter have combined distorted facts with outright falsehoods.

What Trump Has Said

The way Trump tells it, the United States military was in a complete shambles when he took office. Over the years, Trump has made a variety of statements in order to perpetuate this notion.

In one oft-repeated story, Trump illustrated his claim that Obama depleted the military by saying that the armed forces had "no ammunition" when he took office. In October 2019, for instance, Trump   said : "When I took over our military, we did not have ammunition."

This is   not true . The military did not run out of ammunition during the Obama administration (or during any other administration, as far as we can tell).

Did Trump Inherit a 'Depleted' Military From Obama? | Snopes.com

We have had family members in the Army, Air Force, Navy and 2 Marines.  In my experience it is always the Corps who think they are right 100% of time and their views are unshakable in spite of the facts.

So it appears that Vic isn’t the one here who is full of shit.

Keep enjoying the brown Kool Aid.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
7.2.26  Split Personality  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @7.2.24    3 months ago
Congress also resisted Pentagon efforts to close excess bases.

Every BRAC hearing was a shit show to save jobs and votes.

Willow Grove has been closed for years since the vote to close and promises of funding to clean up the environmental waste from decades of spills and leaks of dozens of chemical cleaners, fuel and deicing foam.

Now it just sits vacant waiting for the environmental cleanup funding that Congress promised..

yay BRAC...

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
7.2.27  Sparty On  replied to  Sparty On @7.2.22    3 months ago

[]

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8  TᵢG    3 months ago
"Kamala Harris' deadly destruction of America's borders is completely and totally disqualifying for her to be president. You can't have a person like this as president."

The only PotUS who has engaged in fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement in a failed attempt to steal a presidential election believes that a failure to control the border disqualifies his rival.  

Trump supporters continue to ignore that their nominee is a scoundrel who will abuse the office of the presidency for his own whims while desperately trying to find ways to bring Harris down to Trump's level.

This is an act of futility and shows just how detrimental blind partisanship is to our nation.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.1  devangelical  replied to  TᵢG @8    3 months ago
This is an act of futility and shows just how detrimental blind partisanship is to our nation.

some of them haven't even hit rock bottom yet...

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.2  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @8    3 months ago

I posted the exact text from the election interference indictment in a comment yesterday. The couple people who responded did nothing but try to change the subject. Its pitiful how little they know or want to know. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @8.2    3 months ago

It is pitiful that people will knowingly act to give the power of the presidency to a proven scoundrel and traitor simply because of partisanship.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Expert
8.2.17  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @8.2    3 months ago

This is not directed to John. The rest of this thread was deleted for multiple violations. Knock it off. Only warning.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.2.18  devangelical  replied to  JohnRussell @8.2    3 months ago
Its pitiful how little they know or want to know.

it's difficult for them to discuss a subject their favorite media outlets don't report...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8    3 months ago
rump supporters continue to ignore that their nominee is a scoundrel who will abuse the office of the presidency for his own whims while desperately trying to find ways to bring Harris down to Trump's level.

You keep forgetting he was President and an excellent one btw.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3    3 months ago

Trump was a horrible PotUS.   Just amazing that someone could declare that a traitor who engaged in fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement in an attempt to steal a presidential election would be deemed as an excellent PotUS.   A clown who tried to talk down the pandemic to (misguided) keep the stock market high rather than take immediate action.   A proven con-man who demonstrably will abuse the power of his office for his own personal whims.

Just amazing.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.1    3 months ago
Trump was a horrible PotUS.   

But you can't show us how.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
8.3.3  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.2    3 months ago

election interference in georgia, the big lie, 1/6/21, willful retention of classified documents and obstructing the process of their rightful and warranted return.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @8.3.3    3 months ago

Radical rule

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.3.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.2    3 months ago
s an excellent PotUS.   A clown who tried to talk down the pandemic to (misguided) keep the stock market high rather than take immediate action. 

he just did

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.3.5    3 months ago
he just did

No that is the media propaganda he is repeating.

Trump followed every suggestion Dr Fauci made. He also got a vaccine developed in record time.

Finally, more Americans died under Biden with the vaccine, than under Trump before it was developed.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.7  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.1    3 months ago

this is exactly why he should have gone on trial in all of his cases before the election

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.3.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.6    3 months ago

I'm getting out of here before I say something that gets me suspended. TiG is doing an excellent job of educating you and doesn't need my help

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.2    3 months ago

he just did

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.10  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.6    3 months ago

I posted, yesterday,  the exact text of the indictment charging trump with trying to steal the election , and all you could do was try and change the subject.

you were busted on all this long ago

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.7    3 months ago

Why? You got the conviction you wanted.  Oh wait, that is going to be overturned right after the election.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.9    3 months ago

No, he didn't. He indicted Dr Fauci.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.10    3 months ago
the exact text of the indictment charging trump with trying to steal the election

What court issued that indictment?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.13    3 months ago

still trying to change the subject

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.15  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.14    3 months ago

You mean it was a political indictment?

No shit!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.3.16  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.6    3 months ago
No that is the media propaganda he is repeating.

We all saw him do it.   The evidence is overwhelming.   You produce yet another absurdly weak argument trying to suggest that what we all witnessed is merely propaganda.  

As for talking down the pandemic, here, Vic, read what this clown said (a sampling):  

Here is a sampling of what Trump has said about the coronavirus threat:

Jan. 22

The day that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed what it then thought was the   first case of the coronavirus   in the United States, Trump   told a CNBC reporter   that the country had it "completely under control" and suggested that he was not concerned about a pandemic.

"We have it totally under control. It's one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It's going to be just fine," he said.

Feb. 27

During a February meeting with Black leaders, held as U.S. health officials warned that the coronavirus pandemic might stay with the country for some time, Trump said a "miracle" might make the coronavirus pandemic "disappear."

"It's going to disappear. One day — it's like a miracle — it will disappear,"   Trump said.   "And from our shores, we — you know, it could get worse before it gets better. It could maybe go away. We'll see what happens. Nobody really knows."

March 11

During an   Oval Office address , Trump said that for "the vast majority of Americans, the risk is very, very low" — though he did warn that the "elderly population must be very, very careful." That same day, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a member of the White House's coronavirus task force,   told members of Congress   at a House hearing that "bottom line, it's going to get worse."

How much worse, Fauci said, would depend on the country's ability to contain the "influx of people who are infected" coming from other countries and "the ability to contain and mitigate within our own country."

April 3

When the CDC made its initial   recommendation   that people wear cloth or fabric face coverings, Trump   said   it was going to be "really, a voluntary thing" and emphasized that he would not do it.

" You can do it. You don't have to do it. I'm choosing not to do it, but some people may want to do it, and that's OK. It may be good. Probably will. They're making a recommendation. It's only a recommendation," Trump said.

Trump — who stresses how often he and the people around him are tested —   wore a mask in public   for the first time in July, for a visit to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

May 19

Trump   told reporters   that he viewed the high number of U.S. cases of the coronavirus as a "badge of honor" and a reflection of the country's testing capacity.

"When we have a lot of cases, I don't look at that as a bad thing," the president said. "I look at that in a certain respect as being a good thing, because it means our testing is much better. So, if we were testing a million people instead of 14 million people, we would have far few cases, right?

"So, I view it as a badge of honor. Really, it's a badge of honor," he added. "It's a great tribute to the testing and all of the work that a lot of professionals have done."

Days later, the U.S. recorded   100,000 known deaths   from COVID-19.

July 19

During an interview with   Fox News Sunday , the president seemed to suggest that some people without serious symptoms were being tested and confirmed as positives and added to the total number of infections.

"Many of those cases are young people that would heal in a day," Trump   said . "They have the sniffles, and we put it down as a test." He added that many of those sick "are going to get better very quickly."

At the time of Trump's interview, more than 3.7 million coronavirus cases had been   confirmed   in the United States, and more than 140,000 Americans had died.

Sept. 21

During a   campaign speech   in Swanton, Ohio, Trump claimed without evidence that the coronavirus "affects virtually nobody," downplaying the risk of the extent of the pandemic and the danger that it poses to individuals.

In that campaign speech, he suggested that the virus is dangerous only to older people with heart problems and preexisting conditions, sentiments that go against the guidance of most public health experts.

"It affects elderly people, elderly people with heart problems, if they have other problems, that's what it really affects, that's it. In some states thousands of people — nobody young — below the age of 18, like nobody — they have a strong immune system — who knows?" Trump said.

"Take your hat off to the young because they have a hell of an immune system. It affects virtually nobody," he added. "It's an amazing thing — by the way, open your schools!"

Deal with reality.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.17  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.16    3 months ago

it would be nice if magas would deal with reality, but i'm afraid we are years away from that happening

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.18  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.16    3 months ago

This is from October of 2020.

Dr Fauci and all the leftist "fact checkers" deny it now:

Anthony Fauci, the U.S. government's top infectious disease specialist, said he advised the president to "shut the country down" in the earlier stages of the pandemic. He said this was the most significant decision he has taken during the COVID-19 pandemic during a virtual Q&A session hosted by the College of the Holy Cross in Massachusetts on Tuesday.

Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, was responding to a question from one student regarding his most crucial decision of the pandemic.

"It was a decision to make a recommendation to the president," Fauci said. "It wasn't my decision that I could implement."

"When it became clear that we had community spread in the country, with a few cases of community spread—this was way before there was a major explosion like we saw in the northeastern corridor driven by New York City metropolitan area—I recommended to the president that we shut the country down.

"That was a very difficult decision because I knew it would have very serious economic consequences, which it did. But there was no way to stop the explosive spread that we knew would occur if we didn't do that."

Fauci Says He Told Trump to 'Shut the Country Down' - Newsweek

Then President Trump loosened restrictions in order to get a vaccine developed in 10 months. Something Dr Fauci said was impossible.


The media lied so that your POS Biden could win an election.

Accept FACTS!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.3.19  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.18    3 months ago

Strange that you think this rebuts my point.   I guess you did not even read what I posted.

My point was that Trump was trying to talk down the pandemic (to keep the stock market high) rather than take action.   Hello?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.20  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.19    3 months ago
My point was that Trump was trying to talk down the pandemic (to keep the stock market high)

Trump thought everyone would blame him for the pandemic.  It was actually a great opportunity for him to show real leadership in a crisis, but I guess he didnt have it in him. 

 
 
 
George
Junior Expert
8.3.21  George  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.18    3 months ago

[deleted][]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.22  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.6    3 months ago

No, the truth

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.23  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.16    3 months ago

I was working at the University of Maryland Hospital at the time and was sent home mid-March for 'two weeks' and that two weeks turned into a year or so . . . . . . .

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.24  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.18    3 months ago

Accept FACTS!

Yes, please!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.25  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.19    3 months ago

And mine was that Trump followed the advice of the "experts" all the way through.

On Jan. 21 - the day the first COVID-19 case in the U.S. was confirmed - Fauci appeared on conservative Newsmax TV. "Bottom line, we don’t have to worry about this one, right?" asked Greg Kelly, the host.

Fauci said, "Obviously, you need to take it seriously and do the kind of things the (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the Department of Homeland Security is doing. But this is not a major threat to the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about."

PolitiFact | Did Fauci tell U.S. 'not to worry about' coronavirus?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.3.26  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.25    3 months ago

You are still trying to discredit Dr. Fauci??    

Dr. Fauci and other experts did not advise Trump to say the following:    

Jan. 22

The day that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed what it then thought was the   first case of the coronavirus   in the United States, Trump   told a CNBC reporter   that the country had it "completely under control" and suggested that he was not concerned about a pandemic.

"We have it totally under control. It's one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It's going to be just fine," he said.

Feb. 27

During a February meeting with Black leaders, held as U.S. health officials warned that the coronavirus pandemic might stay with the country for some time, Trump said a "miracle" might make the coronavirus pandemic "disappear."

"It's going to disappear. One day — it's like a miracle — it will disappear,"   Trump said.   "And from our shores, we — you know, it could get worse before it gets better. It could maybe go away. We'll see what happens. Nobody really knows."

March 11

During an   Oval Office address , Trump said that for "the vast majority of Americans, the risk is very, very low" — though he did warn that the "elderly population must be very, very careful." That same day, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a member of the White House's coronavirus task force,   told members of Congress   at a House hearing that "bottom line, it's going to get worse."

How much worse, Fauci said, would depend on the country's ability to contain the "influx of people who are infected" coming from other countries and "the ability to contain and mitigate within our own country."

April 3

When the CDC made its initial   recommendation   that people wear cloth or fabric face coverings, Trump   said   it was going to be "really, a voluntary thing" and emphasized that he would not do it.

" You can do it. You don't have to do it. I'm choosing not to do it, but some people may want to do it, and that's OK. It may be good. Probably will. They're making a recommendation. It's only a recommendation," Trump said.

Trump — who stresses how often he and the people around him are tested —   wore a mask in public   for the first time in July, for a visit to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

May 19

Trump   told reporters   that he viewed the high number of U.S. cases of the coronavirus as a "badge of honor" and a reflection of the country's testing capacity.

"When we have a lot of cases, I don't look at that as a bad thing," the president said. "I look at that in a certain respect as being a good thing, because it means our testing is much better. So, if we were testing a million people instead of 14 million people, we would have far few cases, right?

"So, I view it as a badge of honor. Really, it's a badge of honor," he added. "It's a great tribute to the testing and all of the work that a lot of professionals have done."

Days later, the U.S. recorded   100,000 known deaths   from COVID-19.

July 19

During an interview with   Fox News Sunday , the president seemed to suggest that some people without serious symptoms were being tested and confirmed as positives and added to the total number of infections.

"Many of those cases are young people that would heal in a day," Trump   said . "They have the sniffles, and we put it down as a test." He added that many of those sick "are going to get better very quickly."

At the time of Trump's interview, more than 3.7 million coronavirus cases had been   confirmed   in the United States, and more than 140,000 Americans had died.

Sept. 21

During a   campaign speech   in Swanton, Ohio, Trump claimed without evidence that the coronavirus "affects virtually nobody," downplaying the risk of the extent of the pandemic and the danger that it poses to individuals.

In that campaign speech, he suggested that the virus is dangerous only to older people with heart problems and preexisting conditions, sentiments that go against the guidance of most public health experts.

"It affects elderly people, elderly people with heart problems, if they have other problems, that's what it really affects, that's it. In some states thousands of people — nobody young — below the age of 18, like nobody — they have a strong immune system — who knows?" Trump said.

"Take your hat off to the young because they have a hell of an immune system. It affects virtually nobody," he added. "It's an amazing thing — by the way, open your schools!"

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.27  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.26    3 months ago

Still focused on things said rather than what was done?

It’s been said that the hardest words to utter in the English language are “I am sorry,” “I need help” and “I was wrong.”

Lately, you can add to that: “Trump was right.”

Two such admissions came from, of all places, the White House last month. First, President Joe Biden credited the former administration’s role in making vaccines available with the promised “warp speed.” It was a rare compliment offered by Biden to his predecessor, although others have said as much, including former Biden aide Andy Slavitt, who  said  last year, “I would absolutely tip my hat. … The Trump administration made sure that we got in record time a vaccine up and out.”

Later, Biden  told  governors on a conference call, “There is no federal solution (to COVID-19). This gets solved at the state level.” People on social media were quick to point out that this was basically Trump’s position. Trump told governors in April 2020 they would be “ calling their own shots ” on their respective states’ pandemic response.

Similarly, in 2020, Trump wanted schools to  stay open , which is what Biden  said Tuesday  needs to happen despite some calls to  temporarily return to virtual learning  amid the omicron surge.

Here's NBC's   @TODAYshow   passing off Biden's comments about Covid and testing not having a "federal solution" but rather "at a state level" like it's no big deal.

A year, year and a half ago? NBC would have lost its mind with Trump. Oh, wait, they did.   pic.twitter.com/G4ueXIwQPU
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck)   December 28, 2021

While largely critical of Trump, KFF (formerly Kaiser Family Foundation), a nonprofit that provides health policy news and analysis, credits Trump for  the administration’s actions  taken before the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 to be a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Trump established a White House  COVID-19 task force  on Jan. 27, 2020, and days later, declared a public health emergency and barred foreign nationals coming from China from entering the U.S. These actions, of course, stand in contrast to Trump’s cheery insistence that the virus would soon be history, but his attitude was consistent with what he later told Bob Woodward: that he’d deliberately downplayed the threat so Americans wouldn’t panic.

Few people would say that’s an effective strategy — or even an ethical one — in the face of a virus that has now killed more than 800,000 Americans. National Review editor Rich Lowry  wrote  that Trump’s strategy was a mistake, one that made him seem “out of touch with reality, an incredibly perilous position for a president.”

But now, looking at what COVID-19 has wrought under two presidents, Lowry is  asking  where’s the apology due Trump from people who blamed him for virus deaths in 2020. Lowry notes that during one of the presidential debates, Biden said, “Anyone who is responsible for that many deaths should not remain as president of the United States of America.”

In fact, as it turned out, more Americans died of COVID-19 in 2021 than 2020, according to  data  from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Johns Hopkins University. And while this was in part because of the emergence of more contagious variants, these deaths occurred under Biden’s watch with vaccines available and no  shortage of personal protective equipment  like the U.S. saw in 2020.

Did Trump or Biden handle the pandemic better? Here’s what we know | Opinion – Deseret News

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
8.3.28  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.27    3 months ago
Still focused on things said rather than what was done?

No, Vic, focused on big picture vs. little picture and focused on what Trump did when he had a choice vs. what he was forced to do by the situation.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
8.3.29  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @8.3.28    3 months ago

That was a great line.

I have to always give Jennifer Graham the credit for it.

 
 
 
Thomas
Masters Guide
8.3.30  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.29    3 months ago
that was a great line.

I have to always give Jennifer Graham the credit for it.

I bet you think it was perfect.

 
 
 
Thomas
Masters Guide
8.3.31  Thomas  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.3.25    3 months ago

"right now" are the operational words in that sentence. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10  Snuffy    3 months ago

A question that I recently thought of. With Harris and the willing media doing all it can to remove the negatives from her past and attempt to paint her as a moderate, will she lose votes from the hard-left progressives? Will she lose votes due to her comments on Israel? The honeymoon phase appears to be reaching it's end, what will November bring? Gonna be interesting to watch. I suggest a lot of your favorite beverage...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
10.1  devangelical  replied to  Snuffy @10    3 months ago
With Harris and the willing media doing all it can to remove the negatives from her past

I'd be concerned about how far maga wants to reach into the past. it's not like trump is short of negative material.

democrats have a monopoly on friendly media? friendly media outlets that haven't settled for millions, with even more litigation pending? the honeymoon is over? so much so that a trump friendly immigrant billionaire feels the need to suspend fund raising on his social media site? it's starting to seem like only negative trump news will steal the spotlight from harris enthusiasm, temporarily. I think trump should keep dodging a debate date and keep making excuses until november. harris could take trump to the woodpile and his blindly partisan sycophants would still think he won, if he told them so. trump should go for it, he's got nothing to lose in their eyes...

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  devangelical @10.1    3 months ago

How far is too far in the past? Wasn't it self-proclaimed liberals who started cancel culture by finding issues from 10+ years in the past to cancel speakers, comedians and other public figures? Is 4 years too far back to look? Because only 4 years ago Harris was on record as stating she was 100% against fracking, yet now that she's trying to win in an oil producing state that is a battleground state (Pennsylvania) that she's backed away from that statement? She fully supported Biden's electric car mandate yet now that Michigan is in play she's backing away from that as well. How well are her statements that ICE must be disbanded and states should stop hiring police due to over-policing going to play in boarder states? 

So just how far back is still fair game? 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
10.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Snuffy @10.1.1    3 months ago
boarder states

... uh, like california and hawaii? I'll probably need a definition of that term...

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  devangelical @10.1.2    3 months ago

So your only retort is a spelling error?  What a lame reply. maybe next time actually answer the questions posed unless there are no talking points yet generated for the questions. Guess they cannot answer questions unless the answers are party approved talking points.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
10.2  evilone  replied to  Snuffy @10    3 months ago

In an...

...attempt to paint her as a moderate, will she lose votes from the hard-left progressives? Will she lose votes due to her comments on Israel?

I'm sure she will, but as you well know politicians have a balancing act when it comes to campaigning. They almost always court the wings to win the primary and then flip-flop back to the center when it comes to the general. It always costs them some votes. It's just a matter of how many.

Specifically to Harris (and I said this when she primaried last time) she likes to act Progressive, but she's never really done anything particularly Progressive. The Progressives have constantly bashed her on her prosecutor work in CA as being too hard on offenders. Despite any comments she has, her official platform on Israel will be much the same as all Dems have had for the last half century. 

The honeymoon phase appears to be reaching it's end, what will November bring?

She's still raising cash faster than people can log into the internet to give it to her and her numbers in places that count seem (it's too early to really tell for sure yet) to be trending up.

Gonna be interesting to watch. I suggest a lot of your favorite beverage...

No doubts there. I have a lot of beer and (since I'm in WI) cheese popcorn... 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
10.2.1  Sparty On  replied to  evilone @10.2    3 months ago

Yep, looking back to Biden’s “moderate” act in 2020.

All moderates who fell for that bullshit should be really pissed.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10.2.2  Snuffy  replied to  evilone @10.2    3 months ago
I have a lot of beer and (since I'm in WI) cheese popcorn... 

256

Oh man..  I do miss those fresh cheese curds. Down here in Arizona we have something they call "cheese curds" but it's a very cheap imitation at best. They have all the taste of salty American cheese...  damn.   But then again, we do have an advantage down here as NOBODY has ever died of a heart attack from having to shovel the sunshine out of their driveway...   LOL

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
10.2.3  evilone  replied to  Sparty On @10.2.1    3 months ago
All moderates who fell for that bullshit should be really pissed.

When one is so far to the right all acts must look progressive?

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
10.2.4  evilone  replied to  Snuffy @10.2.2    3 months ago
Oh man..  I do miss those fresh cheese curds.

I can send you some.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
10.2.5  Sparty On  replied to  evilone @10.2.3    3 months ago

If you are talking about me, you have no idea what you are talking about.    My “conservatism” could only be described as “far right”  in this liberal echo chamber.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10.2.6  Snuffy  replied to  evilone @10.2.3    3 months ago

The problem with Harris is one doesn't have to look all that far back to see her progressive stance. Look at her talking points for the 2020 primaries before she dropped out, and all the support she has given as VP for the progressive plans around the Green New Deal, defund the police, abolish ICE, etc. 

Now that she's running for president, she's getting all of that removed from her pedigree and attempting to appear as a more moderate person. As the electorate saw the same in 2020 for Biden who campaigned as a moderate but once getting into office has appeared to champion more far left issues, it remains to be seen how that will impact Harris this November.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.2.7  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @10.2.6    3 months ago

I predict a BLUE WAVE

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
10.2.8  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @10.2.7    3 months ago

Good luck!

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
10.2.9  evilone  replied to  Snuffy @10.2.6    3 months ago
The problem with Harris is one doesn't have to look all that far back to see her progressive stance. Look at her talking points for the 2020 primaries before she dropped out, and all the support she has given as VP for the progressive plans around the Green New Deal, defund the police, abolish ICE, etc. 

As I said she wanted to present herself as a Progressive in the 2020 Primaries. She was attacked by Progressives for her prosecutor's record. Her record in the Senate was thin, but her record as prosecutor in California was tough on crime. As the AG she chose to largely sit out of the debate. She was hammered by both sides in 2014 when Prop 47 was being debated in CA, but she wouldn't give an opinion. In 2016 when Jerry Brown wanted to release some offenders early, she again gave no opinion.

She didn't do much as Senator - gave a speech on the DREAM Act and worked to remove lynching from federal law. She was on the Intelligence, Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, but was criticized in 2020 for having really not having gotten any laws passed. 

She is a Dem and politically savvy is about the best I can say for where she stands on any given point. I expect she will mostly toe the moderate Dem line, including green energy initiatives that don't really do a whole lot, but make progressives feel as if she's trying to do something.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
10.2.10  evilone  replied to  Tessylo @10.2.7    3 months ago
I predict a BLUE WAVE

I predict both the House and the Senate will flip and it will still be by very slim margins. It's simply way to early to tell where the Presidency is going. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
10.2.11  Tessylo  replied to  evilone @10.2.10    3 months ago

okey dokey

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
10.2.12  Snuffy  replied to  Tessylo @10.2.7    3 months ago

Here's a blue wave for ya....  About what we can expect from this years politics.

256

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
11  Sparty On    3 months ago

There’s a reason a majority in the military tradition tend to support conservatives. [deleted][]

 
 

Who is online

Sparty On
Tessylo
Dismayed Patriot
JohnRussell
Tacos!
Hallux
MonsterMash
Kavika
Drakkonis


325 visitors