Trump On Eminent Domain

[revelarts]

Donald Trump: ‘Eminent Domain Is Wonderful’

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425212/donald-trump-eminent-domain-wonderful
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425212/donald-trump-eminent-domain-wonderful


Donald Trump sees a simple reason why so many conservatives disagree with him on eminent domain, the controversial power by which the government seizes private land for development projects: They just don’t understand the issue as well as he does. “I fully understand the conservative approach, but I don’t think it was explained to most conservatives,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier that aired yesterday. “Nobody knows this better than I do, because I’ve built a lot of buildings in Manhattan and you’ll have twelve sites and you’ll get eleven and you’ll have the one holdout, and you end up building around them. I know it better than anybody.” Eminent domain may seem like an obscure issue, but the Club for Growth Action Fund found it important enough to spotlight in an attack ad against Trump. The ad focused on Trump’s full-throated support for the Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London, which allowed state and local governments to seize land from one private owner and give it to another private owner to further economic development. Many conservatives saw the decision as expanding the power of elected officials and wealthy developers at the expense of the private landholders who often stand in the way of their ambitions. In a perfect irony, the state and city spent $78 million to purchase and bulldoze the home of Susette Kelo . . . and then the developer couldn’t finance the project. (The site remains an empty lot today.) As Ilya Somin put it, “Trump did not merely claim that the Kelo v. New London decision was legally correct; he argued that it was ‘good’ to give government the power to forcibly displace homeowners and small businesses and transfer their property to influential developers on the theory that doing so might promote ‘economic development.’”​.....

[Perianne]

National Review. Yuch.

[Gunny]

Donald Trump: ‘Eminent Domain Is Wonderful’

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425212/donald-trump-eminent-domain-wonderful
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425212/donald-trump-eminent-domain-wonderful

I hate that law and think it's BS. The government says you're moving and offers you 1/4 what your property is worth. And notice it usually happens only where people live who cannot afford to fight the government.

The Alamodome is one of my biggest pet peeves. First, Henry Cisneros guarantees it would get SA an NFL team. Then he says it would be paid for by a hike in VIA prices (VIA is the city bus). He neglects to explain that VIA is the City of San Antonio, so it actually turned out to be a city tax hike. Then he picks the one little place where the blacks live in SA, and runs them out to build his albatross.

The Spurs refused to play in it. They played there for a couple of years then got their own basketball arena. So all THAT for WHAT? They have monster truck shows and tractor pulls in the thing. A low-rent college game once a year. Been twenty years and do we have an NFL team? NO.

Same happened in 67 when they built I-37 for Hemisfair 68. Oddly enough, same neighborhood. :rolleyes:

[sundaydriver]

Yeah, being legally allowed to obtain someone's property because you want to build something that will create more tax revenue than what is currently there. That's just plain wrong!

[fj1200]

National Review. Yuch.

But what's your opinion on expansions of government power?

[jimnyc]

I know he tried to use this in AC with a woman who wouldn't move. Has he been using it or suing for such things since? Which dates, can someone post them?

Not to mention, this won't be something that the POTUS will be working on, nor will one be using EO's in order to use eminent domain. Has that been done before, precedent of a POTUS doing such?

[revelarts]

I know he tried to use this in AC with a woman who wouldn't move. Has he been using it or suing for such things since? Which dates, can someone post them?

Not to mention, this won't be something that the POTUS will be working on, nor will one be using EO's in order to use eminent domain. Has that been done before, precedent of a POTUS doing such?


http://www.justice.gov/enrd/history-federal-use-eminent-domain

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Carmack

https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt5bfrag4_user.html

the agencies below the president are the ones that'd follow thru on this.
(Watch out Bundy ranch)
And Look, According to president Bush and Obama we are at WAR, I suspect that a president could claim war powers to take land for "the safety" of the nation.
they've taken our other rights why not land as well, if it's going to keep us safe from the scary Muslims? Would you rather have your land or be DEAD?

[jimnyc]

http://www.justice.gov/enrd/history-federal-use-eminent-domain

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Carmack

https://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt5bfrag4_user.html

the agencies below the president are the ones that'd follow thru on this.
(Watch out Bundy ranch)
And Look, According to president Bush and Obama we are at WAR, I suspect that a president could claim war powers to take land for "the safety" of the nation.
they've taken our other rights why not land as well, if it's going to keep us safe from the scary Muslims? Would you rather have your land or be DEAD?

Without reading extensively into all the links - are they executive orders done by presidents? Wouldn't congress need to be involved?

I fail to see how Trump having tried this in the 90's matters at all today. It's not like he's going to get into office and unilaterally make changes from within the oval office. Again - non-story. Trump having tried this in the 90's with one old lady means nothing today about him trying to run for POTUS.

[jimnyc]

And Look, According to president Bush and Obama we are at WAR, I suspect that a president could claim war powers to take land for "the safety" of the nation.
they've taken our other rights why not land as well, if it's going to keep us safe from the scary Muslims? Would you rather have your land or be DEAD?

Has Trump said ANYTHING at all about taking land for the safety of the nation? Or are you just making things up to make him sound worse? I think Bush and Obama should rest on their own work, and Trump should judged on what he does actually say.

[sundaydriver]

What matters is our Supreme Court found this to be okay and is being used by developers and cities to take peoples property to hopefully gain more revenue. Trump has only said; he likes the idea, not that he does it every day.

[revelarts]

Without reading extensively into all the links - are they executive orders done by presidents? Wouldn't congress need to be involved?

I fail to see how Trump having tried this in the 90's matters at all today. It's not like he's going to get into office and unilaterally make changes from within the oval office. Again - non-story. Trump having tried this in the 90's with one old lady means nothing today about him trying to run for POTUS.


Has Trump said ANYTHING at all about taking land for the safety of the nation? Or are you just making things up to make him sound worse? I think Bush and Obama should rest on their own work, and Trump should judged on what he does actually say.


"are they executive orders done by presidents? Wouldn't congress need to be involved?"
that is the question you asked. a HOW and if he'd have the authority question.
I answered that question.

Look I don't know what he'll do, but as you point out he's done it before, and he says he loves it still.
That tells me that IF it comes up during his presidency that he WILL use it with little to no hesitation or qualm.

you complained on another day that i should find out his views. that's what i'm doing.
So now i know he's FOR that type of thing if a situation arises.
Maybe you trust him to "use it wisely" or assume that since he didn't mention it's use specifically that OF COURSE he would NEVER do it... and no one should even think or imagine it.
OK if that's your view. I don't know you tell me.

But sorry I'd rather have the knowledge in my back pocket.
This guy doesn't mind using Eminent Domain AT ALL if in his opinion it's justified.
He believes personal property rights are subject to Gov't seizure on his opinion of better use.

It's a view i don't agree with much.
maybe you do.
no problem

[jimnyc]

What matters is our Supreme Court found this to be okay and is being used by developers and cities to take peoples property to hopefully gain more revenue. Trump has only said; he likes the idea, not that he does it every day.

That should be what matters the most. Over the years I have heard this endless times - "Supreme court decisions are the supreme law of the land". And like I mentioned as well, he's not going to do anything unilaterally. So I don't even see this as a "Trump" thing - unless he is somehow campaigning on this? I think it's more of a "let's use something from 20 years ago against him, even though it's not something that has anything to do with him and a presidency".

[jimnyc]

It's a view i don't agree with.
maybe you do.
no problem

It's not that I agree or disagree, it's just not something that the president is going to be controlling. I'm as worried about the POTUS unilaterally taking away property, as I am worrying about him changing the flavor of my favorite bubble gum. But if you think he will do something with eminent domain as prez, then don't vote for him. I'm sure this completely changed your mind and now you are no longer gonna vote for him! LOL

[Gunny]

I know he tried to use this in AC with a woman who wouldn't move. Has he been using it or suing for such things since? Which dates, can someone post them?

Not to mention, this won't be something that the POTUS will be working on, nor will one be using EO's in order to use eminent domain. Has that been done before, precedent of a POTUS doing such?

Why would the date matter. He's an opportunist. He'll justify anything with circular reasoning and use any law he can to get what he wants.

[Gunny]

Without reading extensively into all the links - are they executive orders done by presidents? Wouldn't congress need to be involved?

I fail to see how Trump having tried this in the 90's matters at all today. It's not like he's going to get into office and unilaterally make changes from within the oval office. Again - non-story. Trump having tried this in the 90's with one old lady means nothing today about him trying to run for POTUS.

Because you don't want to. What Hillary did in the 90s on the other hand seems to be biting her in the ass. Can't have 2 sets of rules.

[sundaydriver]

That should be what matters the most. Over the years I have heard this endless times - "Supreme court decisions are the supreme law of the land". And like I mentioned as well, he's not going to do anything unilaterally. So I don't even see this as a "Trump" thing - unless he is somehow campaigning on this? I think it's more of a "let's use something from 20 years ago against him, even though it's not something that has anything to do with him and a presidency".

What matters to me the most is his agreement to condemning and confiscation of personal property for others financial gain.

[jimnyc]

Why would the date matter. He's an opportunist. He'll justify anything with circular reasoning and use any law he can to get what he wants.

Because it shows that it's not something he is doing daily.

But AGAIN, it's not something that the POTUS will be working on. This would be congress or the SC. Unless those Trump haters think he is going to executive order his way into property.

[jimnyc]

Because you don't want to. What Hillary did in the 90s on the other hand seems to be biting her in the ass. Can't have 2 sets of rules.

What are you talking about? I don't want to what? And what sets of rules are you talking about?

[jimnyc]

What matters to me the most is his agreement to condemning and confiscation of personal property for others financial gain.

I wouldn't vote for him then, if what he tried to do in AC in the 90's bugs you. And if you think he'll somehow do the same in the capacity of the president, then I definitely wouldn't vote for him. I am almost 100% against eminent domain. Still doesn't bug me though, as I know the president, any president, isn't going to be sitting back using eminent domain via executive orders and such. I'll worry more about congress trying such crap.

[sundaydriver]

I wouldn't vote for him then, if what he tried to do in AC in the 90's bugs you. And if you think he'll somehow do the same in the capacity of the president, then I definitely wouldn't vote for him. I am almost 100% against eminent domain. Still doesn't bug me though, as I know the president, any president, isn't going to be sitting back using eminent domain via executive orders and such. I'll worry more about congress trying such crap.

Trump isn't my guy and never was. The Kelo Decision was a town vs citizens. Think local level because that's where it's being used.

[jimnyc]

Trump isn't my guy and never was. The Kelo Decision was a town vs citizens. Think local level because that's where it's being used.

That's how I see it. He may be an ass for using it as a businessman, or in AC or whatever - but I see him possibly using it as POTUS as a non-story. It's simply not happening.

[revelarts]

It's not that I agree or disagree, it's just not something that the president is going to be controlling. I'm as worried about the POTUS unilaterally taking away property, as I am worrying about him changing the flavor of my favorite bubble gum. But if you think he will do something with eminent domain as prez, then don't vote for him. I'm sure this completely changed your mind and now you are no longer gonna vote for him! LOLWell here's my thing i like to.. as you advised me.. to understand where candidates are coming from on the issues.
You should know i'm a issues based person. I look for candidates general views on issues and past actions to get a feel for what they MIGHT do in the future.
and in my thinking i like to know what are the range of options a candidate or politician BELIEVES they have.

I don't assume the best or not worry that it "probably won't effect me". I wonder how it might play for others around the country and elsewhere and how it might play long term if others in the office later assume the same options are available. And how it jibes with my traditional understanding of the constitution.

you seem to think --I could be wrong- that whatever the supreme court does makes everything basically OK. And we should not be concerned about it or try to limit any rulings effects. thats what it seems like you're impling when you and sunnydaydriver say thing like


What matters is our Supreme Court found this to be okay and is being used by developers and cities to take peoples property to hopefully gain more revenue. Trump has only said; he likes the idea, not that he does it every day.
That should be what matters the most. Over the years I have heard this endless times - "Supreme court decisions are the supreme law of the land"
I could be completely wrong, if so i apologize. I mean no harm seriously.
i just got that impression. please clarify your view if i'm mistaken. don't take my head off for an honest misreading of your view.



But on topic , you know I'm not a fan of a lot of W Bush's actions or words but i also give credit where it's due.
and after the Kelo case a lot of people on the Right and left were upset about the eminent domain issue and this is one of the GOOD things that Bush did about it...

Bush Limits Eminent-Domain SeizuresAssociated Press
Saturday, June 24, 2006
President Bush ordered yesterday that federal agencies cannot seize private property except for public projects such as hospitals or roads. The move occurred on the one-year anniversary of a controversial Supreme Court decision that gave local governments broad power to bulldoze people's homes for commercial development.
The majority opinion in the Supreme Court case involving New London, Conn., homeowners limited the homeowners' rights by saying local governments could take private property for economic-development-related projects because the motive was to bring more jobs and tax revenue to a city.
But the court also noted that states are free to pass additional protections, and many have prohibited "takings" for shopping malls or other private projects.
Many conservatives -- particularly in the West -- see the decision as a dangerous interpretation of the "takings clause" in the Constitution's Fifth Amendment, which allows the government to seize property for public use with just compensation. They have argued such takings are an unjustified governmental abuse of individual rights. Cities, though, backed by some liberals, see the takings power as an important tool for urban renewal projects crucial to revitalizing cities....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/23/AR2006062301722.html

I and "many" other conservatives (maybe not REAL conservatives) are concerned about how Presidents view eminent domain.
Sunday driver and FJ seems to think that the gov't knows what best for private property. Trump and Sunday D seem to think more taxes revenue is what's best.. mm hmm. taxes.

I'm not with you there Sunday.
Jim you don't think it's something he's got any power to influence, but Bush's acts says you're mistaken.

I see it as a stance that is a real potential problem.
Bush seemed to think it was a problem as well and AS PRESIDENT made some moves to LIMIT the DAMAGE.
I don't see Trump repeating similar or honoring those past orders.
but he's a "real conservative" so it's all good right?

[jimnyc]

Rev, with all due respect, I'm not going in depth on this one. I don't see Trump or ANY president coming out and stealing property via executive orders. I WOULD have an issue of congress somehow tried to do something. I see no reality in here. Just because he tried this as a businessman, that hardly means he can magically take property as president. These issues would go through congress and/or the SC. And even if Trump tried a power grab, that's where it would be just as quick, in front of the SC. I just don't see it happening, not in the slightest bit, therefore not even an issue to me.

Now, if he campaigns on this somehow, and states he CAN do such things as president, or that he has that power, then I'll reverse course.

Hell, I'm sure he's been involved in "hostile takeovers" and similar as a businessman - but I'm not worried about him doing the same or similar as president.

[Black Diamond]

Well here's my thing i like to.. as you advised me.. to understand where candidates are coming from on the issues.
You should know i'm a issues based person. I look for candidates general views on issues and past actions to get a feel for what they MIGHT do in the future.
and in my thinking i like to know what are the range of options a candidate or politician BELIEVES they have.

I don't assume the best or not worry that it "probably won't effect me". I wonder how it might play for others around the country and elsewhere and how it might play long term if others in the office later assume the same options are available. And how it jibes with my traditional understanding of the constitution.

you seem to think --I could be wrong- that whatever the supreme court does makes everything basically OK. And we should not be concerned about it or try to limit any rulings effects. thats what it seems like you're impling when you and sunnydaydriver say thing like

I could be completely wrong, if so i apologize. I mean no harm seriously.
i just got that impression. please clarify your view if i'm mistaken. don't take my head off for an honest misreading of your view.



But on topic , you know I'm not a fan of a lot of W Bush's actions or words but i also give credit where it's due.
and after the Kelo case a lot of people on the Right and left were upset about the eminent domain issue and this is one of the GOOD things that Bush did about it...


I and "many" other conservatives (maybe not REAL conservatives) are concerned about how Presidents view eminent domain.
Sunday driver and FJ seems to think that the gov't knows what best for private property. Trump and Sunday D seem to think more taxes revenue is what's best.. mm hmm. taxes.

I'm not with you there Sunday.
Jim you don't think it's something he's got any power to influence, but Bush's acts says you're mistaken.

I see it as a stance that is a real potential problem.
Bush seemed to think it was a problem as well and AS PRESIDENT made some moves to LIMIT the DAMAGE.
I don't see Trump repeating similar or honoring those past orders.
but he's a "real conservative" so it's all good right?

Michael Badnarik may be available for a run, revs.

[sundaydriver]

I'm not with you there Sunday.


Don't worry Rev, I with you. I'm not in agreement with Emanate Domain for tax revenue and personal profits for developers. I thought that's what I said all along. The old law for infrastructure I feel is a necessary evil in earlier times and on rare occasions today.

[revelarts]

Rev, with all due respect, I'm not going in depth on this one. I don't see Trump or ANY president coming out and stealing property via executive orders. I WOULD have an issue of congress somehow tried to do something. I see no reality in here. Just because he tried this as a businessman, that hardly means he can magically take property as president. These issues would go through congress and/or the SC. And even if Trump tried a power grab, that's where it would be just as quick, in front of the SC. I just don't see it happening, not in the slightest bit, therefore not even an issue to me.
Now, if he campaigns on this somehow, and states he CAN do such things as president, or that he has that power, then I'll reverse course.
Hell, I'm sure he's been involved in "hostile takeovers" and similar as a businessman - but I'm not worried about him doing the same or similar as president.

You don't seem too worried that he'll do any wrong/harm at all Jim.
The rest of aren't as trusting.

[PixieStix]

Because it shows that it's not something he is doing daily.

But AGAIN, it's not something that the POTUS will be working on. This would be congress or the SC. Unless those Trump haters think he is going to executive order his way into property.

It is a practice in which states and local governments might typically engage. Not a President or Congress.

[jimnyc]

You don't seem too worried that he'll do any wrong/harm at all Jim.
The rest of aren't as trusting.

You say "any", but aren't we speaking of ONE subject here? And no, I don't think he'll do any harm at all on this subject.

[jimnyc]

It is a practice in which states and local governments might typically engage. Not a President or Congress.

Yeps, almost what I said. Either way, I'm not worried about Trump popping into the WH and starting to change eminent domain.

[PixieStix]

I am just curious, what you guys think of building highways and things that help a community thrive, where they did not necessarily thrive before?

I come from a small town, where eminent domain happened to or for many people. This actually helped the small, poor, and dilapidated town become a thriving town. True story. It connected this small town and many other small towns to the capital of that state. Keep in mind that it is coal country.

[Black Diamond]

I am just curious, what you guys think of building highways and things that help a community thrive, where they did not necessarily thrive before?

I come from a small town, where eminent domain happened to or for many people. This actually helped the small, poor, and dilapidated town become a thriving town. True story. It connected this small town and many other small towns to the capital of that state. Keep in mind that it is coal country.
In short, time is money. Expressways speed up deliveries, among other things.
Is eminent domain big government? Maybe. But it comes down to pragmatism vs idealism.

[PixieStix]

I wish the government would eminent domain my property so I could move :thumb: I am a pragmatist :D

[jimnyc]

I am just curious, what you guys think of building highways and things that help a community thrive, where they did not necessarily thrive before?

I come from a small town, where eminent domain happened to or for many people. This actually helped the small, poor, and dilapidated town become a thriving town. True story. It connected this small town and many other small towns to the capital of that state. Keep in mind that it is coal country.

It's not that - they are going to try and jump on him for his attempts with an old lady in Atlantic City in the 90's. She didn't want to sell and her home sat blocking an area of his casino that he wanted to use.

Something tells me the POTUS won't be trying to bribe folks out of their homes, nor taking anything via eminent domain.

[PixieStix]

It's not that - they are going to try and jump on him for his attempts with an old lady in Atlantic City in the 90's. She didn't want to sell and her home sat blocking an area of his casino that he wanted to use.

Something tells me the POTUS won't be trying to bribe folks out of their homes, nor taking anything via eminent domain.
I realize that, just wanted people to think about what eminent domain does. Yes, it is sometimes abused. But without it we would still be using a horse and carriage :coffee:

[jimnyc]

I realize that, just wanted people to think about what eminent domain does. Yes, it is sometimes abused. But without it we would still be using a horse and carriage :coffee:

Folks are looking to find anything and everything negative about Trump at this point. But lately some of them are just non-stories. This one wont harm him at all.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

People are free to post all the hit pieces on Trump they like here but what I do not see are those same people parading out praises on their chosen guy.
Strikes me as kind of funny/weird. I post no hit pieces on the other Republican nominee and only praise my chosen candidate or post my hit pieces on Hillary which is the true opposition.
Seems to me that some miss that clarity.
Now all this supposing about trump and/or red herring crap is perfectly alright to post here but to me it speaks volumes about the true character of the posters in my personal opinion.

Seems trying to tear somebody down rather than build one's own chosen candidate up falls right in line with what the dems are doing to Trump.
Just an observation and I am damn well free to make it, regardless of who it may or may not offend.-Tyr

[PixieStix]

Folks are looking to find anything and everything negative about Trump at this point. But lately some of them are just non-stories. This one wont harm him at all.

If that's all they got. I don't know what to tell them. I could post all kinds of goodies on other candidates but that is just too time consuming, plus what did Ronald Reagan say about attacking your own?.... I happen to believe that Trump can beat Hillary. Not so sure about the rest. After 8 years of Obama, it is time to kick the dems to the gutter where they belong

[Black Diamond]

Folks are looking to find anything and everything negative about Trump at this point. But lately some of them are just non-stories. This one wont harm him at all.

The stuff of real concern didn't matter. Now they are desperate.
But. The stuff of real concern should have been a concern when Romney ran. State health care. Abortion, gun contol. All part of Romney's Massachusetts. This is just occuring to me..

[Black Diamond]

If that's all they got. I don't know what to tell them. I could post all kinds of goodies on other candidates but that is just too time consuming, plus what did Ronald Reagan say about attacking your own?.... I happen to believe that Trump can beat Hillary. Not so sure about the rest. After 8 years of Obama, it is time to kick the dems to the gutter where they belong

I am not convinced you're wrong.

[PixieStix]

People are free to post all the hit pieces on Trump they like here but what I do not see are those same people parading out praises on their chosen guy.
Strikes me as kind of funny/weird. I post no hit pieces on the other Republican nominee and only praise my chosen candidate or post my hit pieces on Hillary which is the true opposition.
Seems to me that some miss that clarity.
Now all this supposing about trump and/or red herring crap is perfectly alright to post here but to me it speaks volumes about the true character of the posters in my personal opinion.

Seems trying to tear somebody down rather than build one's own chosen candidate up falls right in line with what the dems are doing to Trump.
Just an observation and I am damn well free to make it, regardless of who it may or may not offend.-Tyr


It is a revolution of sorts against politics as usual. Against globalization and all it's creepy little quirks.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

If that's all they got. I don't know what to tell them. I could post all kinds of goodies on other candidates but that is just too time consuming, plus what did Ronald Reagan say about attacking your own?.... I happen to believe that Trump can beat Hillary. Not so sure about the rest. After 8 years of Obama, it is time to kick the dems to the gutter where they belong

LOOK AT YOUR POST TIME AND THEN LOOK AT MY POST TIME, BOTH ARE THE SAME !
Great minds think alike.....:beer: :beer: :salute: -Tyr

[PixieStix]

The stuff of real concern didn't matter. Now they are desperate.
But. The stuff of real concern should have been a concern when Romney ran. State health care. Abortion, gun contol. All part of Romney's Massachusetts. This is just occuring to me..

I was wondering the same thing. Did the National Review do a hit piece on McCain and Romney? I don't think so. Could it be that the great minds of the National Review are......dare I say, ESTABLISHMENT?

[jimnyc]

but what I do not see are those same people parading out praises on their chosen guy.

On the right, outside of those supporting Trump, the others must be confused.

But that's cool, not everyone is gonna like Trump. I get that. But it's extremely clear that many have been sidelined with their hatred of Trump. If they hate him, that's cool, move onto someone else and let's hear what else is good about them. But many got to the "hate Trump" part and never let go.

Some will complain that all they see on TV is "Trump, Trump, Trump" and no one else is even there. Some will say that Trump even overtakes the airtime. I've seen this on 2 boards now. And the majority of those complaining? They go on to do not much more than complain about Trump! :laugh2:

Truth is, the more the haters hate, the more attention he gets. Leaving all of the others on the side and ignoring them - folks will be helping get Trump in office and not even realize it. I know, I know, and this is where we hear that many will stay home, and therefore he can't beat Hillary.

[Black Diamond]

I was wondering the same thing. Did the National Review do a hit piece on McCain and Romney? I don't think so. Could it be that the great minds of the National Review are......dare I say, ESTABLISHMENT?

There was resistance against Romney but not like this.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I was wondering the same thing. Did the National Review do a hit piece on McCain and Romney? I don't think so. Could it be that the great minds of the National Review are......dare I say, ESTABLISHMENT?

They are compromised and fairly well PC, WHICH TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE NOW PRETTY MUCH RAGS IMHO.--TYR

[PixieStix]

Hate is a blinding thing, it is a destructive thing.

[Black Diamond]

On the right, outside of those supporting Trump, the others must be confused.

But that's cool, not everyone is gonna like Trump. I get that. But it's extremely clear that many have been sidelined with their hatred of Trump. If they hate him, that's cool, move onto someone else and let's hear what else is good about them. But many got to the "hate Trump" part and never let go.

Some will complain that all they see on TV is "Trump, Trump, Trump" and no one else is even there. Some will say that Trump even overtakes the airtime. I've seen this on 2 boards now. And the majority of those complaining? They go on to do not much more than complain about Trump! :laugh2:

Truth is, the more the haters hate, the more attention he gets. Leaving all of the others on the side and ignoring them - folks will be helping get Trump in office and not even realize it. I know, I know, and this is where we hear that many will stay home, and therefore he can't beat Hillary.
There's no such thing as bad publicity.

To your first point, I think antitrumpers may be overwhelmed by the number of candidates.

[PixieStix]

They are compromised and fairly well PC, WHICH TELLS ME THAT THEY ARE NOW PRETTY MUCH RAGS IMHO.--TYR

I stopped my subscription to the National Review when I realized that. I first got a free subscription when I joined the NRA a long time ago. I renewed it and realized what a rag it really is.

[Black Diamond]

I am surprised Carly didn't get more traction. She's the only candidate to really draw Trump's blood. Jeb tried but he got his ass kicked so bad....

[revelarts]

it's not a hit piece. the article just tells us his position here.
Trump owns it as he does his others.
i just wonder that people say they support him because he's so conservative but he has several positions that are not really that conservative.

As i've said before he comes across more like Obama in the way he campaigns. just not nearly as positive. Making a lot of people feel good but not too much substance.

[Black Diamond]

it's not a hit piece. the article just tells us his position here.
Trump owns it as he does his others.
i just wonder that people say they support him because he's so conservative but he has several positions that are not really that conservative.

As i've said before he comes across more like Obama in the way he campaigns. just not nearly as positive. Making a lot of people feel good but not too much substance.

Who has said that trump is "so conservative"?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

To your first point, I think antitrumpers may be overwhelmed by the number of candidates.

Perhaps thats true but thats not my problem. I post positives about my candidate, perhaps they should consider doing the same for theirs. Yet I freely admit they are free to post only negatives
about the top Republican but also admit that seems to me to be right in line with the dems and what they are doing. Just an observation, as we are all free to have in our posts at this site. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I stopped my subscription to the National Review when I realized that. I first got a free subscription when I joined the NRA a long time ago. I renewed it and realized what a rag it really is.

I stopped long ago. I saw the handwriting on the wall way back.-Tyr

[Black Diamond]

Perhaps thats true but thats not my problem. I post positives about my candidate, perhaps they should consider doing the same for theirs. Yet I freely admit they are free to post only negatives
about the top Republican but also admit that seems to me to be right in line with the dems and what they are doing. Just an observation, as we are all free to have in our posts at this site. -Tyr
I don't know that most antitrumpers have a candidate. Too overwhelmed by a wide field.

[revelarts]

Who has said that trump is "so conservative"?
those who claim "real conservatives" support Trump

[jimnyc]

Who has said that trump is "so conservative"?

Yeps.

He's not a far right cuckoo, but he's sure as shit not a leftie. Hell, Rubio is considered a conservative to some, and yet his immigration plan alone has scared off tons.

[jimnyc]

those who claim "real conservatives" support Trump

Trump is "so conservative" or real conservatives support him. Which one?

[revelarts]

Trump is "so conservative" or real conservatives support him. Which one?

Wel Ok, I guess I'm wrong. Noone says he's conservative at all then.
But he's so much better than any democrat and all the other R candidates somehow.
go figure.

kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK!! Merry Christmas!! WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!:flyflag:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

those who claim "real conservatives" support Trump
Really ???
About 20% of Trump supporters are old time Southern democrats, you know the dems that actually are still patriotic and think of the nation ahead of dem party power/wins ..
Trumps supports spans a mighty wide ravine my friend.
And that has the dem bastards crying in their damn wheaties. :laugh::laugh::laugh:--Tyr

[jimnyc]

Wel Ok, I guess I'm wrong. Noone says he's conservative at all then.
But he's so much better than any democrat and all the other R candidates somehow.
go figure.

kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!

I was going to answer your questions, and point out the difference between where he stands as a conservative (in my mind) and which conservatives support him. But I see by your last line that the street lights must have come on, and it's night night time for Rev. Many have stated his conservative qualities, even us right here, you are correct. And he does have support of conservatives.

But you want to play the retard game instead.

WhoooJHooo, terrorists have as much rights!!! Free everyone from Gitmo!! WhooyA!! Amnesty for all illEgals!! Yeah

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Wel Ok, I guess I'm wrong. Noone says he's conservative at all then.
But he's so much better than any democrat and all the other R candidates somehow.
go figure.

kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK!! Merry Christmas!! WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!:flyflag:


kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK!! Merry Christmas!! WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!:flyflag:
Damn Rev. are you really getting into the right spirit, good for you.. ;)--Tyr

[jimnyc]

Damn Rev. are you really getting into the right spirit, good for you.. ;)--Tyr

Trump running away with things thus far has turned a lot of folks around the world into a frenzy. I can't wait until he starts running away with the primaries, and watching others swallowing the Tums by the bottle! :laugh:

[jimnyc]

I'd also like to add, that I RARELY speak up on illegal immigration. I'm hardly the worst on speaking up on muslims. But when the going gets tough for some, quote my post and toss in shit that I don't say!

[Black Diamond]

I'd also like to add, that I RARELY speak up on illegal immigration. I'm hardly the worst on speaking up on muslims. But when the going gets tough for some, quote my post and toss in shit that I don't say!

People DO forget that the Syrian refugees were infiltrated by ISIS.

[PixieStix]

Damn Rev. are you really getting into the right spirit, good for you.. ;)--Tyr


:lmao::lmao::lmao:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'd also like to add, that I RARELY speak up on illegal immigration. I'm hardly the worst on speaking up on muslims. But when the going gets tough for some, quote my post and toss in shit that I don't say!

Hell, has been par for course by members trying to take me out ever since my first week here.
Raise your shield with honor and draw your sword with truth and you will never lose.
My father told us that many,many times. Has always stood me in good faith and with success.-Tyr

[jimnyc]

Hell, has been par for course by members trying to take me out ever since my first week here.
Raise your shield with honor and draw your sword with truth and you will never lose.
My father told us that many,many times. Has always stood me in good faith and with success.-Tyr

True that, brother. I let that stuff eat me alive each time, wondering whether others read shit and believe it. He's purposely misquoted me a bazillion times, even after I asked him to stop that crap a bazillion and one times. This time I know he was being sarcastic, but once again it's when he quotes MY post, and gets it wrong again and exaggerates. I guess it makes him feel better, maybe he truly believes what he posts. :dunno:

[revelarts]

Jim I wasn't quoting you . if that's what one of your previous was about.
i was characterizing the tone and what seems to be the talking points of the Trump campaign that are drawing his most fervent support.
banning killing not trusting muslims, deporting jailing illegal immigrants, walling up the boarders and the "merry christmas" show.

But Are these some of the items you were going to mention.
Banning Muslims,
defeating terrorist (which everyone wants to do BTW. some of us just like to be sure they are terrorist before we kill them)
Building a wall against Mexican immigrants
Saying merry christmas
better trade deals with China
universal health care
Study legalizing Drugs use taxes
end Common core
Maybe some climate change is manmade, but not all.
Let Russia fight in Syria
Let Germany deal with Ukraine
More sanctions on Iran
20-35% import taxes
Database on jews.. i mean muslims.
Bring back torture
Ban refugees
Ship millions of mexicans back to Mexico
no raise in minimum wages
Close the Internet... to terrorist(?)
Says he's pro-life now says he want to defund planned parenthood.

Threr more but that mixed bag there.

[jimnyc]

I guess that explains his huge leads in just about every poll. :laugh:

[Gunny]

I guess that explains his huge leads in just about every poll. :laugh:

Being mad at the Republican party is an emotion. There's no logic to handing the party off to a populist that will never accomplish anything he says he can. He just wants to be President because it's another feather in his cap.

[jimnyc]

Being mad at the Republican party is an emotion. There's no logic to handing the party off to a populist that will never accomplish anything he says he can. He just wants to be President because it's another feather in his cap.

I think otherwise about his intentions, but I guess we just disagree.

[Black Diamond]

Jim I wasn't quoting you . if that's what one of your previous was about.
i was characterizing the tone and what seems to be the talking points of the Trump campaign that are drawing his most fervent support.
banning killing not trusting muslims, deporting jailing illegal immigrants, walling up the boarders and the "merry christmas" show.

But Are these some of the items you were going to mention.
Banning Muslims,
defeating terrorist (which everyone wants to do BTW. some of us just like to be sure they are terrorist before we kill them)
Building a wall against Mexican immigrants
Saying merry christmas
better trade deals with China
universal health care
Study legalizing Drugs use taxes
end Common core
Maybe some climate change is manmade, but not all.
Let Russia fight in Syria
Let Germany deal with Ukraine
More sanctions on Iran
20-35% import taxes
Database on jews.. i mean muslims.
Bring back torture
Ban refugees
Ship millions of mexicans back to Mexico
no raise in minimum wages
Close the Internet... to terrorist(?)
Says he's pro-life now says he want to defund planned parenthood.

Threr more but that mixed bag there.
Much of that sounds like Romney. Except Romney lacked boldness. Oh and the Hitler reference that you and protesters exhibit is hilarious.

[Kathianne]

Kelo was a horrible decision and the states in the main passed laws to moot it:

http://ij.org/report/five-years-after-kelo/

That Trump supports Kelo just speaks volumes on 'public interest' v 'being big time establishment'

[NightTrain]

kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK!! Merry Christmas!! WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!:flyflag:



Now you're talking! About time you started showing that fire I knew you had!



+4 Man Points.

[revelarts]

Much of that sounds like Romney. Except Romney lacked boldness. Oh and the Hitler reference that you and protesters exhibit is hilarious.

You mean "the database for the jews.. i mean muslims?" line

But why is it only Nazi like if it's for the Jews though BD?
that's the point.

A "database" for Jews or Buddhist, Hindus, Christians, Muslim, Gypsies, Japanese, Blacks, Rednecks... name your group it just smacks of Yellow Stars and IBM number tattoos.
and it's not funny.
I find it hard to believe others don't see it.. or have a problem with it. The left thinks Christians are "dangerous" too maybe when they get in power they'll make a gov't Christian database as well. you ok with that too? they are just as sincere as you are in your "concern" about muslims.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Now you're talking! About time you started showing that fire I knew you had!



+4 Man Points.

Methinks that the right and honorable Mr. Trump showed him the true light. ;)
I am amazed at how fast he did a 180.. ;) --Tyr

[NightTrain]

You mean "the database for the jews.. i mean muslims?" line

But why is only Nazi like if it's for the Jews though BD?
that's the point.

A "database" for Jews or Buddhist, Hindus, Christians, Muslim, Gypsies, Japanese, Blacks, Rednecks... name your group it just smacks of Yellow Stars and IBM number tattoos.
and it's not funny.
I find it hard to believe other don't see it. The left thinks Christians are "dangerous" too maybe when they get in power they'll make a database as well. you ok with that too? they are just as sincere as you are in your "concern" about muslims.


When any group acts as the muzzies have, they deserve to have special attention given them. Real special.

Why on earth are you against getting a handle on the muslim problem?

Don't like the solutions being proposed? Okay, what's your solution, Rev?

[revelarts]

When any group acts as the muzzies have, they deserve to have special attention given them. Real special.

Why on earth are you against getting a handle on the muslim problem?

Don't like the solutions being proposed? Okay, what's your solution, Rev?

written it up a few times here over the years,
few seems to "feel" satisfied with my solutions. Not stuff that riles the blood. even though it'd work imo.
Not draconian or fascist enough i guess.

[Black Diamond]

Wel Ok, I guess I'm wrong. Noone says he's conservative at all then.
But he's so much better than any democrat and all the other R candidates somehow.
go figure.

kill the MUSLIMS!!! BUILD A WALL!! Immigrants STINK!! Merry Christmas!! WHOOOAHH YEAHH! YEAHHHH!!!!:flyflag:

Give me your tired, your poor, and your terrorists

[NightTrain]

written it up a few times here over the years,
few seems to "feel" satisfied with my solutions. Not stuff that riles the blood. even though it'd work imo.
Not draconian or fascist enough i guess.


I've seen a ton of criticism from you over the years, but never any solutions.

Care to share?

[Black Diamond]

I've seen a ton of criticism from you over the years, but never any solutions.

Care to share?

Libertarianism. Minus abortion.

[NightTrain]

Libertarianism. Minus abortion.


Well... specifically regarding the muzzie issue. But that's a funny answer!

[jimnyc]

Well... specifically regarding the muzzie issue. But that's a funny answer!

And one that couldn't have been covered over the years - the issue of taking in refugees from places like Syria, where it's already been clearly shown that we can't properly vet these folks.

[Black Diamond]

You mean "the database for the jews.. i mean muslims?" line

But why is it only Nazi like if it's for the Jews though BD?
that's the point.

A "database" for Jews or Buddhist, Hindus, Christians, Muslim, Gypsies, Japanese, Blacks, Rednecks... name your group it just smacks of Yellow Stars and IBM number tattoos.
and it's not funny.
I find it hard to believe others don't see it.. or have a problem with it. The left thinks Christians are "dangerous" too maybe when they get in power they'll make a gov't Christian database as well. you ok with that too? they are just as sincere as you are in your "concern" about muslims.
First off, The Nazis policies were based on race, not religion.
It was a blood issue. And if anyone came to my rally and compared me to Hitler I would have them escorted out, too. Also just because you put people in a database doesn't mean you're going to send them to gas chambers and crematoria.

[Black Diamond]

And one that couldn't have been covered over the years - the issue of taking in refugees from places like Syria, where it's already been clearly shown that we can't properly vet these folks.

ISIS has already done that. Sorry. But I can't get over that fact.

[NightTrain]

Methinks that the right and honorable Mr. Trump showed him the true light. ;)
I am amazed at how fast he did a 180.. ;) --Tyr


Rev's sarcastic line really cracked me up there. I hee-hawed like a damn donkey.

[fj1200]

It's not that I agree or disagree, it's just not something that the president is going to be controlling. I'm as worried about the POTUS unilaterally taking away property, as I am worrying about him changing the flavor of my favorite bubble gum. But if you think he will do something with eminent domain as prez, then don't vote for him. I'm sure this completely changed your mind and now you are no longer gonna vote for him! LOL

I don't think anyone would be concerned with eminent domain and a POTUS but anyone should be legitimately concerned with a candidate who favors and argues for expansions of government power.

[Kathianne]

I don't think anyone would be concerned with eminent domain and a POTUS but anyone should be legitimately concerned with a candidate who favors and argues for expansions of government power.

Exactly. President's are to 'lead' and 'execute' the laws. We've had 7+ years of watching a President that doesn't agree with the Congress and courts. He too is applauded by those that agree with him, but think he doesn't go 'far enough in flouting the rules.

[NightTrain]

Exactly. President's are to 'lead' and 'execute' the laws. We've had 7+ years of watching a President that doesn't agree with the Congress and courts. He too is applauded by those that agree with him, but think he doesn't go 'far enough in flouting the rules.


Hell yeah! I'm hoping President Trump is going to take over the country and install himself as Dictator!

Let's burn this bitch down!!

All power to Trump!

We Trumpies are getting in line to be his Toadies as he lights his cuban cigars with the Constitution. I'm hoping for a role similar to Igor when he takes over. That's just how we Trumpies roll, you know! Bootlicking has always topped my list of Fun Things To Do.

We're all about supporting Dictator Trump and his tyrannical rule!!

I'm just surprised you figured us out, Kathi. I didn't see your name on the Secret Manifesto we've all signed with blood pledging allegiance to Trump. Kudos!

[Kathianne]

Hell yeah! I'm hoping President Trump is going to take over the country and install himself as Dictator!

Let's burn this bitch down!!

All power to Trump!

We Trumpies are getting in line to be his Toadies as he lights his cuban cigars with the Constitution. I'm hoping for a role similar to Igor when he takes over. That's just how we Trumpies roll, you know! Bootlicking has always topped my list of Fun Things To Do.

We're all about supporting Dictator Trump and his tyrannical rule!!

I'm just surprised you figured us out, Kathi. I didn't see your name on the Secret Manifesto we've all signed with blood pledging allegiance to Trump. Kudos!

I am surprised at the continual diversions on any possible reasons to look at what is being said and applauded. Jim is right, some are taking any possible criticism way too personally. Why is that?

[NightTrain]

I am surprised at the continual diversions on any possible reasons to look at what is being said and applauded. Jim is right, some are taking any possible criticism way too personally. Why is that?

I'm tired of your sniping.

I am not a rube, or naive, or a fucking retard.

Your constant posts alluding to Trump supporters as such has finally worn down to a raw nerve.

[Kathianne]

I'm tired of your sniping.

I am not a rube, or naive, or a fucking retard.

Your constant posts alluding to Trump supporters as such has finally worn down to a raw nerve.

It's not sniping. It's called a difference of opinion. Once again, we all have a right to our opinions and concerns.

[NightTrain]

It's not sniping. It's called a difference of opinion. Once again, we all have a right to our opinions and concerns.


Well, just come right out with it, then.

I'm an idiot that can't see the forest for the trees, right? A mindless sheep under the spell of Trump? An ignorant hick that doesn't understand the issues?

[PixieStix]

Being mad at the Republican party is an emotion. There's no logic to handing the party off to a populist that will never accomplish anything he says he can. He just wants to be President because it's another feather in his cap.

It is not logical to allow the same old, same old.

[Kathianne]

Well, just come right out with it, then.

I'm an idiot that can't see the forest for the trees, right? A mindless sheep under the spell of Trump? An ignorant hick that doesn't understand the issues?

Never said nor implied any such thing. OTOH disagreeing with popular opinion here makes one a condescending bitch? Hardly. It is difference of opinion and only those disagreeing are pretty much being told to STHU.

[PixieStix]

The hate is almost tangible.I can feel it :smoke:

[NightTrain]

Never said nor implied any such thing. OTOH disagreeing with popular opinion here makes one a condescending bitch? Hardly. It is difference of opinion and only those disagreeing are pretty much being told to STHU.


No one has told you to STFU.

Show me one instance of where that happened.

People have, however, taken offense to your continued comments to the effect that everyone is a fucking retard for supporting Trump.

[Kathianne]

No one has told you to STFU.

Show me one instance of where that happened.

People have, however, taken offense to your continued comments to the effect that everyone is a fucking retard for supporting Trump.

Wrong and it's not just me. Anyone who posts anything that might warrant a look at what he has said, done, written is considered calling his supporters fucking retards. Well sorry, that's not the intent but your impression. We can't control your thoughts or your votes.

[revelarts]

First off, The Nazis policies were based on race, not religion.
It was a blood issue. And if anyone came to my rally and compared me to Hitler I would have them escorted out, too. Also just because you put people in a database doesn't mean you're going to send them to gas chambers and crematoria.

well at 1st those put in the German IBM machine provided database weren't even bothered.
But then with amazing precision and speed BECAUSE of the database the German officials where able to round up the Jews.
And at 1st they where just deported.
after that sent to work camps
after that began the gas chambers and crematoria.
so it didn't START with killings.
But who says we people have to be killed before it's bad enough to be concerned about?
How about some PRE-EMPTIVE striking on BAD obviously Nazi like policy.

Also reason the Jews, AND the Poles, the "infirm", the "feeble minded", the Gypsies and other "undesirables" were rounded up was ultimately because they were considered dangerous to the survival of the "German folk".

The cries of Trump and others are similar saying that "Muslims", ALL Muslims, are a potential DANGER to the survival of real American folks.

[NightTrain]

Wrong and it's not just me. Anyone who posts anything that might warrant a look at what he has said, done, written is considered calling his supporters fucking retards. Well sorry, that's not the intent but your impression. We can't control your thoughts or your votes.

Bullshit.

Would you like me to construct a Wall Of Text quoting your condescending sniping of Trump supporters similar to what I honored Gabby with?

You've been incredibly disrespectful and insulting for quite a while now over this.

[PixieStix]

Wrong and it's not just me. Anyone who posts anything that might warrant a look at what he has said, done, written is considered calling his supporters fucking retards. Well sorry, that's not the intent but your impression. We can't control your thoughts or your votes.

We know what he says and does, better than all the articles with half truths and outright lies. We are paying attention and we do read and listen and watch and judge.

[Kathianne]

We know what he says and does, better than all the articles with half truths and outright lies. We are paying attention and we do read and listen and watch and judge.

Then my posts shouldn't be causing the reaction that some keep having.

[jimnyc]

I am surprised at the continual diversions on any possible reasons to look at what is being said and applauded. Jim is right, some are taking any possible criticism way too personally. Why is that?

Except Jim was mostly pointing at the other side. Some folks are more interested in Trump supporters than they are Trump himself. And then when I pointed stuff out like this, folks got angry. I only take things personally when folks are taking jabs at the supporters instead of the issues, which seems to be non-stop when it concerns Trump supporters.

[jimnyc]

I don't think anyone would be concerned with eminent domain and a POTUS but anyone should be legitimately concerned with a candidate who favors and argues for expansions of government power.


Exactly. President's are to 'lead' and 'execute' the laws. We've had 7+ years of watching a President that doesn't agree with the Congress and courts. He too is applauded by those that agree with him, but think he doesn't go 'far enough in flouting the rules.

So how is Trump going to use eminent domain when and if in power? Executive orders? Demand congress listen to him?

[jimnyc]

Never said nor implied any such thing. OTOH disagreeing with popular opinion here makes one a condescending bitch? Hardly. It is difference of opinion and only those disagreeing are pretty much being told to STHU.

Fwiw, I've not seen folks get mad with disagreeing with popular opinion - but rather giving jabs at folks who simply support Trump or his stances. And did I miss something, which thread were you called a condescending bitch in? I'll handle that, as that's inappropriate.

[jimnyc]

Wrong and it's not just me. Anyone who posts anything that might warrant a look at what he has said, done, written is considered calling his supporters fucking retards. Well sorry, that's not the intent but your impression. We can't control your thoughts or your votes.

Would you like for me to find every post where folks have used "Trump supporters" instead of addressing the issues?

[PixieStix]

Then my posts shouldn't be causing the reaction that some keep having.

But it is a nice friendly board and when someone posts thing in a very condescending way. A lot of things you post are outright fabrications. It can cause those reactions you speak of. Kathianne, I can actually feel the raw hatred. I am sorry. But I think people need to support their candidate and let us know who the are cheering for. That includes you. Who is your favorite?

I am afraid that you are wasting your time. We really do understand Trump. I am just sorry you feel so upset about this

[LongTermGuy]

well at 1st those put in the German IBM machine provided database weren't even bothered.
But then with amazing precision and speed BECAUSE of the database the German officials where able to round up the Jews.
And at 1st they where just deported.
after that sent to work camps
after that began the gas chambers and crematoria.
so it didn't START with killings.
But who says we people have to be killed before it's bad enough to be concerned about?
How about some PRE-EMPTIVE striking on BAD obviously Nazi like policy.

Also reason the Jews, AND the Poles, the "infirm", the "feeble minded", the Gypsies and other "undesirables" were rounded up was ultimately because they were considered dangerous to the survival of the "German folk".


*The cries of Trump and others are similar saying that "Muslims", ALL Muslims, are a potential DANGER to the survival of real American folks.


Rev...Bullshit....Its better to be safe > "and see" <.. what were dealing with (Like Trump says) instead if using "PC" to Numb our brains and sing "kum-by ya"....The koran is an instruction manual ..everything is right there...and many "infidels" still dont get it...The trick is to see which muslims will follow the koran to ... A.. " T ".....Why take a chance with AMERICAN lives?

[Gunny]

Then my posts shouldn't be causing the reaction that some keep having.

It's called bullying. That thing the left does all the time. If you ain't down with Trump, then you ain't in the clique. Guess I ain't in the clique. He's turned this election into a clown show.

[revelarts]

No one has told you to STFU.

Show me one instance of where that happened.

People have, however, taken offense to your continued comments to the effect that everyone is a fucking retard for supporting Trump.


Kath has never called anyone an F***kn Retard or and F***n' anything .. ever to my knowledge.
she's taken the high road this whole time.

I've struck my usual tone of passive aggressively pointing out the hypocrisy of so called true conservative, Christians, and Constitution loving TEAparty cheerleaders supporting someone with Trumps thread bare conservative and RINO positions.
And poking fun at you folks for being so caught up in his "he-man woman hater" personally.
and not seeing the xenophobia and hate/fear/concern of the "other" he's using to lead "real Americans" by fear ...i'm sorry... "concern" to the polls.
--BTW Trump reminds me of a Bad guy Pro Wrestler that people love. (BTW you know wrestling is fake right.) --

Gunny has tossed a few genades at Trump but i don't think Dumb has has been his main thing

Dragonstrike didn't call people retards either i don't think..at least before he left.. over the reactions to his comments.

But as far as i can tell the only person who makes the repeated dumb assertions is Tailfins.
There have been articles about it that he's posted. But he's the only one here who's posted those I think right?

But Kath is a class act. you shouldn't put words in her mouth. Or Assume what she REALLY MEANS.

But is seem many here consider it "hate" to even point out any of the flaws or problems with Trumps positions or history.
Again i don't even understand that kind of thinking.
Do you guys HATE every politician you point out problems with? that's a serious questions. because you seem to assume others do.

[jimnyc]

Yay!! Now I'm a nazi!! LOL

[NightTrain]

Kath has never called anyone an F***kn Retard or and F***n' anything .. ever to my knowledge.
she taken the high road this whole time.

I've struck my usual tone of passive aggressively pointing out the hypocrisy of so called true conservative, Christians, and Constitution loving TEAparty cheerleaders supporting someone with Trumps thread bare conservative and RINO positions.
And poking fun at you folks for being so caught up in his "he-man woman hater" personally.
and not seeing the xenophobia and hate/fear/concern of the "other" he's using to lead "real Americans" by fear ...i'm sorry... "concern" to the polls.

Trump reminds me of a Bad guy Pro Wrestler that people love. (BTW you know wrestling is fake right.)


But as far as i can tell the only person who makes the repeated dumb assertions is Tailfins.
There have been articles about it that he's posted. But he's the only one here who's posted those I think right?

But Kath is a class act. you shouldn't put words in her mouth.


Read what I posted.

You've completely missed what I've said.

[Kathianne]

Fwiw, I've not seen folks get mad with disagreeing with popular opinion - but rather giving jabs at folks who simply support Trump or his stances. And did I miss something, which thread were you called a condescending bitch in? I'll handle that, as that's inappropriate.

Hey, no problem. Those in disagreement are causing angst by implications. Attacks that are interpreted as moves to silence are ok. That has been going on for months.

'Real Americans'
'liberal blather' and all the various derivatives
etc.

I don't think there's a person on this board, even Gabby who's been MIA for awhile that has been for Hillary. Yet, no one blinks an eye at anything negative posted about her.

In fact, the number of times it's been said that 'she could blend puppies on stage' or 'admit to murder' and still be elected has been used more than a few times. When Mr. Trump says the same about himself and shakes his head in wonder, it's now 'sniping' at his supporters. Not about what Trump said, but about posting what he said.

[jimnyc]

It's called bullying. That thing the left does all the time. If you ain't down with Trump, then you ain't in the clique. Guess I ain't in the clique. He's turned this election into a clown show.

How many times have YOU started in with "Trump supporters" crap? Can't address the issues? Stop saying others are doing it to you when there is written proof of YOU trying to trash talk others simply for supporting Trump. And now show me where I have done the same to you - attacked you or who you support (which no one has a clue about).

You feel bullied? Whine some more. What a bunch of crap.

[jimnyc]

Hey, no problem. Those in disagreement are causing angst by implications. Attacks that are interpreted as moves to silence are ok. That has been going on for months.

'Real Americans'
'liberal blather' and all the various derivatives
etc.

I don't think there's a person on this board, even Gabby who's been MIA for awhile that has been for Hillary. Yet, no one blinks an eye at anything negative posted about her.

In fact, the number of times it's been said that 'she could blend puppies on stage' or 'admit to murder' and still be elected has been used more than a few times. When Mr. Trump says the same about himself and shakes his head in wonder, it's now 'sniping' at his supporters. Not about what Trump said, but about posting what he said.

About that link?

[NightTrain]

Very well, Kathi.

Since you don't seem to believe what you've been posting has been insulting to a wide swath of members on this board, including myself, I will construct a thread showing you in your own words.


Also, do me a favor and quote for me where someone, ANYONE, has told you to shut up. Or admit you lied.

Thanks in advance.

[Gunny]

Hey, no problem. Those in disagreement are causing angst by implications. Attacks that are interpreted as moves to silence are ok. That has been going on for months.

'Real Americans'
'liberal blather' and all the various derivatives
etc.

I don't think there's a person on this board, even Gabby who's been MIA for awhile that has been for Hillary. Yet, no one blinks an eye at anything negative posted about her.

In fact, the number of times it's been said that 'she could blend puppies on stage' or 'admit to murder' and still be elected has been used more than a few times. When Mr. Trump says the same about himself and shakes his head in wonder, it's now 'sniping' at his supporters. Not about what Trump said, but about posting what he said.

Wonder how many times us "not pretty people" have to point that out.:rolleyes:

[PixieStix]

It's called bullying. That thing the left does all the time. If you ain't down with Trump, then you ain't in the clique. Guess I ain't in the clique. He's turned this election into a clown show.

I call bullshit. When you can't get us to fall in line with the MSM lies and half truths bullshit, you cry "bully":rolleyes: Who is your candidate?

[jimnyc]

Very well, Kathi.

Since you don't seem to believe what you've been posting has been insulting to a wide swath of members on this board, including myself, I will construct a thread showing you in your own words.

Just look up Trump supporters


Also, do me a favor and quote for me where someone, ANYONE, has told you to shut up. Or admit you lied.

Or that such supporters are wrong or dumb in ANY way as a result of who they/she supports

[jimnyc]

Wonder how many times us "not pretty people" have to point that out.:rolleyes:

I wonder how many times you used the words "Trump supporters" because you couldn't find a better argument?

[Kathianne]

Would you like for me to find every post where folks have used "Trump supporters" instead of addressing the issues?

This is a time where the election has taken on a life of its own. Since Spring I've consistently said that Trump may well cause a split for conservatives. It's happening. May be all cake and cookies as the majority here believe. Then may not. Time will tell.

There are no other candidates right now on the 'conservative side' that can win, other than Trump and Cruz. Their views and related are relevant for discussion, IMO. Others don't want that. Others are in the majority.

Does the majority want those that disagree to shut up and post only what the majority wants?

[Gunny]

I call bullshit. When you can't get us to fall in line with the MSM lies and half truths bullshit, you cry "bully":rolleyes: Who is your candidate?

You cry bukkshit all you want Mis Lost in the Sauce. I'm FAR more concerned with winning and keeping the Dems out than listening to some loudmouth who has split the GOP and is going to cost us an election. Y'all say he's winning? WHAT is he winning?

I don't want you to fall in line with shit. Don't assume what I want. But if you're going to get on here and talk shit and bust out the pom poms for an opportunist who can't do a damned thing he says he's going to, I am the one calling bullshit.

Whatever happened to conservative principles? Or are they convenient only as a coincidence?

[Kathianne]

I wonder how many times you used the words "Trump supporters" because you couldn't find a better argument?

How is it one should refer to 'his supporters?'

[jimnyc]

This is a time where the election has taken on a life of its own. Since Spring I've consistently said that Trump may well cause a split for conservatives. It's happening. May be all cake and cookies as the majority here believe. Then may not. Time will tell.

There are no other candidates right now on the 'conservative side' that can win, other than Trump and Cruz. Their views and related are relevant for discussion, IMO. Others don't want that. Others are in the majority.

Does the majority want those that disagree to shut up and post only what the majority wants?

Trump is NOT guilty of having folks here continually using "Trump supporters" and then insulting those who support him. He did not cause that split, that's the responsibility of whomever writes those words.

[Kathianne]

I just don't get how 'not supporting Trump' or being totally appalled by his campaign is attacking fellow posters. But, there you have it.

I've considered Jim and NT two of my favorite people for years, haven't always agreed and have fought over various issues. Now though, I'm suddenly the 'liar?' Good grief.

[jimnyc]

How is it one should refer to 'his supporters?'

When it's followed by insults, and how his supporters don't know this, don't know that... it has NOTHING to do with those 2 words, but rather with the insults that follow them.

If I said "Those who DO NOT support Trump" aren't the brightest bulbs, and can't understand the complexities and what it is they are actually doing. <--- that's a compliment, correct?

[PixieStix]

TrumP SUPPORTER video. Damned nazi


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIWkifAMiLI :lol:

[Gunny]

Trump is NOT guilty of having folks here continually using "Trump supporters" and then insulting those who support him. He did not cause that split, that's the responsibility of whomever writes those words.

Neither are those who do not support guilty of insulting those that do just because the supporters take the presumptive stance that insulting Trump is insulting them. That's called being thin-skinned and reading what you want instead of what is there.

And Trump has insulted everyone but Mother Teresa.

[PixieStix]

Whatever happened to conservative principles? Or are they convenient only as a coincidence?

I don't know, you'll have to ask the Senate and the House that question

[jimnyc]

I just don't get how 'not supporting Trump' or being totally appalled by his campaign is attacking fellow posters. But, there you have it.

I've considered Jim and NT two of my favorite people for years, haven't always agreed and have fought over various issues. Now though, I'm suddenly the 'liar?' Good grief.

You guys are PURPOSELY being obtuse now. NT is gathering the words. I'm not an idiot. The "Trump supporters" and the insults are MANY in numbers. At the same time - feel free to show me where folks attacked you for solely not supporting Trump - because it didn't happen. 10-1 says it happened AFTER someone jumps on Trump supporters - because apparently it's difficult to go after Trump himself or his stances. Others here aren't attacking other candidates, or their supporters for following them - as no one has any idea!

I have NO ISSUE with anything anyone says - NONE - not unless it's an attack on "supporters", of which I am one. Feel free to post where folks attacked you for not supporting him, I'll be MORE than happy to take a peek, and even admit I'm wrong if someone did it for just that reason as you say.

[jimnyc]

Neither are those who do not support guilty of insulting those that do just because the supporters take the presumptive stance that insulting Trump is insulting them. That's called being thin-skinned and reading what you want instead of what is there.

And Trump has insulted everyone but Mother Teresa.

Ok. And thsoe that don't support Trump, but have big mouths - are simply assholes like yourself who just repeat and repeat and repeat the same things over and over and over. :)

[Gunny]

I don't know, you'll have to ask the Senate and the House that question

Nah ... I'll ask Trump's twin, Obama. Two sides of the same coin.

Seriously, why ask Congress a question when the answer is rather clear ... an egotistical President with a pen and a phone is what has marginalized Congress. Trump is just more of SOS.

[Kathianne]

When it's followed by insults, and how his supporters don't know this, don't know that... it has NOTHING to do with those 2 words, but rather with the insults that follow them.

If I said "Those who DO NOT support Trump" aren't the brightest bulbs, and can't understand the complexities and what it is they are actually doing. <--- that's a compliment, correct?

I've avoided that type of thing since the majority here obviously coalesced around his candidacy and you're correct, not the best way to address such. For that I do apologize.

Regarding late fall and winter, not so much. For the most part, I did 'shut up' as seemed so many wanted. Then when several said, 'No, you should post as you want, I tried.' Again was attacked for being 'condescending.' Ok, shut up again. Repeat and repeat.

So, does one post what one thinks is relevant to discussion? How does one check to find what is acceptable?

[PixieStix]

Nah ... I'll ask Trump's twin, Obama. Two sides of the same coin.

Seriously, why ask Congress a question when the answer is rather clear ... an egotistical President with a pen and a phone is what has marginalized Congress. Trump is just more of SOS.

You just proved Jim right again

[jimnyc]

I've avoided that type of thing since the majority here obviously coalesced around his candidacy and you're correct, not the best way to address such. For that I do apologize.

Regarding late fall and winter, not so much. For the most part, I did 'shut up' as seemed so many wanted. Then when several said, 'No, you should post as you want, I tried.' Again was attacked for being 'condescending.' Ok, shut up again. Repeat and repeat.

So, does one post what one thinks is relevant to discussion? How does one check to find what is acceptable?

I think it's more than extremely easy - simply that folks don't go after supporters but rather spend their time going after ideas and candidates. I have not seen a single person attack anyone for simply disagreeing.

[revelarts]

Yay!! Now I'm a nazi!! LOL

Never said you were Nazi, (words in my mouth much?)
I said, putting Muslims in a database is the same thing the Nazis did to the Jews.
Because they were thought to be to "dangerous" to the Germans.

that's just a fact.
And the parallels are real.
what you do with that info is up to you.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Nah ... I'll ask Trump's twin, Obama. Two sides of the same coin.

Seriously, why ask Congress a question when the answer is rather clear ... an egotistical President with a pen and a phone is what has marginalized Congress. Trump is just more of SOS.



Trump is just more of SOS.

^^^^^ Thats your opinion and you are free to have it but I vehemently disagree with it myself.
Trump is no damn obama!!!
Where he so, I'd hate him same as I do the obama.
I am no dunce , I know he is not perfect but neither is any other Republican nominee.
Trump supporters are not missing the big picture and Trump is damn sure not another obama.
SOME OF US FINALLY SEE A MAN THATS NOT TAKING SPECIAL INTERESTS DONOR MONEY, NOT KISSING MUSLIM-ASS, NOT PLAY FOOTSIES WITH THE REPUBLICAN ELITES -THOSE FFING LIARS , ETC.
AND TRUST ME WE ARE NOT BLIND TO TRUMPS FAULTS EITHER.

We just see that the other candidates have faults too.
Apparently we chose not to try to destroy them for their faults and thus help the dems win. -Tyr

[Gunny]

You just proved Jim right again

Afraid not. Stop sucking up. Geez. Come next Jan when they're swearing in Hillary/Sanders/Biden because of YOUR choice, we'll see who's right.

Here's some deja vu for ya ... Ross Perot pulled this same shit and we got 8 years of Bill Clinton. You'd think after 25 years some people would learn to quit making the same damned mistakes and expecting a different result.

[Kathianne]

I think it's more than extremely easy - simply that folks don't go after supporters but rather spend their time going after ideas and candidates. I have not seen a single person attack anyone for simply disagreeing.

How does one address their issues regarding Mr. Trump without mentioning his supporters when he is the one that brought them up regarding his shooting someone and would not lose support? 'It's incredible.'

Granted, that is very recent and in fairness, he was 'joking' though not ignoring the kernel.

As I said, for more than a few months, I've tried to address what he says and does, not his supporters. For the most part though what he says is aimed at emotions-not specifics. So, when one ask questions of a deeper nature, one leaves themselves open to emotional reactions.

I know, we're supposed to go to his 'position sites' as that's what he really believes. Problem for me is that his off the cuff remarks rarely refer to those position sites especially in specifics. He is running an emotion based campaign which is 'winning' and those opposed to that are supposed to deal with specifics?

[jimnyc]

Never said you were Nazi, (words in my mouth much?)

Too funny! But maybe that'll be a hint for you after you've done so to me no less than 200x over the years, if not more.

As for the rest, no thanks.

[jimnyc]

Afraid not. Stop sucking up. Geez. Come next Jan when they're swearing in Hillary/Sanders/Biden because of YOUR choice, we'll see who's right.

Here's some deja vu for ya ... Ross Perot pulled this same shit and we got 8 years of Bill Clinton. You'd think after 25 years some people would learn to quit making the same damned mistakes and expecting a different result.

It'll be because of the retards who stayed home.

[PixieStix]

Afraid not. Stop sucking up. Geez. Come next Jan when they're swearing in Hillary/Sanders/Biden because of YOUR choice, we'll see who's right.

Here's some deja vu for ya ... Ross Perot pulled this same shit and we got 8 years of Bill Clinton. You'd think after 25 years some people would learn to quit making the same damned mistakes and expecting a different result.

Oh I see. I vote for Trump the apocalypse happens and it will be my fault. Okee dokee then.

Ross Perot was no Donald Trump.

Sucking up? You sound like a child. I say what I think, not what gets me points.

[jimnyc]

How does one address their issues regarding Mr. Trump without mentioning his supporters when he is the one that brought them up regarding his shooting someone and would not lose support? 'It's incredible.'

Oh please, like that was nearly the only time it was stated? That was FAR FAR FAR from the only time it was stated. If that were it, wouldn't have a problem. But 9 out of 10x when the trump supporters crap was used, it was when his supporters had NOTHING to do with anything being discussed.

[PixieStix]

It'll be because of the retards who stayed home.

I know a LOT of people that are conservative minded people, that say "well, I am just one vote, it will make no difference. And for some weird retarded reason they actually do not vote. THAT IS THE PROBLEM

[jimnyc]

I know a LOT of people that are conservative minded people, that say "well, I am just one vote, it will make no difference. And for some weird retarded reason they actually do not vote. THAT IS THE PROBLEM

Yes, that's bad, but worse are those who stay home AND say "I'm staying home and I know this will result in Hillary being elected" <--- now THAT is retarded.

[Gunny]

It'll be because of the retards who stayed home.

Not in 92 it wasn't. It was because Perot split the GOP vote. And you can call whoever you want a retard, but the fact is, they're going to stay home again. When a candidate is forced on you that represents you in no way, why bother?

It's actually just as much the fault of the people who stick retarded candidates guaranteed to lose out there that don't represent conservative values as it is anyone who doesn't want to vote for them. McCain made his name fighting Republicans yet he's the Republican nominee. Romney flip-flopped on more issues than Time has magazines.

And it's going to happen again this time.

[Abbey Marie]

Never said you were Nazi, (words in my mouth much?)
I said, putting Muslims in a database is the same thing the Nazis did to the Jews.
Because they were thought to be to "dangerous" to the Germans.

that's just a fact.
And the parallels are real.
what you do with that info is up to you.

Perhaps my education is lacking- were the WWII-era European Jews going around cutting off the heads of non-Jews? Publicly avowing they will not rest until Germany is pushed into the sea? Blowing up buildings? Treating their women like animals?

Unless they were, any attempt to equate the Nazi treatment of Jews with our attempt to keep our country safe is absurd.

[Gunny]

Yes, that's bad, but worse are those who stay home AND say "I'm staying home and I know this will result in Hillary being elected" <--- now THAT is retarded.

It's called standing on principle. Put Bozo the Clown out there and it's on you, not the people the don't want Bozo the Clown.

[revelarts]

Rev...Bullshit....Its better to be safe > "and see" <.. what were dealing with (Like Trump says) instead if using "PC" to Numb our brains and sing "kum-by ya"....The koran is an instruction manual ..everything is right there...and many "infidels" still dont get it...The trick is to see which muslims will follow the koran to ... A.. " T ".....Why take a chance with AMERICAN lives?

OK So , See now you seem to think that the constitution is a PC, kum-by-ya, brain numbing document that's should be IGNORED because the koran is far more powerful.
The constitution doesn't allow for police databases of citizens based on religion... or race... or group affiliations.
It doesn't give the gov't authority to spy on ANY citizens without reasonable suspiscion.

That's what Communist, Fascist and Totalitarian countries do to their subjects.


Some "conservatives" are SO consumed with fear/hate/concern they are willing to burn the constitution..for this imagined horrific threat.
sorry I trust the constitution and american public and my God more than i fear the koran.
And I fear Losing the protections constitution MORE than terrorist attacks. because if we lose it what kind of country do we have. just another police state.
You guy somehow imagine that the state won't ever bother you though... because "you've done thing wrong":rolleyes:.

[LongTermGuy]

Yes, that's bad, but worse are those who stay home AND say "I'm staying home and I know this will result in Hillary being elected" <--- now THAT is retarded.



....Agree...so true...that is really "Retarded" :)

[PixieStix]

It's called standing on principle. Put Bozo the Clown out there and it's on you, not the people the don't want Bozo the Clown.

Staying home and not voting is standing on principle? Hillary will win for sure if that attitude is prevalent

[Gunny]

....Agree...so true...that is really "Retarded" :)

So y'all can call people that stay home "retarded" (BTW, I haven't missed a vote since I was old enough to vote), but take offense that they don't like Trump? Who was it that said they don't like being hypocrites?

[revelarts]

Perhaps my education is lacking- were the WWII-era European Jews going around cutting off the heads of non-Jews? Publicly avowing they will not rest until Germany is pushed into the sea? Blowing up buildings? Treating their women like animals?
Unless they were, any attempt to equate the Nazi treatment of Jews with our attempt to keep out country safe is absurd.

No they weren't. Hitler just claimed they caused the depression, caused Germans to starve, be homeless and lose the WWI.
Hitler claimed they were a poison in society, and were like animals as well.
He felt very justified in his reasons for the database of ALL the people in that group as well.

[jimnyc]

Not in 92 it wasn't. It was because Perot split the GOP vote. And you can call whoever you want a retard, but the fact is, they're going to stay home again. When a candidate is forced on you that represents you in no way, why bother?

It's actually just as much the fault of the people who stick retarded candidates guaranteed to lose out there that don't represent conservative values as it is anyone who doesn't want to vote for them. McCain made his name fighting Republicans yet he's the Republican nominee. Romney flip-flopped on more issues than Time has magazines.

And it's going to happen again this time.

Ok, so then it's the same as saying that Trump represents you in no way - so therefore you're cool with Hillary being in office. Enjoy that decision. :rolleyes:

[Abbey Marie]

Funny; I never hear Dems saying they won't vote because they don't love their nominee.

[jimnyc]

It's called standing on principle. Put Bozo the Clown out there and it's on you, not the people the don't want Bozo the Clown.

Like I said, then enjoy Hillary if you want her and we'll see how much better she is at POTUS than she was as secretary. Your choice, not mine.

[jimnyc]

So y'all can call people that stay home "retarded" (BTW, I haven't missed a vote since I was old enough to vote), but take offense that they don't like Trump? Who was it that said they don't like being hypocrites?

Why are you being thin skinned? Didn't you just say that a few minutes back?

[PixieStix]

So y'all can call people that stay home "retarded" (BTW, I haven't missed a vote since I was old enough to vote), but take offense that they don't like Trump? Who was it that said they don't like being hypocrites?


You're not staying home, are you?. So that doesn't apply to you and all the other voters on this board. Just the ones that stay home

[Gunny]

Ok, so then it's the same as saying that Trump represents you in no way - so therefore you're cool with Hillary being in office. Enjoy that decision. :rolleyes:

Nope. A red herring is a fish so this one doesn't fly.

Trump does NOT represent me. In no way, shape nor form. I've yet to hear him actually espouse a conservative principle. He's too busy worrying about where Ted Cruz was born.

[jimnyc]

Nope. A red herring is a fish so this one doesn't fly.

Trump does NOT represent me. In no way, shape nor form. I've yet to hear him actually espouse a conservative principle. He's too busy worrying about where Ted Cruz was born.

So he doesn't represent you, and you won't vote for him. So are you going 3rd party or are you staying home?

[PixieStix]

Nope. A red herring is a fish so this one doesn't fly.

Trump does NOT represent me. In no way, shape nor form. I've yet to hear him actually espouse a conservative principle. He's too busy worrying about where Ted Cruz was born.

It is apparent to me that you have no clue as to Trump. He actually does represent the same issues you have always bitched about

[Abbey Marie]

No they weren't. Hitler just claimed they caused the depression, caused Germans to starve, be homeless and lose the WWI.
Hitler claimed they were a poison in society, and were like animals as well.
He felt very justified in his reasons for the database of ALL the people in that group as well.


Ok, Rev. Let's try it this way:

Hitler pushed insane non-existent threats to justify his actions. Do you think the Muslims are good guys, and we are reading them all wrong? Or are the news stories all lies, made up by Muslim-hating journalists who are all in a vast bigoted anti-Muslim conspiracy together? Beheadings are all staged? Everything I mentioned above is false? Did you see 13 Hours? Was that all a lie, too?
Are you a 9-11 Truther? :eek:

There is simply no valid comparison to be made. And in fact, when you make these kinds of comparisons, it ruins any chance you might have had to convince me. It is so far out in left field, I believe nothing attached to it. I think you see giant, invasive TSA guys looming in every gov't action our country takes, Rev.

[jimnyc]

Nope. A red herring is a fish so this one doesn't fly.

Trump does NOT represent me. In no way, shape nor form. I've yet to hear him actually espouse a conservative principle. He's too busy worrying about where Ted Cruz was born.

Btw, his 2nd amendment stances aren't conservative? What about his stance on the military, and veterans, immigration... nevermind, while you say you never heard anything conservative from him - we both know it's because you don't follow him in the slightest bit and don't read anything about him or follow him. Because he HAS espoused such, but I surely won't waste my time showing you such.

[jimnyc]

It is apparent to me that you have no clue as to Trump. He actually does represent the same issues you have always bitched about

Yeps.

[revelarts]

Funny; I never hear Dems saying they won't vote because they don't love their nominee.

Some do.
but are we now saying that since Dems don't stick by their principals and follow party lines blindly that conservatives should do the same?

[jimnyc]

Are you a 9-11 Truther? :eek:

Oh brother, false flags, boston, Fbi, newtown.... it's all a grand conspiracy!

[Abbey Marie]

Oh brother, false flags, boston, Fbi, newtown.... it's all a grand conspiracy!


I'm pretty sure the Jewish bankers are behind it all!

[jimnyc]

I'm pretty sure the Jewish bankers are behind it all!

If there's a youtube video showing that, then it'll be factual and real!! LOL

[Abbey Marie]

If there's a youtube video showing that, then it'll be factual and real!! LOL


Ironically for Rev, beyond the "imaginary terrorism", no country on earth takes away more of its own citizens' rights than the Muslim ones.

[Gunny]

It is apparent to me that you have no clue as to Trump. He actually does represent the same issues you have always bitched about

Don't you wish you knew what you were talking about? Trump is as obvious to me as daylight. Apparently it is YOU that don't know Trump. Trump represents Trump. You don't just become conservative by saying you are.

And his hot air promises are a designed strategy to appeal to people disaffected with the status quo. It's really easy to see if you know how to read people and just watch their dumb asses in action.

What he represents is all the loudmouthes who are too afraid to say shit and live through his hot air vicariously. And he'll tell you anything you want to hear and appeal to your every emotion for a vote.

SO maybe YOU, who thinks you're so damned more intelligent than anyone ought, ought to be the one questioning what you're buying is=nstead of worrying about why I'm not buying a boat with a hole in the bottom.

[jimnyc]

Don't you wish you knew what you were talking about? Trump is as obvious to me as daylight. Apparently it is YOU that don't know Trump. Trump represents Trump. You don't just become conservative by saying you are.

And his hot air promises are a designed strategy to appeal to people disaffected with the status quo. It's really easy to see if you know how to read people and just watch their dumb asses in action.

What he represents is all the loudmouthes who are too afraid to say shit and live through his hot air vicariously. And he'll tell you anything you want to hear and appeal to your every emotion for a vote.

SO maybe YOU, who thinks you're so damned more intelligent than anyone ought, ought to be the one questioning what you're buying is=nstead of worrying about why I'm not buying a boat with a hole in the bottom.

So you disagree with his stance on the 2nd amendment, as well as his stance on veteran affairs, and his military stances. Odd, wouldn't have expected you to be against such things.

[jimnyc]

What he represents is all the loudmouthes who are too afraid to say shit and live through his hot air vicariously.

I'd be MORE than happy to say everything I say here to folks in person!! Every last word of it. Not sure why you think folks would be afraid. Not for one fucking second.

[revelarts]

Ok, Rev. Let's try it this way:

Hitler pushed insane non-existent threats to justify his actions. Do you think the Muslims are good guys, and we are reading them all wrong? Or are the news stories all lies, made up by Muslim-hating journalists who are all in a vast bigoted anti-Muslim conspiracy together? Beheadings are all staged? Everything I mentioned above is false? Did you see 13 Hours? Was that all a lie, too?
Are you a 9-11 Truther? :eek:

There is simply no valid comparison to be made. and in fact, when you make these kinds of comparisons, it ruins any chance you might have had to convince me. It is so far out in left field, I believe nothing attached to it. I think you see giant, invasive TSA guys looming in every gov't action our country takes, Rev.

I don't believe ALL muslims want to cut your head off Abbey do you?
I don't believe we have to ROUND UP all muslims to be safe.
the number of radical muslims is small compared to billion of muslims that despite there negative thoughts and koran ARE living in relative peace with us.
Are the millions of Muslims in the U.S. who are NOT bombing and killing or stoning their wives nonexistent, are they just ghost stories. or the MAJORITY in the U.S.?

the comparison is clear.
the principal is clear YOU DON'T BLAME and TAG A WHOLE RELIGIOUS GROUP or RACE FOR THE ACTIONS OF A FEW.

look, Abbey there are Racist KKK and Neo Nazi white people should we database ALL whites? All Over the whole WORLD there are neo Nazis radicalized and hurting people. are the news stories all lies made up by white hating journalist who are all in a vast bigoted anti-white conspiracy together? the killing of jews being staged? Are you a conspiracy theorist?

look i don't know what analogy to use to break through the fog of Fear/hate/concern here.
But Blaming a whole race religion is wrong a gov't tagging targeting a whole race or all in a religion as a murderous threat is wrong.

I'll just say this and leave you to enjoy the Trump Hate on Muslim rallies.
When the gov't decides that ALL Christians and the bible are a threat to civilization you don't get to complain.
They've just define "dangerous" in a different place than you folks.

[Gunny]

I'd be MORE than happy to say everything I say here to folks in person!! Every last word of it. Not sure why you think folks would be afraid. Not for one fucking second.

I don't recall naming anyone specifically. Are you saying the right isn't afraid of its own shadow? Because if you are, I'd like to know why and how PC exists since the only one that adheres to it IS the right as imposed on them by the left.

[PixieStix]

I'd be MORE than happy to say everything I say here to folks in person!! Every last word of it. Not sure why you think folks would be afraid. Not for one fucking second.

I say what I think, I am not afraid and Gunny knows it. I will say what I want, when I want.

[jimnyc]

I don't recall naming anyone specifically. Are you saying the right isn't afraid of its own shadow? Because if you are, I'd like to know why and how PC exists since the only one that adheres to it IS the right as imposed on them by the left.

You said "he represents", but he doesn't. I don't know a single person "afraid" right now. Angry as hell, yes, but not even remotely close to afraid. And you also said that we need to live through him somehow. Also not true.

[Gunny]

I say what I think, I am not afraid and Gunny knows it. I will say what I want, when I want.

On a message board.

[jimnyc]

On a message board.

And why wouldn't she speak up her mind off of a message board?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yes, that's bad, but worse are those who stay home AND say "I'm staying home and I know this will result in Hillary being elected" <--- now THAT is retarded.

But then they cry out, how that will be all the Trump supporters fault.
Dont vote, let Hildabeast win, its on you the guy not voting.
Damn sure is not on me for my supporting my chosen candidate!
Too bad these people do not seem to learn that any Republican is better to have in office than any dem.
And its been that way for at least 50 years now, more so ever year since the mid 1960's IMHO.-Tyr

[PixieStix]

On a message board.

And to your face. And you know it

[Gunny]

And to your face. And you know it

No, I don't know it.

[jimnyc]

And to your face. And you know it

That's what I don't get. Why wouldn't we speak up as he says? Are we supposed to be afraid of getting beat up by others if we took the stances that Trump has? Which I have I might add, and freely tell anyone who will listen!!

[PixieStix]

No, I don't know it.

So I would not stand up and look you in the eye and say everything I say here? Really? :laugh:

[Gunny]

So I would not stand up and look you in the eye and say everything I say here? Really? :laugh:

You can stand in someone's face and shriek incoherently, I'll give you that.

[PixieStix]

That's what I don't get. Why wouldn't we speak up as he says? Are we supposed to be afraid of getting beat up by others if we took the stances that Trump has? Which I have I might add, and freely tell anyone who will listen!!

Trump has said it himself. If he could have just 15 minutes with someone who thinks they hate him, he could explain that we all want the same thing. I have no problem telling people IRL what I am thinking

[Gunny]

Trump has said it himself. If he could have just 15 minutes with someone who thinks they hate him, he could explain that we all want the same thing. I have no problem telling people IRL what I am thinking

I want to know what makes you think that extremist mindthink makes you anything but a leftwingnut? Trump would get nowhere with me in 15 minutes or 15 days as far as him being President goes. If he wants to build me a casino, fine. He should stick to what he's good at.

As far as hate goes ... that's a load of extremist bullshit. No one said anything about hating anyone, and only haters ascribe that mind set others.

[Abbey Marie]

I don't believe ALL muslims want to cut your head off Abbey do you?
I don't believe we have to ROUND UP all muslims to be safe.
the number of radical muslims is small compared to billion of muslims that despite there negative thoughts and koran ARE living in relative peace with us.
Are the millions of Muslims in the U.S. who are NOT bombing and killing or stoning their wives nonexistent, are they just ghost stories. or the MAJORITY in the U.S.?

the comparison is clear.
the principal is clear YOU DON'T BLAME and TAG A WHOLE RELIGIOUS GROUP or RACE FOR THE ACTIONS OF A FEW.

look, Abbey there are Racist KKK and Neo Nazi white people should we database ALL whites? All Over the whole WORLD there are neo Nazis radicalized and hurting people. are the news stories all lies made up by white hating journalist who are all in a vast bigoted anti-white conspiracy together? the killing of jews being staged? Are you a conspiracy theorist?

look i don't know what analogy to use to break through the fog of Fear/hate/concern here.
But Blaming a whole race religion is wrong a gov't tagging targeting a whole race or all in a religion as a murderous threat is wrong.

I'll just say this and leave you to enjoy the Trump Hate on Muslim rallies.
When the gov't decides that ALL Christians and the bible are a threat to civilization you don't get to complain.
They've just define "dangerous" in a different place than you folks.

Rev, you really need to be a little less wordy. I only have so much time to respond. :coffee:

But I'll do my best to answer.

No, I don't think every Muslim wants to cut off my head. But I don't know WHICH ones do. Do you? I also don't know which snake in the basket wants to bite me, but I'm going to keep a close eye on the whole lot of them unless and until I do.

I thought we were talking about databases and vetting. Using terms like "rounding people up" is just trying to fan the flames. Why must you see/frame everything as an extreme violation of rights?

To answer all of your other questions, any group that threatens innocent people should be watched. If "white people" as a group espoused terror against the country, then yes, build a "white people" database. If I am the innocent wife of a KKK guy, I expect to be watched, even though I personally may not ever lift a finger to hurt a soul. If Christians are deemed a threat because we are actually beheading people, threatening people, etc., then we would deserve our own database, too. If we are hounded without us being a physical threat, then I damn sure do deserve to complain.

With all the invasiveness of our federal government these days, even to the point of telling us what we can eat, what we can learn, etc., protecting us from those who wish to harm us is a role I see them performing validly under the Constitution.

[Gunny]

Rev, you really need to be a little less wordy. I only have so much time to respond. :coffee:

But I'll do my best to answer.

No, I don't think every Muslim wants to cut off my head. But I don't know WHICH ones do. Do you? I also don't know which snake in the basket wants to bite me, but I'm going to keep a close eye on the whole lot of them unless and until I do.

I thought we were talking about databases and vetting. Using terms like "rounding people up" is just trying to fan the flames. Why must you see/frame everything as an extreme violation of rights?

To answer all of your other questions, any group that threatens innocent people should be watched. If "white people" as a group espoused terror against the country, then yes, build a "white people" database. If I am the innocent wife of a KKK guy, I expect to be watched, even though I personally may not ever lift a finger to hurt a soul. If Christians are deemed a threat because we are actually beheading people, threatening people, etc., then we would deserve our own database, too. If we are hounded without us being a physical threat, then I damn sure do deserve to complain.

With all the invasiveness of our federal government these days, even to the point of telling us what we can eat, what we can learn, etc., protecting us from those who wish to harm us is a role I see them performing validly under the Constitution.

Funny. I thought we were talking about eminent domain. I wake up and it's about Trump. :rolleyes:

[Abbey Marie]

Funny. I thought we were talking about eminent domain. I wake up and it's about Trump. :rolleyes:

My reply is not about Trump.

[Gunny]

My reply is not about Trump.

I'm aware of that. I just wondered how it went from eminent domain to Trump to religion :dunno:

[Abbey Marie]

I'm aware of that. I just wondered how it went from eminent domain to Trump to religion :dunno:

Sorry, I missed your sarcasm there. :cool:

To answer the question:
1. Conversations ebb and flow like this IRL, and
2. Everything is about Trump, lol.

[Abbey Marie]

Oh, and Rev, I am holding you 100% accountable for making me late for my lab appointment and lunch with my daughter. You made me type that long response to you!

[Gunny]

Sorry, I missed your sarcasm there. :cool:

To answer the question:
1. Conversations ebb and flow like this IRL, and
2. Everything is about Trump, lol.

I was just curious since rev already has a thread on Trump and religion by itself.

[LongTermGuy]

So y'all can call people that stay home "retarded" (BTW, I haven't missed a vote since I was old enough to vote), but take offense that they don't like Trump? Who was it that said they don't like being hypocrites?

Dont get your Panties in a wad...I am agreeing with jim... (staying home is emotional and doesn't make sense)...It is "retarded" and not a very smart thing to do...and only hurts the country...get over it... some folks like Trump...and they are free to vote for him...and not a damn thing you can do about it except Bitch and whine... your free to vote for "Your" guy....and others can vote for "Their" guy....

[Gunny]

Dont get your Panties in a wad...I am agreeing with jim... (staying home is emotional and doesn't make sense)...It is "retarded" and not a very smart thing to do...and only hurts the country...get over it... some folks like Trump...and they are free to vote for him...and not a damn thing you can do about it except Bitch and whine... your free to vote for "Your" guy....and others can vote for "Their" guy....

Try again. I don't care if you agree with Jim, and I don't care who you want to vote for. If you shove it my face, I'm shoving back.

If you want to make it personal, I don't bitch and whine ... I shove YOUR shit back in YOUR face. FYI, since you missed the last two elections around me on message board, I was the first to say in o8 and 12 that if you don't vote for the Republican nominee you may as well vote Dem. I stand by that. But I sure as shit didn't call the people that disagree with me whiners because they did.

I get my panties in a bunch when a bunch of So-called conservatives are behaving like hypocritical, speech-stifling leftwingnuts because not everyone like THEIR RETARD. You call people who exercise their right to stay home retards well how about giving them something besides a retard to vote for.

Now you got a choice, you can sit back your little Trumpy ass and play nice or we can do this the hard way. Just because I choose to not hammer the fuck out of people doesn't mean I don't remember how.

And you're damned rights I'll like who I want and I ain't taking any shit off anyone for my choices.

[revelarts]

Oh, and Rev, I am holding you 100% accountable for making me late for my lab appointment and lunch with my daughter. You made me type that long response to you!

Would Trump approve of you trying to push that responsibility on me?
I think NOT.:poke:

[Abbey Marie]

Would Trump approve of you trying to push that responsibility on me?
I think NOT.:poke:


No, but Hillary and Bernie would. :coffee:

[jimnyc]

Sorry, I missed your sarcasm there. :cool:

To answer the question:
1. Conversations ebb and flow like this IRL, and
2. Everything is about Trump, lol.

I would tell the person you replied to - simply look at the title. How did it turn into Trump? The damn thread IS about Trump!

[fj1200]

So how is Trump going to use eminent domain when and if in power? Executive orders? Demand congress listen to him?

I don't know. Why would I trust someone who already argues for greater government powers over private property than before Kelo.

[Gunny]

I would tell the person you replied to - simply look at the title. How did it turn into Trump? The damn thread IS about Trump!

The first one wasn't and it got turned into Trump anyway.

[jimnyc]

Can someone link me to this thread about eminent domain that changed into Trump instead? Is it recent?

[Perianne]

If any of you watched the debate Saturday night, you saw establishment Jeb Bush harassing Trump about eminent domain. Now there is a report that Jeb, as governor of Florida, employed eminent domain (http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/01/Floridian/Standing_his_ground.shtml) to rid a man of his land. He be a hypocrite.

[Kathianne]

If any of you watched the debate Saturday night, you saw establishment Jeb Bush harassing Trump about eminent domain. Now there is a report that Jeb, as governor of Florida, employed eminent domain (http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/01/Floridian/Standing_his_ground.shtml) to rid a man of his land. He be a hypocrite.

Trump said it, I've yet to see any reports that it's true. If Jeb was involved in such, it would be a huge problem-I really don't see the Bush family making that sort of mistake, considering where he is in the standings.

[Abbey Marie]

Something on which we can agree?


http://kidy.images.worldnow.com/images/8514003_G.jpg

[Perianne]

Trump said it, I've yet to see any reports that it's true. If Jeb was involved in such, it would be a huge problem-I really don't see the Bush family making that sort of mistake, considering where he is in the standings.

I provided the link. I will provide it again:

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/01/Floridian/Standing_his_ground.shtml

[red state]

Rev, you really need to be a little less wordy. I only have so much time to respond. :coffee:

But I'll do my best to answer.

No, I don't think every Muslim wants to cut off my head. But I don't know WHICH ones do. Do you? I also don't know which snake in the basket wants to bite me, but I'm going to keep a close eye on the whole lot of them unless and until I do.

I thought we were talking about databases and vetting. Using terms like "rounding people up" is just trying to fan the flames. Why must you see/frame everything as an extreme violation of rights?

To answer all of your other questions, any group that threatens innocent people should be watched. If "white people" as a group espoused terror against the country, then yes, build a "white people" database. If I am the innocent wife of a KKK guy, I expect to be watched, even though I personally may not ever lift a finger to hurt a soul. If Christians are deemed a threat because we are actually beheading people, threatening people, etc., then we would deserve our own database, too. If we are hounded without us being a physical threat, then I damn sure do deserve to complain.

With all the invasiveness of our federal government these days, even to the point of telling us what we can eat, what we can learn, etc., protecting us from those who wish to harm us is a role I see them performing validly under the Constitution.


HERE, here!!! :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Kathianne]

I provided the link. I will provide it again:

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/03/01/Floridian/Standing_his_ground.shtml

I apologize, what you've linked to has everything to do with why eminent domain exists-for public good, not private. The state of FL has the ability to make their case, though the people, not just this one person, may disagree with an expansion of the Everglades protected area.

I thought you were referencing Trump's claim today, regarding a baseball team 'Bush' benefitted from.

[Perianne]

I apologize, what you've linked to has everything to do with why eminent domain exists-for public good, not private. The state of FL has the ability to make their case, though the people, not just this one person, may disagree with an expansion of the Everglades protected area.

I thought you were referencing Trump's claim today, regarding a baseball team 'Bush' benefitted from.

I haven't heard anything about that.

[sundaydriver]

On CNN this morning a Trump campaign manager explained that the Kelo ruling is not about developers, but about states and local government. He explained this by saying; suppose Walmart comes to town and wants to build a store but it's only a deal if we can build on the property we selected. The city or state then uses Emanate Domain to get the property to seal the deal. See, it's not the developers that use Emanate Domain. I almost bought it! :laugh:

[Kathianne]

The suburb I grew up in had 'the big hospital' for our county-until the county built one in the 70's. Because the hospital served the emergency needs of about a 15 mile radius, it was and still is considered very important.

It had started out as rather small back at the turn of the century, when most of the area was still farmed. By 1960 the suburb itself had 40k people-Between 1948-1970 the hospital had to be expanded 6 separate times. It was built in the oldest residential area near the city centre. The first few expansions went pretty well, people were happy to sell their 'old houses' for enough to buy new construction in more residential areas. By 1965 though, several homes in the area were rehabbed and the old farmhouses/Victorians were in demand. Still the area was in need for more rooms and expanding radiology, oncology, etc departments.

After the last expansion and with the county opening another Trauma 1 center about 15 miles west, with Loyola about the same distance east, no expansion would be allowed after. Plans were set in motion though to build a new hospital in the future, on land on less populated area to the south of the current area. It took 25 years for the city to buy all the residences in the area planned-either directly from the owners by offers or wait until they sold for whatever reason. Then the new hospital was constructed and opened about 7 years ago.

While it was the city that had to do the eminent domain those 6 times, it wasn't for the city itself by the 60's/70's, it was for an 'area of about 8 suburbs.' The city itself was within 15 miles of Loyola-but the suburbs to the north and west were further and further.

Did people make money off of the construction? Yes-contractors, etc. It's the building itself that provided the services that the people needed as much as sewers, water, electricity, etc.

The Kelo decision was more in line with Trump personally with the limo parking and his example of WalMart.