What Was And What Will Be

[DukeU]

Sorry but you can tell me that a fertilized egg is a baby, you just can't convince me. Unless of course you can tell what makes a cell a human being.

They say a pic. is worth a thousand words.

 

[alang1216]

Funny, I'd say that absolute morality, your position, is black-and-white while my relativism is nuanced and encompasses every color of the rainbow.

What does the black-and-white-think, self-negating drivel of moral relativism have to do with the complexities of moral truth?

Moral relativism: there are no moral truths except the moral truth that there are no moral truths; hence, the assertion that there are no moral truths is false. LOL! Behold black-and-white think. Zoom Right over your head.

What you fail to understand is that there are no absolute moral truths. Is there any moral code that is present in every society throughout history?

I have my morality and you have yours and we live under societies that have their own moral truths.

 

[alang1216]

I think you just disqualified yourself from any future discussion of morality. You obviously don't have any.

So are you implying that what the Israelites did was evil? Please explain.

No explanation is necessary. If you don't view genocide as evil you have proven my point. What was the moral difference between Joshua and Hitler? At least Hitler spared the animals.

 

[alang1216]

Sorry but you can tell me that a fertilized egg is a baby, you just can't convince me. Unless of course you can tell what makes a cell a human being.

They say a pic. is worth a thousand words.

View attachment 452664

How do I know they are human and not chimpanzee? How do you? Of course they are far from being fertilized eggs.

 

[Ringtone]

Not really an answer to my question, PoliticalChic would be happy, she couldn't answer it either.

What kind did Jefferson practice? Was he an evil man? Should we be erecting monuments to evil men?

Nonsense! There's nothing "rocket sciencey" about that question. Every swingin' Dick and Jane of us are evil.

 

[alang1216]

My nephew is a severely autistic, 27-year old. I'll spare you the details but he has never been really happy and has ruined the lives of those around him. My sister-in-law never had another child, knowing what was in store for her. How many children did he keep from being born? Who knows?

So why don't you just kill the inhuman, inconvenient bastard and be rid of him?

It wasn't my call but had I been able to see the future I would not have hesitated to abort him. Cruelty or kindness? Probably both.

 

[Ringtone]

No explanation is necessary. If you don't view genocide as evil you have proven my point. What was the moral difference between Joshua and Hitler? At least Hitler spared the animals.

More black-and-white think. Are you asserting that genocide, in and of itself, is evil? If so, why is it evil?

 

[alang1216]

Not really an answer to my question, PoliticalChic would be happy, she couldn't answer it either.

What kind did Jefferson practice? Was he an evil man? Should we be erecting monuments to evil men?

Nonsense! There's nothing "rocket sciencey" about that question. Every swingin' Dick and Jane of us are evil.

If we're all evil, the concept is meaningless.

 

[Ringtone]

If we're all evil, the concept is meaningless.

Why would that be?

 

[DukeU]

How do I know they are human and not chimpanzee? How do you? Of course they are far from being fertilized eggs.

Are chimpanzee parts worth a Lamborghini?

 

[Ringtone]

What you fail to understand is that there are no absolute moral truths. Is there any moral code that is present in every society throughout history?

I have my morality and you have yours and we live under societies that have their own moral truths.

Nonsense. What you pretend not to understand is the distinction between the universally objective standard of morality, whose name you keep alluding to but will not speak, and the shifting societal norms and mores(laws) in history.

 

[alang1216]

No explanation is necessary. If you don't view genocide as evil you have proven my point. What was the moral difference between Joshua and Hitler? At least Hitler spared the animals.

More black-and-white think. Are you asserting that genocide, in and of itself, is evil? If so, why is it evil?

I certainly wouldn't want me or my family to be the victim of it.

 

[alang1216]

What you fail to understand is that there are no absolute moral truths. Is there any moral code that is present in every society throughout history?

I have my morality and you have yours and we live under societies that have their own moral truths.

Nonsense. What you pretend not to understand is the distinction between the universally objective standard of morality, whose name you keep alluding to but will not speak, and the shifting societal norms and mores(laws) in history.

Maybe if you gave me an example of a universally objective standard of morality I'd understand?

Are you inferring that God has given us a universally objective standard of morality?

 

[alang1216]

If we're all evil, the concept is meaningless.

Why would that be?

How do we contrast good and evil if we are all evil?

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. Democrats have a particular propensity to view themselves as monarchs rather than the more American concept of what a President is.


Rather than the messy legislative system in which elected officials write laws, we have this view:

“We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” Obama said…”

CBS News - Breaking news, 24/7 live streaming news & top stories

Watch CBS News live and get the latest, breaking news headlines of the day for national news and world news today.

washington.cbslocal.com

It echoes what Roosevelt, the socialist godfather of the Democrats said earlier about no need to heed the Constitution:

In July 5, 1935, in a letter to Representative Samuel B. Hill of Washington, the President manifested his contempt for the Constitution. Hill was chairman of the subcommittee studying the Guffey-Vinson bill to regulate the coal industry: the purpose of the legislation was to re-establish, for the coal industry, the NRA code system which the Supreme Court had unanimously declared unconstitutional. Roosevelt wrote: "I hope your committee will not permit doubts as to constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the legislation."

Letter to Representative Samuel B. Hill on H.R. 8479. | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

So, how do Democrats govern without the rest of the mechanisms of government????

“President Executive Order: Biden Has Signed A Record 33 In One Week

Biden has signed more than three times as many orders as the previous four Presidents COMBINED.” President Executive Order: Biden Has Signed A Record 33 In One Week

Guess who said....

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM
You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.
"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""
" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Guess what...

You are a liar. Biden never said the use of executive orders made you a dictator. He was responding to a question about tax policy and said EOs cannot be used for that. He even stated he would sign several EOs on his first day in office. He clearly recognizes the limits of EOs.

" Biden never said the use of executive orders made you a dictator."


Watch this:



Guess who said....



"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2021, at 6:39 PM

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting.

"Former United States Vice President Joe Biden, who is running against President Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, said that he would not use executive orders to implement his policies because "you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator.""

" The comments came as he was asked about his tax policy and if it would be a priority. Biden said that he would depend on the votes in Congress but stressed that raising taxes would help the US economy grow more than it would under a second Trump term. " Huh? Would that be a healthy growth or something temporary?"

"you can't use executive orders unless you are a dictator."

You will have to search far and wide for news media quoting Joe Biden about the use of executive orders. It was out there in October but seems to have been scrubbed quite well, since he has taken over the Presidency and is using EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Just found it interesting...

www.t-g.com

Biden: You Can’t Legislate Through Executive Orders ‘Unless You’re a Dictator’: AIR.TV

www.air.tv

Thread
See new Tweets

Tweet




Tom Elliott

@tomselliott



·

Jan 26

.

@JoeBiden

in October: “I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus."

Charlie Kirk: Says that "Joe Biden admits he is governing like a 'dictator.'"

PolitiFact's ruling: False

Here's why: Some outspoken critics of Joe Biden are using the president’s words against him to criticize the flurry of executive orders he signed after Inauguration Day.

In a Jan. 26 Instagram post, Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative advocacy group Turning Point USA, published a clip of Biden speaking on stage about executive action. Text over the video says: "Joe Biden admits he is governing like a ‘dictator.’"

"34+ Executive Orders in less than a week and we’re supposed to believe that *Trump* was the one who governed like a dictator?" Kirk wrote in a caption

Politifact is owned and operated by the Wehrmacht.....er, Democrat Party.

On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
sing inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.

Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.

PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?

But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:

For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.

On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.

Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.

That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."

This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.

There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.



VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way







This bias is evident in:

1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate

PolitiFact examination;2

2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;

and

3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis

and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.

http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf





Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."

The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.

There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.

All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2013/05/28/study-finds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans

PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PolitiFact.com



The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ



"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.

Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest." http://mediatrackers.org/florida/20...-times-scores-pants-on-fire-for-partisan-bias





PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)

PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)

PolitiFact this week judged statements about the Arizona immigration law and Climategate. Guess what side these fact-checkers chose? If you guessed “Progressive/Democrat,” you’re a w...

www.redstate.com

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Politifact

Share:
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmailTumblrRedditLinkedInFlipboardGoogle BookmarksShare

LEAST BIASED
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biases sources.

• Overall, this update reveals a slight leftward shift in Politifact’s fact-checking selection, but not enough to move them from the least biased category.

Detailed Report
Factual Reporting: HIGH
Country: USA
World Press Freedom Rank: USA 45/180
History
Founded in 2007 by the Tampa Bay Times, PolitiFact.com utilizes reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets to “fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists, and interest groups”. They publish original statements and their evaluations on the PolitiFact.com website and assign each a “Truth-O-Meter” rating. The ratings range from “True” for completely accurate statements to “Pants on Fire” (from the taunt “Liar, liar, pants on fire”) for false and ridiculous claims. In 2018, Politifact became affiliated with the Poynter Institute.
Read our profile on United States government and media.


Funded by / Ownership
According to their about page “In 2018, PolitiFact was acquired by the Poynter Institute, a nonprofit school for journalists. While PolitiFact relies on administrative support from the Poynter Institute, it is otherwise financially self-sustaining. PolitiFact receives support from online advertising, as well as revenue generated through content partnerships and from grants.”
Analysis / Bias
In review, Politifact has been called left-biased by some right leaning sources. In fact, there is a source called Politifact Bias that is dedicated to pointing out Politifact’s biases. Politifact is also a signatory of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN), which outlines a code principles for credible fact-checkers.

Politifact uses minimally loaded language in their articles and headlines such as this: Trump falsely claims NATO countries owe United States money for defense spending. All information is well sourced to credible media and/or direct statements from experts in the field or the politicians themselves. Fact Check selection leans slightly left as more right-wing politicians are currently fact-checked. This may be due to bias or the fact that Republicans currently control two branches of government and hence there is more to check. In fact, there was a recent academic study done that shows Politifact employs minimal bias through wording.


Overall, this update reveals a slight leftward shift in Politifact’s fact-checking selection, but not enough to move them from the least biased category. (7/10/2016) Updated (D. Van Zandt (2/05/2020)

"PolitiFact warps reality about left-wing activist inciting Capitol riot
A PolitiFact article written by Bill McCarthy declares “there’s no proof that” a left-wing anti-Trump activist named John Sullivan incited rioting at the U.S. Capitol. As a result of this claim, Facebook flagged and reduced distribution of a post which accused Sullivan of doing so.

However, video footage indisputably proves that Sullivan encouraged people to storm and vandalize the Capitol. Moreover, Sullivan was subsequently arrested and charged with “violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds” and “interfering with law enforcement” during the riot. In the wake of these revelations, PolitiFact “updated” its article twice but has not changed its conclusion despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

PolitiFact warps reality about left-wing activist inciting Capitol riot

A PolitiFact article written by Bill McCarthy declares “there’s no proof that” a left-wing anti-Trump activist named John Sullivan incited

noqreport.com

And so, once again, we find that the only fact-checker necessary.....



Biden voters have a long history of illegality, riots, arson, assaults.....

Not so Trump supporters.

False-flag schemes and agent provocateurs are nothing new for the Nazis....er, Democrats.


Too bad you've never read a book.

....is moi.

So of the thousands of rioters, ONE was some moron with an agenda. Sorry anecdotes are unconvincing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I fully understand that empathy, concern for another human being is not within your character......

Maybe I have empathy for both the unborn AND the mothers that have to raise them. In your binary worldview if one side is good the other must be bad. Those of us who live in the real world know things are never that simple.

You unwittingly demonstrate your utter lack of empathy for either, as you suggest that both pregnancy and motherhood are diseases to be stamped out. In the meantime, we have an abundant supply of willing adopters standing in line and desperating searching abroad while you ghouls abort approximately 3,000 babies a day in America alone.

There's nothing more simple-minded than the self-negating drivel of moral relativism/subjectivism. Your worldview is utterly bereft of nuance. It's the epitome of black-and-white think. In the real world, logic is the foundation of morality. Objectively sifting through the circumstances of any given situation to find the real-world outcome and, thusly, deciphering the truth is simply beyond your moral IQ.

Pregnancy and motherhood happen to real people. People I have empathy for not for some absolutist morality.

"Pregnancy and motherhood happen to real people."

And those real people are totally in charge of how and when that happens.

A change of mind at a later date is not a legitimate reason to slay the baby they have created.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Some friendly advice, when you say "Here's a Democrat wielding the word 'inadvertent'" you should follow it with a quote where the word is actually used. Otherwise someone less charitable than me might think you are a bald faced liar who just makes things up.

There's nothing charitable about black-hearted baby killers.

Sorry but you can tell me that a fertilized egg is a baby, you just can't convince me. Unless of course you can tell what makes a cell a human being.

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point." - Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

 

[PoliticalChic]

Past as prologue.


1.I am a believer in the words of the great Yogi, who presciently said “'It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future'”….but sometimes there are hints in what has been.

But lets begin with the present. It has been established that Biden voters, whatever number there were, and it is surely below 74.2 million, were clueless about the policies that they were voting for. I know this because I have, on numerous occasions, asked them to provide both the Trump policies that they voted against, and Biden policies that they voted for and anticipated.
Of course, they couldn't. Still can't.
A deeply worrisome position for an electorate.



2. For the context of the thread title, recall that whole ‘energy independence’ mantra that impelled elections since the 1960s, 1970s, Trump achieved energy independence, one of the many achievements for which the Democrats felt he needed to be punished.

Joe Biden wiped it out with the stroke of a pen.

“Several unions that eagerly endorsed President Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential election are now learning the hard way what it means to support Democrat policies. During his first day in office, the newly-inaugurated president revoked the construction permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, thus destroying thousands of jobs.A total of 42,000 jobs were expected to be filled once the pipeline was completed. But not anymore.” ‘Insulting and disappointing’: Unions show signs of voter remorse after Biden reality sinks in

Great news for the oil tyrants in the Middle East, and Iran…and especially Russia, you know, the folks the liars said Trump was in bed with.



3. Now, what else might Biden and the Democrats do for Putin and Russia. Well, remember that Reagan, the greatest President in modern times, was the first President to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world, with the START treaty, while another Republican, Nixon, was the first to stabilize the numbers of the increase in nuclear weapons, that was the SALT treaty.

Of course, Democrats, very different: Here is Hussein offering Putin a quid pro quo.



He cut the defensive weapons we were going to put in Poland. What else was he promising Putin?



What do you suppose Biden’s model will be???



Did any of you consider this history and future when you voted for the Wehrmacht…er, Democrats?

Too late now.

You lost the White House.

You lost the Senate.

You lost the House of Representatives.

You lost.

Nobody wants to hear the whining anymore.

Especially from your Orange-haired chimpanzee.

There is 'losing' and there is 'losing.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

Past as prologue.


1.I am a believer in the words of the great Yogi, who presciently said “'It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future'”….but sometimes there are hints in what has been.

But lets begin with the present. It has been established that Biden voters, whatever number there were, and it is surely below 74.2 million, were clueless about the policies that they were voting for. I know this because I have, on numerous occasions, asked them to provide both the Trump policies that they voted against, and Biden policies that they voted for and anticipated.
Of course, they couldn't. Still can't.
A deeply worrisome position for an electorate.



2. For the context of the thread title, recall that whole ‘energy independence’ mantra that impelled elections since the 1960s, 1970s, Trump achieved energy independence, one of the many achievements for which the Democrats felt he needed to be punished.

Joe Biden wiped it out with the stroke of a pen.

“Several unions that eagerly endorsed President Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential election are now learning the hard way what it means to support Democrat policies. During his first day in office, the newly-inaugurated president revoked the construction permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, thus destroying thousands of jobs.A total of 42,000 jobs were expected to be filled once the pipeline was completed. But not anymore.” ‘Insulting and disappointing’: Unions show signs of voter remorse after Biden reality sinks in

Great news for the oil tyrants in the Middle East, and Iran…and especially Russia, you know, the folks the liars said Trump was in bed with.



3. Now, what else might Biden and the Democrats do for Putin and Russia. Well, remember that Reagan, the greatest President in modern times, was the first President to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world, with the START treaty, while another Republican, Nixon, was the first to stabilize the numbers of the increase in nuclear weapons, that was the SALT treaty.

Of course, Democrats, very different: Here is Hussein offering Putin a quid pro quo.



He cut the defensive weapons we were going to put in Poland. What else was he promising Putin?



What do you suppose Biden’s model will be???



Did any of you consider this history and future when you voted for the Wehrmacht…er, Democrats?

Trump lost.
Want to know why Trump lost?
Look up at that steaming lake of butt squirts you posted.
YOU'RE why Trump lost.

Yet you can't come up with any of his policies you can point to as causing any loss....

.....nor any Biden policies you yearned for.

Seriously, weren't you surprised that, after the doctors made the intermastoid incision, and removed your brain- you were still able to post on the board?

Policies the American people opposed:

1. Child separations at the border;
2. Building the Wall;
3. Tax cuts for billionaires;
4. Killing the Affordable Care Act;
5. ICE Detention Camps;
6. Mass incareration;
7. Trump's covid response;
8. Trump sucking up to up to dictators while snubbing allies;
9. Trump's failures to economic issues related to wages and unemployment for low wage workers, infrastructure, or the opioid epidemic - central campaign promises, ;
10. Trump's failure to address climate change.

And that's just a quick top 10 list. Then here's his foreign policy, or rather lack of a cohesive foreign policy, and general assholishness that decent people found disgusting.

Any woman who would vote for a man who brags of "grabbing women by the pussy", isn't completely lacking in self-esteem or critical thinking abilities, but a woman who would vote for a man who took babies away from their mothers, is an utterly disgusting whore unworthy of anything approaching civility, and fully deserving the scorn and derision of others. You're that stupid, gullible slattern.

And then you lie about Trump, calling him a great man, which makes you his bitch. Disgusting.

Trump achievements.


“Before the China Virus invaded our shores, we built the world’s most prosperous economy,” the statement begins, noting the administration achieved an “unprecedented economic boom.”

In addition to 7 million new jobs — “more than three times government experts’ projections” — the administration said that annual income for middle-class families grew by nearly $6,000, or “more than five times the gains during the entire previous administration.”

Weeks before state and local governments began shutting down their economies, the U.S. unemployment rate fell to 3.5 percent, “the lowest in a half-century,” the administration said.

In fact, in March 2019, CBS News reported that there were a million more jobs available in the U.S. than unemployed workers — a fact noted by the administration, which said it “achieved 40 months in a row with more job openings than job hirings.”

Nearly 160 million Americans were employed pre-pandemic, another record, as “jobless claims hit a nearly 50-year low,” the White House said.

As incomes gained “in every single metro area” in the country for the first time in almost 30 years, the number of people “claiming unemployment insurance as a share of the population hit its lowest on record,” the administration said.

The list of accomplishments also noted an oft-repeated point — that during Trump’s term, blacks and Hispanics, as well as Asian-Americans and Native Americans all achieved record low unemployment rates. So, too, did Americans with disabilities and workers without a high school diploma, the administration said.

“The bottom 50 percent of American households saw a 40 percent increase in net worth,” said the administration, adding: “Wages rose fastest for low-income and blue collar workers – a 16 percent pay increase.”

Meanwhile, “African American homeownership increased from 41.7 percent to 46.4 percent,” the White House noted.

More than 1.2 million factory and construction jobs were created, as the president enacted “policies to bring back supply chains from overseas,” the list notes.

The administration also touted the meteoric growth in the various U.S. stock indices, which have been good for businesses as well as average Americans’ retirement accounts tied to the markets.

One of President Trump’s 2016 campaign pledges that went unfulfilled was the passage of a massive infrastructure rebuilding project to repair and replace aging, crumbling bridges, roads, sewers, and water systems. But the administration did manage to invest “over $1.3 billion through the Agriculture Department’s ReConnect Program to bring high-speed broadband infrastructure to rural America,” the list notes.

The administration also touted the president’s COVID-19 policies that included a rejection of “blanket lockdowns” as vital to the economic rebound seen in recent months.

“During the third quarter of 2020,” the White House said, “the economy grew at a rate of 33.1 percent — the most rapid GDP growth ever recorded.”

“Since coronavirus lockdowns ended, the economy has added back over 12 million jobs, more than half the jobs lost,” says the White House. “Jobs have been recovered 23 times faster than the previous administration’s recovery.”

The White House said that under President Barack Obama, “it took 49 months for the unemployment rate to fall from 10 percent” following the Great Recession” to under 7 percent compared to just 3 months for the Trump Administration” following the mass joblessness created by mandated business closures and the pandemic.

At the same time, “80 percent of small businesses are now up, up from just 53 percent in April.”

Additional accomplishments noted by the administration include:

— The creation of more than 9,000 “Opportunity Zones” to attract business investment and create jobs;

— Tax relief for corporations, businesses, and the vast majority of American workers;

— The elimination of reams of regulations, which has added to the country’s economic growth;

— Pursued “fair and reciprocal trade” agreements that put the United States first, including withdrawal “from the job-killing Trans-Pacific Partnership” and replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA);

— “Historic support for American farmers”;

— Making the U.S. “a net energy exporter” for the first time in seven decades;

— Approved the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines;

— Increased access to the country’s “abundant natural resource in order to achieve energy independence”;

— Built more than 450 miles of new border wall and secured agreements with countries to house migrants there instead of in the U.S.;

— “Fully enforced the immigration laws” of the country;

— Got NATO countries to significantly increase their contributions to the alliance, as per their initial agreement;

— Strengthened and rebuilt the U.S. military;

— Reduced U.S. troop presence in war zones overseas;

— Brokered several historic peace deals between long-time enemies in eastern Europe and the Middle East;

— Moved the U.S. embassy in Israel to the capital of Jerusalem, though the three previous presidents pledged to do so;

— Defeated ISIS

— Sped development of two new vaccines for the COVID-19 pandemic in record time.

'Unprecedented': White House releases exhaustive list of achievements for Trump presidency
The Trump Administration has released an exhaustive list of accomplishments achieved over the past four years, many of which have largely gone unreported

www.bizpacreview.com


Now, let's see what Democrats voted for.

Yeah I’ve read that list of false claims before. Bullshit all the way. Even going before Covid his economic policies were a disaster in waiting.

No vulgarity....it identifies you as trash.

 

[Bernhard]

Just shows you that if Trump had been a normal person,

Politicians are not normal- people in the spot light are not normal- it takes a narcissist to crave that attention- not everyone is blessed? in that manner- it doesn't matter what the schtick or political stripe- some are better at it than others- and what exactly is normal and why should anyone strive to be like everyone else who calls themselves normal? In this day and time materialistic image over substance is normal (think Bill Clinton, Obama)- personally, I prefer abnormal to the shallow and narrow minded "normal".

I'm saying Trump was obnoxious, boorish, a pathological liar, had stupid hair, is a racist and couldn't stop boasting about how great he was. Man, if anyone ever needed a slap down, it was Trump.

Yeah, maybe Republicans now find out that supporting a candidate/President who constantly divides and incites people, is not a smart thing to do if you want to get your policies through.

Because I'm sure many of those who voted for Biden didn't do so because of policies, but because they were just fed up with the utter constant embaressment that was Donald Trump.

Biden? Dunno, but hell, still better than this ape.