Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, moralist said:

Both are vital to the production of a building. I get your dislike of Trump. You're a thinker. He's a doer.

Greg

 

I agree.  Both have their uses but they are not the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 15k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Michael Stuart Kelly

    4643

  • Peter

    1450

  • Jon Letendre

    1319

  • Brant Gaede

    884

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It is intriguing.  I've been fairly obsessed for about a year with thinking about details.  I find microbiology fascinating. I wouldn't be wise, however, to talk about details.  The schemers are

That's what it says at the top of the page.  Your point?  It's not like this thread has devolved into a medley of cat videos.  Yet.  

Even more hilarious, how about all those dorks who donated money to Stormy Daniels' GoFundMe campaign for legal expenses? This money will now go to President Trump to pay his lawyers. How co

Posted Images

8 hours ago, moralist said:

Both are vital to the production of a building. I get your dislike of Trump. You're a thinker. He's a doer.

Greg

 

I dislike Trump because he is an unmannered boorish person.  I admire some of the deeds done by doers.  Vanderbildt financed some great buildings.  He did not go about trashing people verbally in public.  The Commodore had good manners which did not make him less effective as a businessman. 

Thinkers are necessary, but not sufficient.  Doers are needed make the ideas of thinkers  take shape in reality.  Einstein thought up his relativity theories.  That was necessary by not sufficient to make the GPS  happen in the real world. Both sorts are required to make the world what it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

I dislike Trump because he is an unmannered boorish person.  I admire some of the deeds done by doers.  Vanderbildt financed some great buildings.  He did not go about trashing people verbally in public.  The Commodore had good manners which did not make him less effective as a businessman. 

Thinkers are necessary, but not sufficient.  Doers are needed make the ideas of thinkers  take shape in reality.  Einstein thought up his relativity theories.  That was necessary by not sufficient to make the GPS  happen in the real world. Both sorts are required to make the world what it is.

I like this.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites

The massacres must stop. Are you ready to defend yourself? What is a well regulated militia?

Copied from Wikipedia: It has historically been used to describe all able-bodied men who are not members of the Army or Navy (Uniformed Services). From the U.S. Constitution, Article II (The Executive branch), Sec. 2, Clause 1: "The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States when called into the actual service of the United States."

Today, the term militia is used to describe a number of groups within the United States. Primarily, these are: The organized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, which repealed section two hundred thirty-two and sections 1625 - 1660 of title sixteen of the Revised Statutes, consists of State militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia.[2] The National Guard, however, is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States, which is a federally recognized reserve military force of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force, although the two are linked.

The reserve militia are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

Former members of the armed forces are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code. end quote

I hope Trump will propose something on the following lines. How do we stop the massacres? Obviously, people should not be armed inside certain venues like a political rallies, where there is already armed security. Nor am I suggesting any form of conscription. But on average, every tenth person could voluntarily have a background check, be trained or retrained in the use of concealable or openly carried weapons, and then carry their weapon on certain days of the week, or at all times, if there is a discernable threat, at the discretion of a militia commander or at the discretion of the person who is carrying the weapon.

Other countries like Israel and Switzerland have had laws requiring citizens be armed. Will there be some problems? Of course. But what if every tenth person in a nightclub, movie theatre, or mall was armed when terrorists attempt a massacre?

Peter  

Link to post
Share on other sites

The militia could be called, something along the lines of America’s Defenders. Any other suggestions?

Let the traitorous Progressives howl. It’s time we took back our liberties and our safety from Progressives and the other barbarous hordes trying to murder us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Peter said:

The massacres must stop. Are you ready to defend yourself? What is a well regulated militia?

Copied from Wikipedia: It has historically been used to describe all able-bodied men who are not members of the Army or Navy (Uniformed Services). From the U.S. Constitution, Article II (The Executive branch), Sec. 2, Clause 1: "The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States when called into the actual service of the United States."

Today, the term militia is used to describe a number of groups within the United States. Primarily, these are: The organized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903, which repealed section two hundred thirty-two and sections 1625 - 1660 of title sixteen of the Revised Statutes, consists of State militia forces, notably the National Guard and the Naval Militia.[2] The National Guard, however, is not to be confused with the National Guard of the United States, which is a federally recognized reserve military force of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force, although the two are linked.

The reserve militia are part of the unorganized militia defined by the Militia Act of 1903 as consisting of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who is not a member of the National Guard or Naval Militia.

Former members of the armed forces are also considered part of the "unorganized militia" per Sec 313 Title 32 of the US Code. end quote

I hope Trump will propose something on the following lines. How do we stop the massacres? Obviously, people should not be armed inside certain venues like a political rallies, where there is already armed security. Nor am I suggesting any form of conscription. But on average, every tenth person could voluntarily have a background check, be trained or retrained in the use of concealable or openly carried weapons, and then carry their weapon on certain days of the week, or at all times, if there is a discernable threat, at the discretion of a militia commander or at the discretion of the person who is carrying the weapon.

Other countries like Israel and Switzerland have had laws requiring citizens be armed. Will there be some problems? Of course. But what if every tenth person in a nightclub, movie theatre, or mall was armed when terrorists attempt a massacre?

Peter  

Israel also imposes a -lifetime limit- of 50 bullets for home  kept fire arms....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ba’al wrote: Israel also imposes a - lifetime limit - of 50 bullets for home kept fire arms.... end quote

I found the following in my mailbox, from The Times of Israel, that reminded me of my suggestion to take back and defend America. Interesting.

Peter

The Times of Israel: Birthright Israel Foundation has helped send more than half a million young Jewish adults on a life-changing 10-day journey through Israel to explore their history, heritage and homeland. Become a part of this incredible movement. Please give generously today.

Thank you, David Fisher, President

Link to post
Share on other sites

Florida: America's Jihad Playground by Michelle Malkin, Posted: Jun 15, 2016 12:01 AM

The home of the "Happiest Place on Earth" has been breeding killer jihadists and Muslim zealots for years. Omar Mateen, the cold-blooded mass murderer who gunned down 49 people at an Orlando gay nightclub and wounded 53 more before police took him out late Sunday, may have worked alone. But he operated in the larger context of a teeming, terror-coddling paradise. While tourists from around the world soak up sunshine and dreams at Disney World, Islamic extremism festers around them.

Schools: The Muslim Students Association, founded by the radical Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood whose stated purpose is to wage "grand jihad" on America, is active at the publicly funded University of Central Florida in Orlando. The group defiantly brought un-indicted terror co-conspirator Siraj Wahhaj to campus. He's the black Muslim convert and inflammatory imam tied by federal prosecutors to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and New York City landmarks bombing plots.

Wahhaj served as a character witness for convicted terror mastermind Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheik), called for replacement of America's "constitutional government with a caliphate" and roots for our nation to "crumble" so Muslims can take over. UCF funded a Muslims "da'wa" (conversion) seminar and with an endowment by the Saudi-supported International Institute of Islamic Thought sought to create an Islamic Studies chair to "help the Ummah regain its intellectual and cultural identity and re-affirm its presence as a dynamic civilization."

The IIIT, also a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate, donated at least $50,000 to a "think tank" run by Sami al-Arian that served as a front group for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. While al-Arian, a Muslim Brotherhood member dating back to the 1980s, served as a computer science professor at Tampa's University of South Florida, he toured the country raising money for terrorism overseas. Investigative reporters and the feds caught al-Arian on tape inciting his attendees against, America, Israel "and their allies until death." The left-wing academic pleaded guilty to a terror-fundraising conspiracy charge in 2006.

Al-Arian brought Palestinian-born Ramadan Shalah to teach at USF and head his "think tank" for a spell. Shalah left the school in 1995 and resurfaced as head of Syria's Islamic Jihad. He remains one of the FBI's most wanted indicted terrorist fugitives.

Apologist officials at USF, first exposed by counter-jihad researcher Steve Emerson as America's "Jihad U," turned a blind eye to the terror helpers among them. Mosques: Mateen's homicidal hatred for gays didn't exist in a vacuum. Mateen's neighborhood mosque in nearby Fort Pierce, Florida, was also the house of worship of Moner Abu-Salha, an American jihad recruiter and suicide bomber who blew himself up in Syria last year. The Palm Beach Post reported this week that Abu-Salha had posted videos of an imam's death-to-gays rant on Facebook. . . . . Just weeks before the Pulse nightclub massacre, another Orlando mosque, the Husseini Islamic Center, hosted a guest imam who had preached that "gays must die" and that Muslims should not "be embarrassed about this ... let's get rid of them now." end quote 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Peter said:

But what if every tenth person in a nightclub, movie theatre, or mall was armed when terrorists attempt a massacre?

They'd never attempt it...

 ...because a massacre impossible without a liberal politically correct gun free zone to guarantee helpless unarmed victims..

Greg

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, turkeyfoot said:

Very good read. Especially Fear and Loathing.

EXCELLENT! :lol:

I'm watching with great interest how Donald Trump has been continually evolving from moment to moment. He's tuning his political car even while he's driving it...

...and that's real talent.

Greg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moralist said:

The real reason...

 "Americans – excepting intellectuals and leftists – love the rich who earned their money. "

http://ariwatch.com/FearAndLoathingOfDonaldTrump.htm

 

Greg

False.  There are those who judge others on their manners, how they treat people  and their ethical level.  You have no statistical proof that Americans love the rich  (who earned their money)  without regard to other matters.  For example how many Americans  would live a rich person who earned his money  and tortured helpless  animals?  There are other matters besides income  and manner in which income is gotten. 

You have a very superficial grasp of how people might judge others.  Now if you told me you would love a rich man who earned his money and tortured helpless animals  I would believe you.  I have no reason not to believe you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

False.  There are those who judge others on their manners, how they treat people  and their ethical level.  You have no statistical proof that Americans love the rich  (who earned their money)  without regard to other matters.  For example how many Americans  would live a rich person who earned his money  and tortured helpless  animals?  There are other matters besides income  and manner in which income is gotten. 

You have a very superficial grasp of how people might judge others.  Now if you told me you would love a rich man who earned his money and tortured helpless animals  I would believe you.  I have no reason not to believe you.

My manners are sometimes not so good. This leaves me vulnerable to being shamed by the better mannered which I can only spike by apologizing.

--Brant

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

False.  There are those who judge others on their manners, how they treat people  and their ethical level.  

That quote was referring to your antipathy towards Trump, Bob.

 

Greg

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at MSN and Yahoo, both have stories about the Republican Party abandoning Donald Trump. That is BS. It’s the same old RINO statists who are ticked off about losing their power and sway. You can count on the liberal “press” to lie and propagandize. And one new poll in Wisconsin shows Trump losing to Hillary. Trump did bring that upon himself by being thin skinned and vilifying their Republican governor. That was dumb, Trump.  And his nicknames for Rubio and Cruz? Dumb, even if it did help him win the primary vote. Now how do you like those names that hurt other potential Republican, Trump supporters, who are saying, Never Trump? And who are not part of the RINO’s? They just don’t like you enough to vote for you, even if they despise Hillary.

Peter

Robert is pretty sharp. Oh the twists and turns of the communist inspired, political minds.

Tracinski wrote: . . . . This is nicely summed up in a little graphic passing around on Twitter to illustrate Poe's Law, the Internet adage about how it's impossible to tell the difference between satire of a belief and the sincere expression of it. On the left are tweets from "Godfrey Elfwick," a parody accounting representing the views of a stereotypical leftist "Social Justice Warrior." On the right are tweets from an actual stereotypical Social Justice Warrior, CNN talking head Sally Kohn. The idea, I guess, is that Kohn thinks a radical Islamist needed to learn from American Christians how to hate homosexuals--despite the fact that the death penalty for homosexuality is widely preached and practiced in the Muslim world.

So the left will gladly protect homosexuals from the very great threat of having Christians refuse to bake cakes for their weddings. But when homosexuals are attacked by Muslims who think they should be put to death, the left will cover its ears and eyes and deny the threat even exists.

This is what they call a "teachable moment" for American homosexuals. They have been sold on the idea of a kind of pan-leftist alliance in which all of the different victim groups band together to fight their common oppressors. But the interests of some supposed victim groups trump the interests of others. In a contest between "homophobia" and "Islamophobia," it turns out that the left is more concerned with avoiding any accusation that it might be hostile to Islam.

This is just one example of the con the left has pulled on all minority groups. It presents itself as the protector of their rights and interests, but it is actually just using them for its own agenda. The left starts with a pre-existing animus against capitalism and Western civilization. The point of its supposed alliance of the oppressed is not to actually protect their interests but to assemble an army of malcontents to tear down the existing system. And when it becomes convenient to do so, it will sacrifice them to that agenda. From the Charlie Hebdo massacre to Orlando, it's as if the Islamists have been ticking down a list of traditional liberal client groups--artists, Jews, women, gays--and attacking them, only to be met with the left's stubborn denial and indifference . . . . end quote 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ann Coulter’s article reads, “One thing Trump is not, is unclear.” Well said Ann. I heard Trump’s speech and I repeatedly said, “exactly” or “that’s right Trump, that’s what I think.”

Peter

Some cuts from Ann Coulter’s article. “Speech Actually Hear It?” by Ann Coulter Posted: June 15, 2016 6:17 PM: The media have lost their minds after Trump's magnificent speech on Monday. It's all hands on deck, no attack is too extreme. Their main point is: DO NOT LOOK AT THAT SPEECH. It has "words that wound." Much too dangerous even to read it. Instead of reporting what Trump said, the media give us the "gist" of it (in the sense of an unrecognizable distortion). It was awful, Hitlerian, beneath our dignity as a nation. They lie about what he said and then attack their own lies as if they're attacking Trump.

The Washington Post's headline, which got their reporters banned from Trump's press briefings, was: "Donald Trump Seems to Connect President Obama to the Orlando Shooting." I guess OK, You're Right, didn't sound professional, so the Post pretended not to understand Trump's speech, at all. We can't makes heads or tails of it, but he seems to be saying ...

One thing Trump is not, is unclear. Contrary to the Post's headline suggesting that Trump had posited some crazy theory about Obama secretly meeting with Omar Mateen to plot the attack -- No, this gun is much better for a mass shooting, Omar -- Trump criticized the Obama administration policies that are not keeping us safe. (It's completely unprecedented to respond to a mass murder by criticizing the policies that allowed it to happen!)

After San Bernardino and Orlando -- also, the Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, Little Rock, Chattanooga and Times Square -- quite obviously, Trump is right.

. . . . . In his speech, Trump said: "The killer was an Afghan, of Afghan parents, who immigrated to the United States. His father published support for the Afghan Taliban, a regime which murders those who don't share its radical views. The father even said he was running for president of that country. The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here. That is a fact, and it's a fact we need to talk about. We have a dysfunctional immigration system which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens."

. . . . With the media, you're an "American" when you commit the worst mass shooing in U.S. history, an "Afghan" when you're applying to college. You're an "American" when you shoot up the San Bernardino community center, a "Pakistani" when you're offended by Trump's remarks. You're an "American" when you slaughter troops at Fort Hood, a "Muslim" when the Army realizes it can't fire you.

. . . . . Now you see why reporters aren't quoting Trump and have to hope you won't read the speech for yourself. end quote

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, moralist said:

That quote was referring to your antipathy towards Trump, Bob.

 

Greg

My antipathy toward Trump is due to his boorish behavior.  The man is not fully civilized.  He is a cultural and ethical barbarian. I know several polite people who are politically similar to Trump.  They do not bother me at all.   To some extent I even agree with them on some political issues.  Politics is not the thing with me. I am Old Fashioned.  I was brought up with good manners  and I expect good manners from other people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

My antipathy toward Trump is due to his boorish behavior.  The man is not fully civilized.  He is a cultural and ethical barbarian. I knew several polite people who are politically similar to Trump.  They do not bother me at all.   To some extent I even agree with them on some political issues.  Politics is not the thing with me. I am Old Fashioned.  I was brought up with good manners  and I expect good manners from other people. 

Baal:  I agree wholeheartedly.  

The man is 70 years old, but he still acts like this

If my 15 year old daughter acted like that I would be mortified.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

He can be a bit irksome PDS. Trump brought up an excellent example of how he would fight radical Islam. He would command an all - out war with them because that is what they are doing with us. My easy, lead in question is this. Is radical Islam in an all - out war with Western Civilization? Do they target innocents along with our police and military?

 

Of course they are in an all - out war, and they do target children. Remember the Boston Marathon bombing? And the Orlando murderer, just *cased* Disney World.

 

So my follow - up question is: Should America and the Western World be fighting World War III with radical Islam? (Those Islamic monsters remind me of the Brad Pitt movie, “World War Z.”)  

 

Donald Trump said recently, at a campaign rally in Atlanta, Georgia, "It makes a difference and it makes a big difference because unless you're willing to discuss and talk about the real nature of the problem and the name of the problem, radical Islamic terrorism, you're never going to solve the problem."

 

How will our military solve this problem under President Trump? What is moral? What is common sense? How do we win and stop them from killing our people? 

Peter

Notes:

William Brute Bradford wrote Jan 20, 2016, in “A strategy to kill radical Islam”: In sum, radical Islamists fight a total and global war in alliance with an American fifth column, while we fight a limited air war against ISIS targets in the Middle East with few allies. And so, we are losing. end quote

 

And George H. Smith wrote about war: A state of war, including one declared for just reasons, is a public acknowledgment of a serious conflict of interests . . . If -- or more precisely, *when* -- those who pursue a just war (i.e., one waged the legitimate purpose of self-defense) are responsible for the unintentional killing of innocents, then they have indeed violated the rights of those victims. As I argued at some length previously an exchange with Bill Dwyer, the rights of innocent people do not vanish because it may be in our rational self-interest to violate them -- so we are under a moral imperative to *minimize* civilian casualties as much as is humanly possible. (A moral theory that demands the impossible is useless.) end quote

 

Ayn Rand wrote: When someone comes at you with a gun, if you have an ounce of self-esteem, you will answer him with force, never mind who he is or who stands behind him. If he's out to destroy you, you owe it to your own life to defend yourself. end quote 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Peter said:

Their main point is: DO NOT LOOK AT THAT SPEECH. It has "words that wound." Much too dangerous even to read it. Instead of reporting what Trump said, the media give us the "gist" of it (in the sense of an unrecognizable distortion). It was awful, Hitlerian, beneath our dignity as a nation. They lie about what he said and then attack their own lies as if they're attacking Trump.

 

Spot on, Peter. I noticed exactly the same thing.

Even on youtube it took some searching to find Trump's actual speech, because while many videos showed Trump speaking you couldn't hear him because his voice was blocked out and replaced by the voice of a narrator. I don't need to be told what someone said. I can hear it for myself, and wow... did Trump ever shine bright with his clear and decisive assessment of the radical Islamist terrorist situation.

F*** Obama's prissy sissy liberal politically correct civility.

Right now America needs a President with balls... and Trump's got big ones. I will take great delight in seeing him go after Hillary with a chainsaw and take that b**** apart.

I'm reading Trumps book, The Art of the Deal, and it's a cross between Sun Tzu's The art of War and Atlas Shrugged.

Greg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now