Jonathan Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 18 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: As long as I am doing the Trump tweet thing, here's one for Mitt-mouth. Michael So true! And of McCain as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 34 minutes ago, Jonathan said: And of McCain as well. Jonathan, Bomb bomb bomb... Bomb bomb Iran... Bomb bomb bomb... Bomb bomb Iran... Bomb bomb bomb... Bomb bomb Iran... Groovin' baby... Boy, did we dodge a bullet with that sucker. I voted for him, but knowing what I now know, I'm glad he lost. I'm not glad Obama won, but at least Obama's term of office brought the ruling class's socialism, deep state organizations, and elitist nature into the mainstream. McCain would have kept a veneer of respectability over it all like with Bush. In other words, he would have fooled most people by mouthing what the people wanted to hear and acting "presidential." But behind the scenes he would have hardened the elitist crony ruling class system of endless war for profit. Maybe even started WWIII. At least Obama made the rot that needs fixing visible to the man and woman in the street. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Well gaaawlllieeee... Woodward just discovered that having Robert Redford portray him in a movie decades ago is not a hedge against him trashing his own legacy. Woodward has been on a hunt for the next Watergate ever since Nixon resigned. And it looks like he just woke up to the fact that there has been one right under his nose for over two years, except he was on the side of the bad guys. Irony of ironies... He had joined the equivalent of a cover-up for Nixon and had been running it for over two years. He even wrote a goddam book to back up the cover-up. But now he is going to go after his new Watergate, meaning the Steele Dossier and the intelligence community... Yeah, right... Sorry, pal. Two years is a long time to be as wrong as you were. Now you gotta get in line and wait your turn. There are far better journalists than you already on the gig. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 And it's funny... I'm now seeing sporadic articles in the mainstream fake news media say that, "according to sources close to the event" there may be some inaccuracies in the Steele Dossier, but how that happened is still uncertain... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 One hell of a report: ROBERT MUELLER: UNMASKED by Congressman Louie Gohmert I thought this guy Mueller was supposed to be Mr. Integrity. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 And take that, anti-Trumpers: President Trump is going to have a city named after him on the Golan Heights. Let the hating begin... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 I made an offline communication that I liked so much, I'm posting it here. A person mentioned that the Dems will size up President Trump's manipulation of social media (presumably with Russian aid ) much better this next time around and will presumably trounce him in 2020. Part of the reason will be no wall, no Obamacare repeal and replace, no Hillary Clinton in jail and he will be crying about how the Dems did it. I wrote the following: Quote It's even worse. Trump is such a con, for well over two years he has conned: The American people The Republican party The mainstream media The tech giants The Electoral College The intelligence community The Special Counsel The National Football League Kim Jong-Un China Most of Hollywood and celebrity entertainers The Supreme Court NAFTA Mexico and Canada ISIS Iran Saudi Arabia and their Arabian allies Israel and the Jews The Brits The Pope Omarosa The list goes on and on. Man, it's a good thing all these people are woke now. No longer will they be conned. They'll show Trump next time. They'll show him... But I'm not posting this to be cute (although I am ). I'm posting this because it led me to thinking about... well... I want to say how futile reason is when people hate, but I wasn't really thinking about that. I was thinking about how cute I am. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 I did not expect President Trump to sign on to the theory of British manipulation of American elections this early. "Muh Russian!" was joke. "Muh Brits!" not so much. (Steele of the Steele Dossier is a Brit, but that's just the surface.) The theory goes that Britain (specifically, the elitist British ruling class) is at the core of the globalization effort (being the main center of the world's financial universe). Just like in the US, the British ruling class has polluted its intelligence community with toadies. Those Brits are the folks who kicked in with the US establishment ruling class (including Obama & Co.) to spy on Trump. Also, tone as an issue came from the Brits. British ruling class snootiness cannot abide by someone like President Trump. It's just not done, old man. That snootiness infected the American ruling class (who bend over backwards to be accepted by anyone smelling like royal class) and it's one of the core reasons for the unending hatred of Trump by crony elitists. As an aside, snooty behavior is like turkey feathers. It is a marker that designates the species and is a form of mating call. I see a lot of plausibility in this theory. It's not the whole shebang, but, from where I sit, damned if it isn't a good portion. I'm glad to see President Trump alluding to it. I bet his adherence will help Nigel Farage's new party and help the BREXIT policy finally get finished as voted on by the English people. Throw the bums out. They're easy to identify. Just follow the irritation from the snoot detector in your subconscious. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Also, tone as an issue came from the Brits. British ruling class snootiness cannot abide by someone like President Trump. It's just not done, old man. That snootiness infected the American ruling class (who bend over backwards to be accepted by anyone smelling like royal class) and it's one of the core reasons for the unending hatred of Trump by crony elitists. I've thought for some time that the "tone" problem seems like "British ruling class snootiness" and the ruling class Brit's sense of what just isn't done. Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Ellen Stuttle said: I've thought for some time that the "tone" problem seems like "British ruling class snootiness" and the ruling class Brit's sense of what just isn't done. Ellen No sex, please, we're British. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 5 hours ago, Brant Gaede said: No sex, please, we're British. --Brant I once read a book that talked about the British ruling class (The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War, 1890-1914 by Barbara Tuchman). I'm going on memory since I read it years ago, so I might be slightly off, but I don't think so. She said the problem with the British ruling class (and European ruling class in general) wasn't sex or any form of sexual depravity or perversion. All was permitted and understood. One thing was not forgiven, though. Ever. It was getting caught and letting the lower classes see it. There was no coming back from that. (Just ask Oscar Wilde. ) Although she was talking about a different time, I believe her observation holds today. It's different in form, but identical in essence. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 The following article by Kurt Schlichter is for any Trump supporting schadenfreude junkie (or sporadic partaker of this pleasure) who has been taunted over and over by the never-Trumper geniuses. What Do The Never Trump Losers Do Now? A few gems from the article: Quote While it was immensely satisfying to watch the utter humiliation of the TRUMP TREASON COLLUSION RUSSIANS! liberals, that joy paled in comparison to the schadenfreude that came from watching the crestfallen Never Trump bitter-enders as they saw all their dreams die. . . . Now, it’s not really fair to imply that the Never Trumpers hate Trump solely because he’s vulgar and crude – or, as normal people see it, unwilling to meekly take the guff the Never Trumpers’ country club class pals dish out like a proper gentleman should. They do find him aesthetically displeasing, but it also gnaws at them because every time he stands up to the garbage Democrats, the garbage press, or the garbage jerks and pervs of Hollywood, his refusal to knuckle-under reminds Team Fail that they don’t have the stones to do the same. He shames their cowardly weakness. It’s clear, in retrospect, that George W. Bush’s supine acceptance of the abuse the elite heaped upon him was not because he was too classy and too decent to respond in kind. Since Obama left office and he rediscovered his vocal cords, Bush has had zero problem trashing Trump and Trump supporters who, like many of us, stood by Bush in the '00s while Bush was treading water in a sea of mediocrity. No, it’s clear that W was afraid to fight back against fellow members of the ruling class. He cared about being part of the club. Not The Donald. Trump, by fighting, demonstrates that the establishment GOPers are weak. And it eats at them. . . . Trump infuriates the Never Trumpers for another reason. He’s kicked them out of their comfy sinecures. One of Trump’s magical powers is to make his enemies reveal their own grift complicity... . . . Bill Kristol, Max Boot, and all the rest are nobodies, relegated to occasionally joining CNN panels and fighting with Ana Navarro over the doughnuts in the green room. Where’s Bob Corker now? Jeff Flake hasn’t even got an MSNBC gig; I think last week he was the dude who offered to supersize my order. They are reduced to occasionally popping up on Twitter to inspire a session of Weakheart Whack-A-Mole from actual conservatives. Just look at Senator for Some Reason Mitt Romney. The guy I am sorry I voted for in 2012 is always eager to say something prissy about the president to try to please the same people who, back in 2012, accused him of being a racist and giving a lady cancer. For his obedience, he gets a tasty treat and a pat on the head, like the good doggie he is. . . . On Capitol Hill and in the agencies and think tanks, there are secret Never Trumpers hoping to wait out this madness, counting the days until some squishy Jeb!-ish nominee named something like Marco will usher in a bright and beautiful new era of efficiently managed decline. Because that’s what they do – slow down the inevitable victory of the progressives while maximizing their own power and privilege. Trump’s refusal to be satisfied with merely losing slower infuriates them. They not only get tired of all the winning – they actively hate all the winning. Schlichter linked to the following video to characterize the Never Trumpers. He did that while saying something or other about Fredocon losers. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 On 4/23/2019 at 6:26 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I made an offline communication that I liked so much, I'm posting it here. A person mentioned that the Dems will size up President Trump's manipulation of social media (presumably with Russian aid ) much better this next time around and will presumably trounce him in 2020. Part of the reason will be no wall, no Obamacare repeal and replace, no Hillary Clinton in jail and he will be crying about how the Dems did it. I wrote the following: But I'm not posting this to be cute (although I am ). I'm posting this because it led me to thinking about... well... I want to say how futile reason is when people hate, but I wasn't really thinking about that. I was thinking about how cute I am. Michael And he has no ground game !!! You would figure that the idiots who have not yet figured it out , would have by now but they’re all gonna double down and support Biden ( no chance at winning the nomination ) Bernie ( less chance ) or the field ( the rest of the idiots ). All 50 States , my Emperor shall win. Even if DC gets statehood by then, he wins that too . Greatest President , heck, greatest leader the world has even seen . I love you Mr. President ! John Galt , is my President Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 14 hours ago, Marc said: And he has no ground game !!! You would figure that the idiots who have not yet figured it out , would have by now but they’re all gonna double down and support Biden ( no chance at winning the nomination ) Bernie ( less chance ) or the field ( the rest of the idiots ). All 50 States , my Emperor shall win. Even if DC gets statehood by then, he wins that too . Greatest President , heck, greatest leader the world has even seen . I love you Mr. President ! John Galt , is my President Rand didn't imagine anything like this. Not while writing her fiction. John Galt goes to Washington to battle thousands--no, millions--of Wesley Mouches. Becomes emperor. Libertarians--no, Objectivists--dance in the streets. George H. Smith says, "WTF!?" --Brant where's George? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted April 26, 2019 Share Posted April 26, 2019 (edited) On 3/21/2019 at 9:13 AM, william.scherk said: Styxhexenhammer666 has some interesting comments on the Rosenstein tenure ... And Mr Rosenstein himself has some harsh words about the Obama administration's supposed failure to properly publicize Russian election interference ... Rosenstein Calls Out Obama Admin For Failing to ‘Publicize’ Russian Election Interference By JACK CROWE April 26, 2019 8:38 AM Quote During a private speech Thursday evening, deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein lamented the Obama administration’s decision not to “publicize” Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election. Rosenstein, who oversaw special counsel Robert Mueller’s recently-concluded investigation into Russian election interference, suggested that the Obama administration did the public a disservice by not publicly revealing “the full story” of the Kremlin’s attempt to disrupt the election while adequate counter-measures could have been taken. “Some critical decisions about the Russia investigation were made before I got there. The previous Administration chose not to publicize the full story about Russian computer hackers and social media trolls, and how they relate to a broader strategy to undermine America,” Rosenstein saidduring an address to the Public Servants Dinner of the Armenian Bar Association. Rosenstein went on to criticize former FBI director James Comey for his decision to reveal the existence of a counterintelligence investigation into Russian election interference at the height of the 2016 campaign. [...] Edited April 26, 2019 by william.scherk Grammer and spelking | MUH Russiya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 27, 2019 Share Posted April 27, 2019 In case there is any doubt about the totalitarian nature of the left and its law-be-damned putsch to get rid of President Trump, just watch the monologue below. Bill Maher is unapologetic about the left's hidden intention (but constantly disavowed for show) of using Mueller to get rid of the president irrespective of the law. Mueller's report was supposed to be a rubber stamp for a political coup, a putsch, not an actual report based on the law. Some gems from the monologue: Quote For over two years America has had a crazy person in the White House and for over two years the Democrats have done fuck-all about it because they were waiting for Muller. We all sat around waiting for Prosecutor Jesus to turn in his report, and he came back with, "Ask someone else." . . . I get it. Mueller's a Boy Scout, a straight arrow. He played it by the book. But you may have noticed for the past three years were kind of been off-book. And greatness sometimes means not doing everything by the book. Thomas Jefferson made the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, doubling the size of the United States, without any authority to do so. . . . That's what Spielberg's movie Lincoln is about. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, black people were not free. That required a Constitutional Amendment initiated in Congress. And to make that happen, while he had a window to make it happen, Lincoln lied, bribed, freed prisoners, even fast-tracked an entire new state into the Union, none of which Muller would have had to do. All he had to do is what people in the justice system do every day: use the law to come to justice. Not be so restricted by technicalities that the bad guys win. This is why Clint Eastwood never made a movie called Clean Harry. . . . What good is leaving a roadmap for impeachment if you know a tribal, party-before-country Republican Senate will never remove the President? Bob, you're trail of breadcrumbs isn't good enough... . . . To me this report is summed up in the words: "Donald Trump Jr. declined to be voluntarily interviewed." So make him! . . . In Watergate, the special prosecutor Jaworski ... understood the big picture and his role in history and he sued a sitting president anyway. Muller could have done that and the headline the next day would have been "Muller Breaks With Precedent, Indicts Trump," and then that would be our new reality. . . . Now Trump goes into the election as a vindicated martyr and hell hath no fury like a whiny little bitch scorned. Whiny bitch scorned? This entire monologue was Bill Maher in his preeminent whiny bitch mode. Nobody does "whiny bitch scorned" like Bill Maher. Does he fear Trump will now unseat him as Number One? I mean, come on. Comparing a lost election and a $30 million investigation that did not produce the results he wanted to the Civil War and freeing an entire enslaved race, the Louisiana Purchase, hell, even an iconic Clint Eastwood character... isn't that just a little over the top? Just a teensy weensy little itty-bitty bit over the top? Maybe that mindset of rhetorical excess is why most of the monologue did not rise above Trump is a poopoo head and Mueller sucks. Whiny, whiny, whiny bitch scorned... btw - As an aside, notice how, in comedy, applause is a bad substitute for laughter. Comedy is supposed to make people feel good. But that only happens when they are laughing hard and long. Maher's audience mostly applauded. There was some laughter at a punchline or other, but it was short-lived each time. Maher was playing to the applause and I doubt his audience felt good good after he was done. For the authoritarian leftie soul, laughing at a former god, at muscle like Mueller who failed to break the law to promote its coup, its power grab, its putsch, is not very funny. It's frustrating and maddening. So this particular authoritarian true believer (Maher) vomits hatred for Mueller and Americans he dislikes disguised as comedy. I have to admit, though, after watching that, I felt awfully good. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 28, 2019 Share Posted April 28, 2019 A $30 investigation? --Brant BM is a would be lyncher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 28, 2019 Share Posted April 28, 2019 13 hours ago, Brant Gaede said: A $30 investigation? Brant, LOL... Friggin' autocorrect... I fixed it. Thanks. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 28, 2019 Share Posted April 28, 2019 Even Schiff has lost Maher after Mueller lost Maher: Cry me a bucket of tears... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted April 29, 2019 Share Posted April 29, 2019 On 4/26/2019 at 7:47 AM, Brant Gaede said: Rand didn't imagine anything like this. Not while writing her fiction. John Galt goes to Washington to battle thousands--no, millions--of Wesley Mouches. Becomes emperor. Libertarians--no, Objectivists--dance in the streets. George H. Smith says, "WTF!?" --Brant where's George? I think she not only imagined it, but predicted it. Atlas Shrugged , is 2016-2028 . Not sure how Ivanka will fare after her first term , maybe the New Democrat party will have evolved by then into a real party and not the second coming of Castro’s Revolutionary party . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 1, 2019 Share Posted May 1, 2019 LOL... For later readers, the context was a Senate Hearing interviewing AG Barr on the Mueller Report. The Dems kept trying to gotcha Barr, but it was just one bellyflop after another. The "Muh Russians" hoax died dead, deceased, defunct, done for, and departed with the Mueller Report. And Mueller's case for obstruction was more like gossip and a PR move than something that should have been included in a law enforcement report. So, other than in some quarters (not all) of the fake news media and posturing by a few unhinged politicians, that ain't going anywhere. Ever. So it's safe to say that croaked, too. Regarding the Mueller letter they were talking about in the video, after receiving the letter, Barr asked Mueller by phone that same day (on speaker phone with lots of witnesses) if there was anything inaccurate or misleading in his initial summary. Mueller said no, that his dissatisfaction was with the press coverage. Seriously. That was his beef. He wanted Barr to spin innuendo to the press or promote his own spin to them. Nothing more. It sounds like I'm making that up, given all those Dems hollering at Barr during the session, but them's the facts. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 I think Barr should have shown up even if just to say, "Nerts you duds". edit. Oops, Beevis, I dinna think there was a risqué definition. “Nertz” canna mean one thing and “Nerts” canna mean another on Dictionary Online. Now, don’t you get them confused, laddie. Nerts or nertz. interjection Older Slang. nuts (def 1). Origin of nerts First recorded in 1930–35; by alteration. interjection. Also nerts, nertz (used to express disgust, defiance, disapproval, despair). Adjective insane; crazy. Origin of nuts First recorded in 1900–05; plural of nut. Is that a joke, Scottish Butthead? I’ll never forget this last one, a slang definition. The online slang dictionary says, “Nerts” stands for "nipples erect right through a woman’s shirt, usually seen on a cold day.” . . . Now you know why I really like cold days, Butthead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 In Venezuela, the use of our military is “not off the table,” per The Trump administration. Arrrgh! I don’t know about that. I hope the President is using “the bully pulpit” and economic sanctions to do the right thing down in South America. But, if we DID use our air forces or troops in Venezuela, there are irrevocable chances for errors and wrongful deaths in a country with a moving and surging population, and changing loyalties and positions. Off with his head? Even a “clean surgical strike” against the dictator could have very bad repercussions. We should have a policy of supporting and even arming opposition leader Guaido and working behind the scenes but stop the use of force there. And that is what I think is truly happening. I hope. Peter World News May 2, 2019 / 8:19 AM. Venezuela opposition leader Guaido calls for strike to force Maduro out. And, Katie Rogers April 30, 2019. WASHINGTON — President Trump on Tuesday accused Cuba of aiding the government of President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, who the administration evidently hoped would be ousted by day’s end, warning that the United States would impose an embargo and additional sanctions on the country if Cuba did not end its support. “If Cuban Troops and Militia do not immediately CEASE military and other operations for the purpose of causing death and destruction to the Constitution of Venezuela,” Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter, “a full and complete embargo, together with highest-level sanctions, will be placed on the island of Cuba.” At the same time, the Trump administration reaffirmed its demand for the immediate installation of Juan Guaidó, the opposition leader, as Mr. Maduro’s successor. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in an interview with CNN that Mr. Maduro had planned to flee to Cuba on Tuesday morning, but was urged by the Russian government to stay. “He was headed to Havana,” Mr. Pompeo said, without elaborating on how the administration knew about Mr. Maduro’s destination or his communications with the Kremlin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 4, 2019 Share Posted May 4, 2019 Haters will hate. But non-haters won't hate--and that galls the living crap out of the haters. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted May 7, 2019 Share Posted May 7, 2019 The establishment never learns with President Trump. They always worry about him not accepting the results of an election. Notice, he never questions his opponents if they will accept the results of an election. And you know why? The only people who needlessly worry about this are the people who intend to cheat. They want to make sure they can get away with it. Let's start back in August 2015. Does anybody remember this beauty? Go to 8:10 for the question from Brett Baier. I don't think Brett was scared, I think he was just asking what the Fox brass wanted him to ask. But you could feel the fear from the establishment cronies like something thick and murky in the air at the time. Brett asked Trump if he did not win the primary, would he accept the result and not run as a third party. This concern was running nonstop in the mainstream fake news media at the time (although it was not yet called the fake news media). Giving that question to Trump in that setting was like giving a banana to a monkey. He immediately peeled it and happily started chomping on it as he led the press around by the nose with his little finger. Notice that Megyn Kelly was lying in way to ambush Trump asking him if he was a misogynist. Which she did soon after Brett's banana. And what did Trump do? Oh boy, another banana. He peeled that one, too, started chomping, and even had Megyn slip on the peel and fall on her ass. Why were the establishment people worried? Somebody in the establishment wanted to cheat and they needed Trump to graciously accede to sanction of the victim so they could get rid of him. They worried his public support would not die out without him agreeing to sanction his destroyer-wannabes by withdrawing. That's what cheaters do. That's what cheaters worry about. Incidentally, Trump didn't indent to cheat. So he wasn't worried about who or what others would accept. Then he won and the establishment did everything in their power to keep him from the nomination. Remember the delegate monkeyshines? But he got nominated. Then came the 2016 election. The Dems, with the collusion of the establishment never-Trump Republicans, had already cheated both for Clinton (screwing Bernie and running a sham investigation on Clinton's criminal acts) and against Trump (the Deep State was in full covert operations feather at the time). Around October 2016, the fake news media was running nothing but stories on whether Trump would accept the election results since they had tried to corner him on it in the Presidential debates and he peeled the banana again. Both Dems and establishment Republicans were worried. For example: GOP Slams Trump: Not Accepting Election Results Would Be 'Beyond the Pale' Pretty, ain't it? Well, guess where we are at again? From the NYT three days ago. Pelosi Warns Democrats: Stay in the Center or Trump May Contest Election Results I get it that Pelosi is trying to get a handle on the ultra-left dingbats in her party, so she tries to scare them with a boogie man story, but now all you see in the fake news media is speculation about whether Trump will accept the 2020 election results. And, of course, most of the speculation is that he will not. It's the same sorry-ass stunt as the other times. Hmmmm... I wonder who's intending to cheat again and worried that their cheating won't work again, huh? It ain't Trump, that's for sure. He doesn't cheat. They do. But, hell, I think the Dems and the establishment need to keep on doing what they are doing. I learned in AA and NA that doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result was the definition of insanity. Most of the time, people don't notice this insanity. But now, after a two year silly hoax pile-on by the Dems and the establishment, the Deep State, and about 90% of the fake news media, everybody sees it. They're nuts. Bonkers. Daft. So carry on, I say. Let's see how that form of insanity plays out at voting time. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now