Summations Only

I knew a lot about what we would be getting - competent people appointed to his cabinet, the removal and lessening of job killing regulations, less business destroying regulations from the EPA, the list is actually pretty long. Are you not satisfied that all of it isn't perfectly in place yet? After only 10 weeks? I'm confident that it will happen, and I think you might be too. That's why you're so angry. The national debt increased by $9 trillion during Obama's administration. That's what I call madness. Edited by marc9000, : No reason given.

When the press reported on the Trump / Republican health plan, how did the opening headline almost always read - "24 MILLION AMERICANS SET TO LOSE HEALTH COVERAGE UNDER THE TRUMP PLAN". Yet in the mid 1990's, did the reports on Clinton's welfare reform read - MILLIONS OF AMERICANS SET TO LOSE THEIR SAFETY NET UNDER CLINTON'S WELFARE REFORM". It wasn't reported that way for a Democrat, was it?

What are some symptoms of that pressure? Overworked, unhappy doctors? The rest of the world probably has little appreciation for so much of the technology their country has because of the innovation the U.S. has provided for them, innovation that wouldn't have happened under a socialized U.S. system.

This is a favored tactic of yours; asking questions based entirely on your flagging memory alone. Do you actually know whether there were unfavorable headlines in the 1990s, or are you relying on that same set of recollections that could not recall any activity on gun control in the sixties?I have certainly seen more recent articles proclaiming Clinton's reforms a disaster at the time Obama was doing away with some of them. Who wrote those?

I know that Clinton wasn't hated by the press with anywhere near the intensity that Trump is today. And this is a favored tactic of yours, trying to draw a lone poster facing a gang to go off topic. There really was very little gun control in the 1960's. See, you succeeded!

The question under discussion must include whether Trump has brought at least some of that negative treatment on himself. But stop ducking the question. Where is your evidence regarding the lack of articles criticizing Clinton's welfare reforms? If you'd like me to pull up your actual claim regarding not remember significant debates about gun control or the passage of legislation, I will be happy to do so. In fact, if you'd like me to point out other times you've used this same tactic, of making up crap, including in this very thread, I'd be happy to do that too.If you've got a point, back it up with some evidence. I don't think you have anything. But I am curious about how you are going to back up a posting of a negative claim.ABE:I want to clearly express my objection. Saying, "I don't remember X", does not establish that X does not happen. And more often than not, folks here respond with evidence of X. You do this so frequently that nobody here should rely on what you remember. I've pointed this out to you on several occasions, but you continue to use the same tactic again and again. Folks have caught you doing this in this very thread, and invariably, you don't back your memory claims up with evidence. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : Add explanation.

Are you nuts? Trump is not hated by the press, he is amazing. No president in recent memory, certainly since Richard Nixon has provided as much copy, committed as many blunders, made so many idiotic statements as Donald Trump. Why the press and comedians owe Trump a lot. He almost writes their material.

You mean like Rick Perry for Energy, Betsy DeVos for Education and Scott Pruitt for the EPA? With unemployment at 4.9% we're already at full employment. Increased employment from here would cause inflation. We're going to live with the consequences of reduced attention to the environment for a long, long time. The longer it takes to get in place the better. What is strange is how Trump supporters seem blissfully unaware of the Trump lying and incompetence factor. He has policies he'd like to put in place that I'm in favor of too, such as a reduction of the corporate income tax, removal of tax loopholes (the big one is a tax break for fat cats that allows them to have interest taxed at long term capital gains rates), and tax reform. The border tax seems like a good idea, too, though I need to understand it better.But the fact that Trump supports some policies I favor doesn't blind me to the glaring lying and incompetence displayed in his first hundred days, and I don't understand why Trump supporters don't see it. Not angry - aghast, disturbed, concerned. But it wasn't because of spending. It was because of the most severe recession since the Great Depression. As a percent of GDP, the national debt rose rapidly during the recession, then leveled off.--Percy

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 was a bipartisan effort. It was part of the Republican Contract with America and one of Clinton's campaign promises. Welfare and poverty rates both declined in the latter half of the 1990's, and the bill was deemed a success. Headlines like you suggest wouldn't reflect reality and hence never happened.--Percy

That was my mistake, I mis-read what his point was. I quickly (too quickly) thought it was a downplaying of Hamilton's significance, it was actually a trumping up (pardon the expression) of Hamilton's significance. Enough said, further addressing it drifts off topic.

He has, but most all of it is because of his more traditional views of how the U.S. should be governed. His views of it from a business perspective, not a self-serving politicians perspective. You know, the things he was elected to do. Most of the bluster against him is about him personally - lame attempts to distract from the lack of political arguments the left is able to make. My claims in that regard are only to inspire anyone reading to think about their own experiences with what they witnessed in the differences in the reporting on the Clinton presidency versus the Trump presidency. If someone doesn't see any differences, it's almost certain that; 1) They're 20 years old or younger and haven't been around much, or;2) they're hopelessly blinded by a liberal point of view. In either case, my providing any evidence is going to be an exercise in futility. I might consider doing it if I got paid a few hundred dollars an hour to post here. Maybe you could recruit a collection service here for that purpose? Again, I was just inspiring readers to think. We had the same second amendment in the 1960's as we did in the 80's, when we got the "Brady Bill". Was there a "Kennedy Bill" in the 1960's? If I have to provide evidence that gun control proposals in the 60's were far less than they were in the following decades, it's not going to make any difference to those closed-minded people who are bent on denying the obvious. I'm not going to worry about your demands. Liberals here don't provide any more evidence than I do, except in a few slight ways because they work in such huge gangs.

Scott Pruitt!!! Oh I could go gay for that guy! Just think, now all the millions of people in the U.S. (myself included) who depend on older trucks to make a living don't have to worry about losing their livelihoods to a brand new, knee jerk global warming regulation that would require expensive retro-fits for their trucks, or a complete replacement of them. That's only one example of many, of those who still have an appreciation for liberty. There's always room for new business start ups, in a society that anywhere near resembles what its founders had in mind for it. What I see in your posts, and all around the mainstream media, is an increasing animosity towards Trump, and I don't remember ever seeing it before. In past elections where a large part of the population was unhappy with the results, like Bush's win in 2000, or Obama's win in 08, people seemed to grudgingly accept the election results to a degree, and move on, to at least discussing the issues. Not with Trump - the LA Times just yesterday "declared war on Trump".The LA Times Just Declared War On President TrumpI guess no one told them that the NY Times and Washington Post declared war on him over a year ago. But really, Trump hasn't changed since his campaign. If he's so incompetent, so low in the polls etc. why is the left so agitated? Wouldn't it be healthier for their blood pressure to wait for the 2018 mid-terms, or better yet, wait for an opportunity to impeach?The problem is two-fold, 1) The respect from the left for the election process in the U.S. is now at an all time low, the anger against Trump is actually an anger with the people who voted for him, they have no respect for it. But the second part (2) could very well be the recent breaking news about the Obama administrations electronic surveillance of Trump's staff during the campaign.Conservative Review - 404 Not Found

quote:

---

Her efforts may draw parallels to former President Nixon’s efforts to spy on his political opponents. Following Nixon’s resignation, the intelligence community was reformed via the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, with the hopes of imposing accountability measures for federal officials that spy on political opponents.

---

Not a word about it this evening on ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT WITH DAVID MUIR. Imagine that! Also;Intelligence official who 'unmasked' Trump associates is 'very high up,' source says | Fox News

quote:

---

The White House, meanwhile, is urging Nunes and his colleagues to keep pursuing what improper surveillance and leaks may have occurred before Trump took office. They’ve been emboldened in the wake of March 2 comments from former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas, who on MSNBC suggested her former colleagues tried to gather material on Trump team contacts with Russia.

​

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Friday her comments and other reports raise serious concerns about whether there was an organized and widespread effort by the Obama administration to use and leak highly sensitive intelligence information for political purposes.

​

Dr. Farkas’ admissions alone are devastating, he said.

---

In other news, I saw on the local ABC report tonight that Trump met with the Egyptian leader today, something they said Obama refused to do during his administration, because Obama deemed him a dictator. Earlier today on the radio, it was said that the Egyptian leader said he looked forward to working with Trump and his "unique" personality. I'm not going to provide NoNukes with evidence for this however. Even without evidence, it's going to soon become clear to everyone, whether they like it or not, that all this bluster about Trump alienating the U.S. from its allies is pure BS.

quote:

---

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power ― Benito Mussolini

---

quote:

---

The definition of fascism is The marriage of corporation and state. ― Benito Mussolini

---

SourceGovernment of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation.Now, I have my suspicions that the above are paraphrases and/or extractions from a larger context. I would not go so far as to call them quote minings.Moose

That's what I thought. Thanks.

Trump is running government from a self-serving business perspective. He has failed to disclose his tax returns, refused to divest himself of his businesses, and filled his administration with like-minded cronies. But he's not doing the things he was elected to do - he's doing the opposite. He ran as a populist, and now he's pursuing policies that run counter to the interests of the people who elected him by paring back programs for those in need (see, for example, In Ohio County That Backed Trump, Word of Housing Cuts Stirs Fear). Trump is a typical trickle-down Republican: help the rich and it will trickle down to the poor. Your dilemma is that it isn't possible to provide evidence for things that never happened.--Percy