At this point, after experiencing the lies, plagiarism, evasions, and muddled parsing by the nine presidents during my voting lifetime, I don't know what to expect from our POTUS. In respect to how and what they did in terms of their constitutional duty and sticking more closely to the executive limitations in that Constitution, of them all I only had a modicum of respect for one. And as for how they spoke, only one or maybe two, nah, in retrospect, only one, the same one to whom I referred in my previous sentence, only one, in my opinion, spoke honestly, with precision, and with eloquence.

I think, in general, we expect too much from a President. Again, the side I'm on, constrains a President to far less doing than what we seem to want the President to do. And we want that because Progressive era Presidents have created that model. That's the side that I'm against. And from the way you clearly and concisely speak, it's the side you're on.

Well, if Trump succeeds, he may well turn out to be on your "side" of presidential power. But you probably won't like the results. That, however, is the result of the way your side governs.

Trump has an odd affinity for succeeding against great odds and.... winning bigley...


there is a pattern to the narrative

Regan= idiot and clown
Clinton= brilliant
Bush= idiot and clown
Obama= brilliant
Trump= idiot and clown

the left tends to want their presidents to be gods...remember the greek columns and Obama looking down on the masses watching them adore him?

I'm still trying to figure out of Trump is brilliant and playing the press and masses masterfully as he destroys the universe while they are distracted or if he's and idiot who's buffoonery renders him incapable of completing simple tasks like destroying the universe :hihi:

That "idiot and clown/brilliant" pattern gives insight on how clearly, precisely, and truthfully the left speaks. I think Trump being a bit of the Progressive authoritarian has learned from them that messaging technique. It's just that he's not as eloquent about it.

But I think that Trump is more honest about his intentions than the left is.

pretty good assessment below...the critics are far nuttier that the nut they are critiquing and seem determined to prove it on a daily basis

Compared with Obama in 2009, at the same point in his young administration, Trump has issued about the same number of executive orders. For all his war on the press, Trump has so far not ordered wiretaps on any reporter on the grounds that he is a “criminal co-conspirator,” nor has he gone after the phone records of the Associated Press — Barack Obama’s Justice Department did both, to little notice in the media.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-assassination

As usual, a great essay by a brilliant conservative which establishes the context in which all the ad hominem remarks against Trump on this forum should be compared.

No doubt that those anti-Trumpers here who actually do read the article wont find anything convincing in it, and will continue their idiotic and clownish remarks against Trump.

Wow, I missed so much.

And you say you don't have an anger problem.

Swedish politicians don't know what Trump was talking about. Right . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y89-8cNj7PM

And this: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-0...aks-out-sweden

Was that Friday night?

Paul, no offense but you really sound dopey here and I am sure you are bluffing. Look at the big picture and get a command on what it is that you are trying to accomplish. It's not exactly a lie when he referred to trouble in Sweden. This is not Hillary claiming sniper fire that Hillary had to brave. Does Trump have trouble articulating his thoughts on occasion? Guilty
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your stuck on your narrative that Trump lied. There is no pretense here that this was Friday night. The narrator said when it happened. It happened soon AFTER Trump referred to what was going on in Sweden. As the narrator said. Trump was right. This has been going on in Sweden. If you want to hang on to your thin thread that Trump actually meant that there was an "attack" in Sweden the night before his address, I have no wish to dissuade you from that opinion.

But you needn't infuse that opinion in this post. It is obviously about the ongoing situation in Sweden as a result of their immigration policy. Go ahead and continue to disregard that. Like the Swedish politicians you can convince yourself that everything is just fine in Sweden. Or lie about it, as the narrator said, to protect their image of Sweden as an untroubled multi-cultural society, open to everyone, with no need to be concerned about their supposedly humanitarian policies.

Trump is the most inarticulate President we have ever had. He lies more than any other politician ever. It is hilarious watching the apologists trying to explain his thought process or cover for his lies.

His statement was either extremely inarticulate or an out and out lie. Either way it just shows what type of person he is.

Chris - how many times was it brought up that Obama said he visited 57 states or the constant crying like little girls about Obama's executive orders? Now when it is pointed out he lied, the response is who cares or what different does it make. The hypocrisy here is amazing.

If you find a single reference I made to prove your point I will be shocked. Sorry,but I only speak for myself. Search is your friend here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it's usually brought up in response to a republican being called an idiot for something they may have said...he did improve immensely once he was on full time teleprompter

my all time favorite by the way...was when he wanted to give a kid with asthma.. a breathalyzer...that was great...

I don't remember him being accused of actually lying about that. It seemed everyone understood that he misspoke, but folks just threw a counterpunch toward those who made fun of GW's verbal faux pas. That you take that fun return jab as some serious accusation of lying probably exposes the deep anger that you harbor. And topping it off by accusing folks of being hypocrites, and worse, with a sexist, nasty remark like "crying like little girls" just shows how your anger seethes so virulently within you that you can't contain it. I fear your anger has built up to a critical level. Not only do you constantly have to strike out with personal attacks, but you have lost the ability to see how foolish it is to cling to the absurd notion that someone would claim something to the ears of the world that was immediately and demonstrably false, and not see that it was obviously a slip, similar to Obama's 57 states. Especially when he who makes the claim is constantly accused of lying--one would think he wouldn't so obviously tell a whopper. That you must see that as a lie rather than a slip, and to insist, angrily over and over again, even after the slip is explained, makes it evident that your anger leads to apparent delusions. Something that should have been put to bed still haunts you. Get over it. Your anger will consume you.

Seriously why do you think I have anger? Are you using that totry getting back at me? You're the one who says people's comments are idiotic and clownish. the anger to do that must be eating you up inside. Would you do that to their face? Or are you one of those internet tough guys? Are you going to send me another apology?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did not say you nor was I referencing you. You and I have had very few interactions. Who is my friend? You can p.m. me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh, oh . . . it's starting to boil over. Get a grip.

So are you going to p.m. me your apology?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is there an or else? Sounds threatening. And confused. I try to help you deal with your condition and you ask me for an apology?

Yes, threatening. LOL
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's better. I was worried about you.

Thanks, appreciate the thoughts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Get some fresh air
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We have winter over stripers down here. Easy to catch if you know where to go.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"We haven't seen one new Trump idea come out of this White House yet."

Tell that to the Carrier workers whose jibs were saved. Jobs that Obama specifically said could not be saved.

He also picked a SCOTUS nominee that has conservatives thrilled.

And he has promised a new health care plan and a tax overhaul.

I don't like Trump at all. But he has done a lot in a few weeks.

Promise in your left, take a #^&#^&#^&#^& your right... tell me which one has stuff in it in the morning
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fortunately for me, I don't know what that means. But I disagree that he has no new ideas. Obama specifically said that the carrier jobs could not be saved, Trump did it. He is cutting regulations, instituting a hiring freeze. The wall, a healthcare overhaul, and a tax overhaul, may be coming soon.

You don't have to like the guy obviously. But to say that he isn't implementing any new ideas? I don't think that's accurate. You can fill the Pacific Ocean with legitimate criticisms of the guy. But I wouldn't say he isn't doing anything.

Maybe it's like--if I don't like an idea, it's not an idea.

I don't want to pick at this, because the Carrier thing is "something", but didn't that happen before he was president?

Yes, it did. But Obama had absolutely nothing to do with it, and Trump/Pence did. But if you are willing to give Trump some credit for that, then I think you are more honest than the vast majority of folks who are deranged with hatred for the man. Trump brings a lot of that on himself, no doubt. My point was we can't judge him by ignoring the good things and only considering the bad things, and that's what a lot of people are doing. Not you at all, but many people.

(I'm not trying to call anyone out with this statement)

What other "good" ideas has he come up with? Mind you the comment re:promises was that until some real plan is put forward, promising is as good as farting... it sticks around for 30-45 seconds and then dissipates. At least #^&#^&#^&#^& sticks to your fingers
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Presidents coming up with ideas usually leads to bad consequences for our liberties and our wallets. They're not really supposed to come up with ideas so much as they are supposed to execute the ideas of Congress (unless those ideas are harmful to the people and the Constitution). They're at their best (for us as a nation) when they see to it that we are defended against enemies foreign or domestic. When they preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. And when they nominate judges who will do the same rather than "interpreting" it to reflect their personal notion of justice.

Sure, they can make suggestions. Anyone can. Most politicians get ideas from the populace at large. Which is how it should be. The proper places for the creation of and demand for implementation of ideas on how to make our country "healthy, wealthy, and wise," are in the public forums, marketplaces, and minds of the people.

It is the duty of government to make it safe enough and free enough for the people to make the country work, and to create the ideas to make it so.

I think I'm comfortable accepting that, but that's not the platform he ran on.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think his platform, if it is possible to translate Trumpist rhetoric, can be summed up in one of his sentences: "We will make America great again." I think it was clear, as clear as a Trump locution can be, and if you actually heard or saw him speak at his rallies, by "We" he actually did mean the people not the bureaucrats in Washington.

His nomination for the Supreme Court is Constitution centered not judge whim centered so reflects what a good President would do.

His directly speaking to the people through social media reflects that it is the people who he depends on not the bureaucracy.

His direct appeal to business leaders and corporations is acknowledging their role in the economy not reliance on the central bureaucrats and politicians.

His repealing as many of the repressive, bureaucratic executive orders as possible is a transfer of power back from the bureaucracy to the people.

His appointments and decisions generally indicate a direction of having the states more involved in regulation and in matters that really should be governed at state and local levels rather than the federal.

His plans for security from the current Islamic threat, the destruction of ISIS and a slowing of immigration from those areas along with strict vetting certainly is proper "doing" of Constitutional Executive power and duty to defend us.

In general, to me, he sees the role of making the country "healthy wealthy and wise" lies in the hands of the people, not the political ruling class.

great article pondering Donaldness

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...man-good-deeds

seems like the left(as is usually the case)....and some others, can't decide whether they want balance of powers and co-equal branches... or at times(when their guy wins) an all powerful President, activist Judiciary, conniving Congress(Obamacare)....as the left tends to do, they want things their way when they want something "achieved" or when they maintain control of a branch of government but when they lose an election or the numbers tip the scales out of their favor power they want a completely different set of rules followed but those that assume control......you couldn't play a game with a sports team that plays like that( "holding, spitballs, hitting below the belt and traveling are fine as long as we're doing it") and I don't think you can co-exist in a society for very long with this kind of collective psychosis

Dow Jones board Dow hits best winning streak in 30 years
 

The biggest winners were shares in energy, financial and healthcare

This says it all ^^^^^^

why do you hate healthcare?

Please tell us why this is bad? We can't all work in the public sector, some of us have to produce wealth, to generate tax revenue, to pay your salary.

The fact that some sectors won, doesn't mean that other sectors had to lose. Some just outperformed others.

The stock market went way up during Obama's 8 years. I heard lots of liberals giving him credit for that.

Not everything to do with "business" is bad, WDMSO. Lots of good, middle class Americans depend upon business for a livelihood.

Your comment is what says it all. You'd be happier if businesses all failed?

It was interesting, and from an outlet that has not been a fan of the guy.

I like most of what Trump is doing. I can't get over how bad the things he says are, and how petty and thin skinned he is.

But I'd rather have a jerk that does a good job, than a nice guy who is incompetent. That last line isn't a dig at Obama, as I consider him to be both a jerk and incompetent.