This might be it, we are doomed.
 

We are doomed as a nation. I am really trying not to go into the kitchen and grab some tinfoil.

Here we are in 2015, as polarized a nation since maybe any time since prior to the Civil War, both politically and ideology .

Where we are:

• 18 Trillion in Debt and counting
• Spending 600-800 Billion more per year that we take in
• We have not been capable of having honest conversation about immigrants that are not here legally and for the past 12 years
• Not sure which is worse:

• The Democrats are as close to appointing a socialist / borderline communist (want to see a new Civil War? Elect Sanders)
  

• The Repubs are about to appoint a bad TV Reality Star
  
  

• The Cold war is heating up again, oh and China.
• The worst mix of ingredients you could stir in a pot in the Middle East are now stirring in a pot in the middle east.
• The SocialJusticeMafia has usurped discussion and replaced it with a Hashtag
• Social Security is on final approach and nobody is dropping the landing gear.
• Iran is getting the Bomb (one way or the other)

Those are just some of the high level items I can scratch up in a quick coffee session.

I am really thinking that we have passed peak America. Y'all need to pause and consider this for a moment. If so, we are doomed. More importantly our kids and their kids are doomed.

i agree
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

John, you left out tens of trillions in debt from unfunded liabilities for social security and medicare, and none of that is included in the 18t you mentioned. Tens of trillions more.

Quick coffee, session, quick.

Besides, I am beginning to think all of that debt is just a lever to get rid of currency in general. Other than pure incompetence, I can see no other endpoint than the elimination of currency, and thus capitalism, to replace with Socialism/Communism, repeat circle back to Civil War.

We're doomed; Eeyore
The sky is falling; Chicken Little
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Look at Puerto Rico right now. They are about to go under and are screaming at congress to allow them to fall under the same municipal bankruptcy protection that US states have.
So, while we might be up chit creek with a turd for a paddle, remember that the creek is only a foot or so deep. We can just default on everything, claim bankruptcy and start over. Just fire up the printing presses !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's right Chris, keep your head in the sand and everything will be fine.

Sure, and China is going to allow that. Well, they might allow that if the USA agrees to retreat from the western pacific and Middle East / Africa. In which case, yes, past Peak America.

Dont forget who got first dibs on Iraqi oil. ;)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

China?

Yup
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[size=1]Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device[/size

OK John. Thank You for making a difference with your internet rant. If we all did that it would be a better place.

Trump is going to make America great again.

Good god.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, or Ben Carson is going to do it by banning abortion, making sure everyone has more guns and ensuring Muslims don't have the rights of other American citizens.

Just imagine the debates between Carson and Clinton :rotflmao:

Bernie...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just saw a clip on Trump on the stump pretty much insulting everyone. He looked desperate.

maybe he should just read from a teleprompter...I remember Obama insulting a lot of people on the stump

Carson said he would love it if Roe v Wade were overturned. Didn't hear that he would make sure everyone has more guns. He is in favor of the second amendment.

I don't recall him say that, as President, he would ban abortion or provide everyone with guns or more guns. I have heard him speak of adhering to the Constitution. So, I would assume he knows, as President, he would not have the power to do such things. On the other hand, Hillary has promised, as President, to do things which would not be in her Constitutionally appointed power to do. Most likely that Progressive idea of the Imperial Presidency.

When did Carson say that Muslims shouldn't have the same rights as other American citizens? He has pointed out that Islamic law is not compatible to our Constitutional law. And that a faithful Muslim could not truthfully protect and defend the Constitution as the oath of office would demand. But would have to as a matter of faith subvert the Constitution when it conflicted with Islamic law. Islam is a governmental system as well as a religion.

Do "other American citizens" have the right to subvert the Constitution when it conflicts with their faith or preferred system of government?

On the other hand, again, Progressives and Socialists do believe their preferred system of government does trump the Constitution. So they might find it strange that a Presidential candidate would not want someone who would impose their religion or preferred system of government when it conflicted with the Constitution. The Progressives and Socialists do so on a regular basis.

Spence and his fellow travelers have supported all sorts of misbehavior and slimy tactics for the last 8 years under Obama, Pelosi and Reed......he has absolutely no business questioning future nefarious congressional actions, dubious executive orders and other usurpation of limits...they've set the bar very low for competence and character and very high for incompetence and deceit

John, sometimes I see the actins of guys like you and TDF (fair minded, hard working, common sense, surround your kids with healthy activities), and I think maybe we avoid the abyss. I hoe there are enough people with brains and common sense. I think that's what it comes down to There may be too many brain dead liberals who want freebies more than they want anything.

I've thought along the same lines. For some, maybe most politicians, it may not be an intentional endpoint, but, rather, simply pure incompetence and stupidity (Donald Trump may be right about that). But for some of the reputedly "smarter" ones for whom the end of capitalism is the goal, the elimination of currency, necessitated by massively inflated and unpayable debt, could possibly be a way to bloodlessly (or "reasonably" so) impose a socialist type of world government. In the complex and highly populated market of today in which barter is not feasible, the elimination of personally accumulated currency as both a medium of exchange and as well the means of building wealth in order to acquire more wealth, would only leave some government invented and controlled medium as the way to exchange labor, or even existence, for goods and necessities.

I sarcastically proposed such a system in a previous thread in which a government issued "insurance" card could be used to "buy" anything the market offered. The government would set the requirements needed to get the card. In such a way the entire market would be government controlled, and everybody would have the equal economic outcome that Socialists want.

why is Trump such a horrible choice? You make him sound like a Kardashian, when he's really an incredibly successful businessman, that's what made him famous first, the reality show just enhanced that (again, good business).

He's going to quickly realize his extremism isn't going to work, but that doesn't mean his ideas are useless. Why is securing our borders and negotiating good trade deals a terrible thing?

I like Ben's ideas. All of them.

No prob Chris, glad to help and continue to beat the drum on one of the biggest things that affect my kid and your kids that most politicians of both stripes quickly change the subject or ignore hoping all will go away.

When you look out a few orders of affect, what else can it be? And by accident or by design?

I saw something interesting lately and had to chuckle, how many more Democrats choose government as the career path.

I did too, until he said that he would not have invaded Afghanistan after 9/11. Iraq if fair territrory to debate, I can't believe any sane person would object to our invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11. I was very saddened by his statement there. Other than that,. I think he's fantastic.

Even I agree with the invasion; not with the 10 year drag out... but the initial move, and original mission 100%...

Other than that, we don't agree on that statement! :fishslap:

I've yet to hear any serious ideas. Really all I've seen from Trump are negative, demeaning, insulting and childish attacks. You don't turn that off, it comes so naturally to Trump because that's who he really is...

Sounds a lot like running on Hope and Change.

No, not at all.

Default on everybody? How about the senior citizens who rely on social security checks?

In the end, we will realize that not only do compassionate conservatives like Paul Ryan, NOT want to destroy Social Security,m but that there were in fact, trying to save it. Others, mostly liberals are willing to let it go under, so that they can buy votes today.

"Just fire up the printing presses "

Because that has no downside...

Actually, he's right. Obama had no specific ideas, he just promised this vague notion of "change".

we voted for change, and we got it, boy.

I saw a news report the other day. After getting elected, Obama asked to borrow a specific Norman Rockwell painting, to hang just outside the Oval Office. Everyone who walks into that office, has to walk right past it.

Know what it is?

A little black girl walking down the street, past a wall, on which is spray-painted in grafiti, the word "N*GGER".

Who the hell would want to walk past that every day, on the way into their office? A race-obsessed fanatic, who wants a constant reminder of who his enemies are. This, from the man who said he would unite us, and be a post-racial president.

Right.

God the hate runs deep with you...

Well honestly, maybe some of that bluntness will help our foreign policy, because this method of gentle diplomacy doesn't seem to be working so well with Syria or ISIS! If Regan acted like this, god knows where we would be with communism!

Right, right. I point out that our president specifically asked for a painting that makes whites out to be the worst kind of loathsome racists, and I am the hateful one.

You sit in Rev Wright's church for decades, who would expect anything different?

Correct. When Carter was elected, the liberals said that his appeasement strategy would lead to peace. They were wrong. And as always, failed to learn from that empirical evidence.

Actually, the woman who posed as a girl for the painting made the request. It was up for 4 months. It's one of the most iconic political paintings of all time by one of America's greatest painters.

The hate is consuming you.

It's divisive.

Look, it's an important part of our history, and if you're going to put up an entire museum, or when you teach history, it's an important subject to touch upon. I'm not saying we pretend it didn't happen.

But if I'm picking one painting to hang outside the Oval Office, I don't pick something whose only message is that whites, at one time, were institutionally racist to blacks. I'd pick something that unites all of us. And if a white President had a painting of Willie Horton raping a white woman, or abu Mumia Jamal murdering a white police officer, which are also factually correct, I don't think you'd be on board with it.

The great uniter!

There, fixed it for you, history, unlike skin color, IS more than skin deep.

YUP....


"In the new West, freedom is inequality, liberty selfishness, and tribalism unity. That is all ye need to know."

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/426080/print