i think that says a great deal. for cheney and all the rest of the self-dealing warmongering crowd. do you have a source for those stats?
i think that says a great deal. for cheney and all the rest of the self-dealing warmongering crowd. do you have a source for those stats?
I'm not assuming anything. I hope he does because, besides being unfit for the office, it's probably necessary to reform the GOP into a viable long-term party. MAGA isn't it. Unfortunately, even the Reagan party isn't it. It will need to include everything we all agree on and some things will require some compromise and revisions.Are you assuming Trump's going to lose? Because I'm not so sure I'd assume that. While I'd still say the election is in coin flip territory, where things are standing to day I think I'd probably rather be him than her.
Anyway....I don't think you are getting what I was saying. The entire situation with Lankford should indicate that the OG GOP really hasn't moved a whole lot on the issue. They'll never say so. But actions speak louder than words. And I think Lankford's position was generally representative of where the party establishment as a whole is.
The bill had "emergency measures" which essentially amounted to shutting down the border. In other words, they can do it when and if they decide they want to. But these measures were only put in motion when they reach a threshold of 5K encounters per day in a moving 7-day average.
Is there any reason you can think of why that number should be any higher than zero?
Pretty close. > 80% of retired four stars work as employees, directors, consultants, or lobbyists for the defense industry. I don’t think they are motivated by supporting and defending the Constitution. The money is significant and it all comes from Uncle Sam. Are you okay with this?
If you are going to discuss Ike, discuss all of him.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
i still largely disagree with this crazed. i'm convinced that the gop fractured over blue collar workers that were independnets or largely dems. trump struck a nerve with those people. they aren't hte warmongering crowd and don't like trickle down. they were the working folks that the dems supplanted with lbgqtpy and academic libs
game. set. match. COH. Mods do what you do
i definitely think it resonated but again i don't think it was the biggest. i was marinating my brain at that time and don't remember immigration being anywhere close to the issue it is today. certainly an issue as evidenced by the push for a wall but not at the forefront. i certainly could be wrongWell, you're certainly entitled to be wrong.
Keep in mind the history here. Bush tried to push through "comprehensive immigration reform". McCain ran on it. There was the Gang of 8 bill -- where they stripped out the border triggers (basically the idea was that the naturalization measures wouldn't kick in until and unless they achieved benchmarks in securing the border).
Any attempt to reform immigration policy always got hung up. And the stumbling block wasn't Republican politicians so much as it was Republican voters -- and their single biggest issue was sealing up the border. The pols knew this (they aren't dumb). But they are just absolutely unwilling to address it.
Then along comes Trump and his "big, beautiful wall." Nobody took his candidacy seriously at first -- and then they all collectively freaked out when he started showing real signs of support.
Immigration wasn't the only issue Trump exploited to get so many voters to leave the old GOP. But it was the biggest one -- by a lot, IMO.
i think the closer reality is maga republicans are closer to dems than old guard pubs. maga pubs don't want all the wars. would cut defense. are old blue collar labor. many with union ties now. protectionist etc.I don't get you guys. For more than a generation you guys pounded the hell out of Democrats on Free Trade. Democrats because of union ties tended to have some protectionism. Election after election conservatives railed on Reagan's belief of free trade.
That same post Reagan generation, Democrats tended to want to cut defense. The Reagan defense strategy was very simple, more is better. Republicans ran against Democrats on this issue, called us naive to think we could cut defense, said we would make the world a much more dangerous place.
Suddenly Trump appears and you (figuratively and in this case, also literally) jump on board that free trade is evil and now we get the Ike "military-industrial complex" speech straight from Bernie.
MAGA Republicans only have one core philosophy I guess, oppose anything and everything Democrats support. That includes, as McConnell now admits, turning on Reagan.
I'm not assuming anything. I hope he does because, besides being unfit for the office, it's probably necessary to reform the GOP into a viable long-term party. MAGA isn't it. Unfortunately, even the Reagan party isn't it. It will need to include everything we all agree on and some things will require some compromise and revisions.
No, I don't believe the number should be higher than zero, but realistically getting to zero is probably impossible.
We can approach it though if given the resources. Which that bill did include, by the way.
You are trying to pack 10 pounds of shit into a 5 pound bag.I don't get you guys. For more than a generation you guys pounded the hell out of Democrats on Free Trade. Democrats because of union ties tended to have some protectionism. Election after election conservatives railed on Reagan's belief of free trade.
That same post Reagan generation, Democrats tended to want to cut defense. The Reagan defense strategy was very simple, more is better. Republicans ran against Democrats on this issue, called us naive to think we could cut defense, said we would make the world a much more dangerous place.
Suddenly Trump appears and you (figuratively and in this case, also literally) jump on board that free trade is evil and now we get the Ike "military-industrial complex" speech straight from Bernie.
MAGA Republicans only have one core philosophy I guess, oppose anything and everything Democrats support. That includes, as McConnell now admits, turning on Reagan.
game. set. match. COH. Mods do what you do
Doesn’t Bing outrank Aloha? I thought Bing was a big shot of some kind in the military.We can get Bing to be Veep. I like it, Mas' head would explode.
i don't blame them in the least. but when you have a vested pecuniary interest in keeping that pump primed you hvae to question motives at least to some degree when it comes to a person who wants to turn it downI've been acquainted with retired Air Force LG John Conaway through his late son Bo. Conaway's long retired now -- like retired retired. During his military career, he ended up as the Chief of the National Guard Bureau -- including during the first Gulf War. I think he retired in that post, if memory serves.
According to Bo, he cashed in on his career pretty good after he left uniformed service. And he said that pretty much all Gens and Admirals do that -- which you can't blame them, I guess.
I don't get you guys. For more than a generation you guys pounded the hell out of Democrats on Free Trade. Democrats because of union ties tended to have some protectionism. Election after election conservatives railed on Reagan's belief of free trade.
That same post Reagan generation, Democrats tended to want to cut defense. The Reagan defense strategy was very simple, more is better. Republicans ran against Democrats on this issue, called us naive to think we could cut defense, said we would make the world a much more dangerous place.
Suddenly Trump appears and you (figuratively and in this case, also literally) jump on board that free trade is evil and now we get the Ike "military-industrial complex" speech straight from Bernie.
MAGA Republicans only have one core philosophy I guess, oppose anything and everything Democrats support. That includes, as McConnell now admits, turning on Reagan.
I don't get you guys. For more than a generation you guys pounded the hell out of Democrats on Free Trade. Democrats because of union ties tended to have some protectionism. Election after election conservatives railed on Reagan's belief of free trade.
That same post Reagan generation, Democrats tended to want to cut defense. The Reagan defense strategy was very simple, more is better. Republicans ran against Democrats on this issue, called us naive to think we could cut defense, said we would make the world a much more dangerous place.
Suddenly Trump appears and you (figuratively and in this case, also literally) jump on board that free trade is evil and now we get the Ike "military-industrial complex" speech straight from Bernie.
MAGA Republicans only have one core philosophy I guess, oppose anything and everything Democrats support. That includes, as McConnell now admits, turning on Reagan.
i don't blame them in the least. but when you have a vested pecuniary interest in keeping that pump primed you hvae to question motives at least to some degree when it comes to a person who wants to turn it down
Sigh...Good post. Too much painful truth here.
FWIW, pretty much all post WW2 US presidents have more or less been advocates of "free-ish" trade. But obviously there are some noteworthy exceptions in there. I think Reagan was the most vociferous proponent of it. And he was right to be. But we also had NAFTA (which spanned Bush41 and Clinton) and many, many other trade expansions.
Free trade is most certainly not evil. It does create winners and losers -- and often the winners are foreigners and the losers are Americans. But it's folly to forget the other side of the ledger and how critically important it is to our well-being.
However, I've never been of the mind that "more is better" when it comes to defense. I think the defense industry is inefficient and absolutely drenched in graft. It wouldn't bother me in the least to see our defense budget trimmed -- but I think it should be done with a fresh needs assessment to ensure that our military's structure and armaments match up well with the threat matrix.
I think Bing is a Colonel, which would equate to Aloha's Naval Captain rank. But I could be wrong, Bing has been infrequent here while he serves in the Pentagon evidently learning rent-seeking as they all do.Doesn’t Bing outrank Aloha? I thought Bing was a big shot of some kind in the military.
I met Bing when he was an O3 or O4 and I was O5. Bing made O6 and likely is on the flag track. I never made flag.Doesn’t Bing outrank Aloha? I thought Bing was a big shot of some kind in the military.
I fear the oath Aloha listed will for Germany will be our new model
I too would love to see defense trimmed, it has to be to get us toward a balanced budget.
You joking? You like this oath and have no issue with it:Do you really? Like…really, really?
I wouldn’t fear that.
I am not sure Trump will go that far, but I am sure he will view personal loyalty first and foremost. Promotion at higher grades requires the president.Do you really? Like…really, really?
I wouldn’t fear that.
You joking? You like this oath and have no issue with it:
“I swear by God this holy oath, that I will render to Donald J Trump, Leader of the United States and People, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, unconditional obedience, and that I am ready, as a military member, to risk my life at any time for this oath”
Ah. Now I got you. I do think he’d like it.Seriously, Aloha? You misunderstood what I was saying.
Of course I’d have a problem with the Hitler Oath. I’m saying we shouldn’t fear it becoming ours. That’s unhinged.
But, let’s face it, the vast majority of fiscal repair would have to come from non-discretionary budget items — which is to say entitlements.
I am not sure Trump will go that far, but I am sure he will view personal loyalty first and foremost. Promotion at higher grades requires the president.
Ah. Now I got you. I do think he’d like it.
The President doesn’t have the authority to change the oath.Maybe. I’m just saying it’s not something anybody should be fretting.
There’s just so much hyperbole surrounding Trump. I get it, and why there is. But I just don’t think serious people should allow themselves to get swept up in it.
Truman and Lincoln let both go along for a long time.If so, that wouldn’t be a terribly novel thing.
Lincoln and McClellan. Truman and MacArthur.
I mean, would any president tolerate military officers who were overtly or covertly thwarting them and their policies? There’s only one CinC, after all.
It doesn't matter what the idiot masses say. Your idiot masses believe in weather control and a long list of other insane and stupid shit..Daddy Bush was “Hitler”, Reagan “Hitler”, and of course Goldwater was “Hitler”. They do this 4 years from now whoever the GOP nominee will be. They will be “Hitler” too and they will wax poetic that they are not a moderate like Trump was.
“The reaction shot — when the cameras returned to Cronkite — showed the ‘most trusted man in America’ gravely shaking his head. When Goldwater accepted the Republican nomination, Democratic California Gov. Pat Brown said, ‘The stench of fascism is in the air.’”
“About Ronald Reagan, Steven F. Hayward, author of ‘The Age Of Reagan’ wrote: ‘Liberals hated Reagan in the 1980s. Pure and simple. They used language that would make the most fervid anti-Obama rhetoric of the Tea Party seem like, well, a tea party. Democratic Rep. William Clay of Missouri charged that Reagan was ‘trying to replace the Bill of Rights with fascist precepts lifted verbatim from Mein Kampf’”
It doesn't matter what the idiot masses say. Your idiot masses believe in weather control and a long list of other insane and stupid shit..
When a General that was his CoS speaks, along with the former chair of the JCOS and they call him fascist, maybe you should listen. It carries a bit more weight than the what the 'dems' say.
Now find a list of Generals who called Raygunz, etc .. a Nazi. Do you see the difference yet?
WTF happened to this country.... How in the f*ck are you people so damn stupid?
Well, I’m convinced.
Which General or former WHCOS said that?
In 2012, Romney was Hitler.
Nikki Haley was “Ava Braun”
I get itWhich General or former WHCOS said that?
So, you still don't get it?
If a random IU fan says Matt Painter f**ks pigs it's a bit different than Keady, Shrewsberry and Edey saying Painter f**ks pigs... the first example should be ignored, the second carries far more weight and shouldn't.
So which General/former CoS, and/or Chair of the JCOS called anyone other than Trump a facsist? btw - they're both republicans.
The chart isn’t relevant twenty. Military spending is the 3rd largest budget line and we’re running high single digit deficits. It needs to be cut.The defense budget is historically smaller than it's ever been.
The chart isn’t relevant twenty. Military spending is the 3rd largest budget line and we’re running high single digit deficits. It needs to be cut.