Politics, Politics, Politics

I have no problem with an owner making as much as he can no matter what the amount... his company his biz he earned it!
can't think of the name of the company that wen5t belly up last year... but was on it's second or third hgh priced CEO and even going belly up they still paid him millions of dollars!
don't you think that maybe just maybe if the upper pay scale hadn't been so high and they invested in the company it might not have happened

anyway in my opinion this big paycheck for the CEO's is all just a show of power... I'm better than you because I made 10 million more than you.... how much can one asshole spend anyway?
 
the Breen berets and a few other special ops units are really part of a guerilla team... they normally do the training and call the shots.... only a few of them infiltrated into some sort of local combat unit... still they are ours and they are there!
seal only work with seals a lot safer (maybe) because they know/trust one another but are in dangerous missions... the other groups have to totally rely on some other group for support/protection
The Green Berets at least officially are supposed to be less involved in combat operations than they were in the Vietnam era
 
Failure to prosecute and/or convict can merely mean the defendant was really good at covering his/her ass. How many probes into Benghazi and we are still waiting for some of the emails?
So, are you trying to help ME make MY OWN POINT? Or, did you really have a point?
 
Presidential race right now is a lot like picking the Superbowl winner at the beginning of the season. There is a all kinds of hype and predictions but the outcome will depend on what at the time are small inconsequential decisions. Every candidate running right now has made a gaff or two that could cost them down the line. My prediction? I think there may be an independent coming out of left field that will catch both parties flat footed. I think there is a fair change that the election could end up in the House of Representatives. The interesting thing is that if nobody gets a majority I think it is 270 votes from the electoral college then the House of Representatives votes on the top 3 candidates. That means that the top Republican and Democrat and independent would be voted on. It would be great entertainment watching that play out!
 
It does help that the media tends to lean to the left.
could be... it depend on your party affiliation as to what news you watch.... and they are all biased in one way or another... they say they aren't but they are!
It's down right comical to watch something on Cnn and then switch to fox.... but then I really don't care for either one.. try to stick to CBS and yes I will agree they are a little to the left... but then so am I

It was really hilarious during all those Black Lives matter protests... to switch back and forth between CNN and Fox... you rerally saw a swing in opinions then!
 
I think there may be an independent coming out of left field that will catch both parties flat footed. I think there is a fair change that the election could end up in the House of Representatives.
with the feelings about everyone that is running that is a possibility.... wouldn't the Dems scream about that.... just thinking about that pisses me off!
But I have to agree about someone coming from nowhere and taking the pie home... none of these candidates are really that well liked... they all have a certain amount of loyal supporters but probably not any more than the other candidate...
to me out of this whole mess and I know I have said it before is Clinton.... not that she is the best.... just do less damage than the others... and hopefully make some corrections.... but the other 3 are..... ?... out there!
 
when Trump first started running.... I liked him a lot... and being a vet Loved his stance on vets... really thought this might be my first time voting for a republican Pres.... never before... a few governors but never a pres..... but as time went on and he talked more... this guy is nuts!.. I have a couple of friends who still support him... and their opinion is he has no speech writer and shooting from the hip... well maybe but still there is more for me not to like than to like... I got a letter from Hillary asking for money and told her to go screw herself because of some remarks she made about the va..... and now here I am thinking she is the best choice.... sucks what we have to choose from
 
The problem with the Republicans, and their "Trickle Down" is they never really looked for the optimum tax rate to produce the optimum tax revenue, as the Laffer Curve suggested. Republicans always assume that the peak of that imaginary curve is some where below what ever the current tax rate is. Dick Cheney & Donald Rumsfeld were having dinner with Jude Wanniski (Wall Street) and Arthur Laffer in 1974. By the way, Cheney was Laffer's classmate in college. Laffer sketched out the bell curve on a dinner napkin showing the tradeoff of tax rates to tax revenues, explaining that there was a place in the curve (the sweet spot) that would produce maximum revenue with the minimum allowable tax ... I think this was when Cheney's dick got hard for the first time in his life as he got all excited about this "theory", and coined his famous phrase under Bush of "tax cuts pay for themselves". That dinner was the beginning of the Supply-Side platform for Reagan 3 years later in his 1976 race. And the 114th Congress took this "theory" a step further and made it their federal, economic policy.
Have you ever played the game where one person tells a story to someone, that person tells someone else, and so on and so on ... then the last person is asked to retell the story, and then they compare it to the original story? That's EXACTLY what happened with Supply-Side Economics and the Republicans. So when we talk about the Laffer Curve ... it really is "He who laughs last, laughs loudest" ... unfortunately, its been at the expense of the US economy. But I think, with THIS election year, its time for the citizens to laugh, and unless Republicans pull a rabbit out of the hat, the voters may be howling by the end of the election.

Don't believe me on that "dinner" discussion? Here's the NAPKIN ...

pic_political-SupplySide-LafferNapkin.jpg

The Republicans failed at "Trickle Down" because they ****** the lower tax rates ... they probably could care less what that maximum tax rate should be to create maximum revenue. The correct tax revenue rate changes, depending on where taxation levels start from, not just what direction its moving (increasing or decreasing). The fact that revenues have declined when the top rates have been reduced proves that the tax rates are lower than the optimum rate needed to produce maximum revenue. Republicans didn't determine the best estimate of the model's parameters, they projected their own ideogical desires onto the model ... just as Scott Walker did in Wisconsin, and Brownback did in Kansas. Isn't it ironic that when Clinton raised the tax rates a balanced budget was produced. When Obama raised the highest tax rate, the deficit cut in half? And when California raised the tax rates ... well, go read.
Fact is, Republicans stand for nothing and promising Tax Cuts is all they have to offer ... then watch the national debt and deficit spending INCREASE and demand cuts to subsidies/entitlements that mostly impact the poorest Americans.
 
Last edited:
"Trickle down" got started with Hoover.
My understanding is it goes all the way back to the Muslim, Ibn Khaldun, a philosopher & founding ******* of economics in the 15th century; he wrote:
"during the beginning of a dynasty, taxation yields large revenue from small assessments, and during the end of a dynasty taxation yields small revenue from large assessments".
 
Last edited:
Children do not like or trust Cruz
3191FE7C00000578-3465077-image-a-48_1456468079537.jpg

272c4bb6b618e2eb16673009c28033ccb3ad1390.jpg
And there is a reason for it
1455052215974.png
Even Rubio, who openly admits he is owned by the establishment, took less money from mega banks and wall street then Cruz.

For all you Hillary supporters, I would think twice about it IF you care about the American working class.
 
your republican nominee is........

Paul Ryan Emails Lead to Questions About Presidential Run

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan has been sending numerous emails to Republican recipients, leading many to speculate that he plans to become the party's nominee at the Republican National Convention.

Some recipients at the Republican committee compared them to campaign fliers, according to the Washington Times.

One email said, "no matter the outcome of this year's crucial presidential election, your Republican House majority will continue to fight for conservative values."

Then the email asks the recipient to take a "Leadership Priority Survey" in order to "help guide our agenda in this crucial election year."

One member of the committee told the Times, "I have probably gotten 10 plus emails from Ryan since last week. Hardly ever did before and I'm on everybody's email list. What do you think is up?"

A report in Politico stated that Paul Ryan is having difficulty advancing his agenda as House speaker. A Republican told Politico that he believes Ryan "underestimated the opposition to getting anything done."

Another Republican told Politico that the GOP "is unwhippable and unleadable," and credited Ryan, calling him "as talented as you can be," but said "even he can't do anything."

The Republican National Committee is set to debate rules that would make it more difficult for a nominee to come into the convention and take the nomination from Donald Trump or Ted Cruz on a third or fourth ballot.

Ryan appeared on CBS' "Late Show," where Ryan and host Stephen Colbert had a joking exchange in which Ryan said, in several different languages, that he would not accept a nomination for president.

In a CNN interview posted Wednesday, Ryan, the party's 2012 vice presidential nominee, was asked if his decision not to get into the race this year meant he's nixed a presidential run in the future as well.

"Well no, but I don't think that far down the road," he said. "I made a decision in this cycle for 2016 not to run for president."

His rejection last week of an 11th hour bid for the party's nomination at a contested convention was emphatic, Politico notes.

"I don't think it's right to have someone parachute in who never ran for the job," he said. "And in my case, I specifically decided not to run for the job, adding that in an open convention, only candidates who campaigned and received votes should be under consideration. I don't know how I can be any clearer than that."
 
To Go or Not to Go: Republicans Face Trump Convention Dilemma

Bloomberg
By Laura Litvan
April 20, 2016 10:25 AM

To Go or Not to Go: Republicans Face Trump Convention Dilemma


At least four top Republican U.S. senators say they’ve decided to skip July’s party nominating convention in Cleveland to campaign in their home states. Several others say they haven’t decided whether they’ll make the trip, and at least one will boycott the event if Donald Trump emerges as the Republicans’ presidential pick.

This year’s convention is shaping up as perhaps the party’s most pivotal -- and contentious -- in a generation, but Senate Republicans appear increasingly nervous about it. Many in the party are agonizing over the possible elevation of Trump or a contested convention that awards the nomination to someone else, either of which risks damaging the party and handing Senate control to Democrats.

House Speaker Paul Ryan even used a Tuesday night appearance on CNN to call on his colleagues in Congress to attend what he said "could be a great historical exercise."

So far, most of the senators planning to skip the convention are being careful to avoid blaming Trump or the potential messiness directly. Senator John McCain of Arizona, the party’s 2008 presidential nominee, said Tuesday that he’ll be too busy running for his sixth Senate term to go to Cleveland, with his own primary just weeks later.

“It’s not unusual for someone who’s up for re-election to be campaigning,” McCain said when asked whether he would rather avoid a potentially disordered convention. “I have a primary that’s on Aug. 30.”
McCain is facing what may be his toughest re-election fight and has clearly been uncomfortable with Trump’s success. Two others not attending -- Mark Kirk of Illinois and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire -- also face tough races against Democrats.

Even though those taking a pass on Cleveland say they just want to be on the campaign trail, staying away affords them other advantages. They might be able to avoid taking sides in what could be a protracted and bitter feud between Trump and Texas Senator Ted Cruz, and perhaps distance themselves from any chaotic fallout -- or an unpopular nominee.
But their absences also diminish the likelihood of any grand unity gesture emerging from the convention, if many of the party’s senior leaders and most well-known figures aren’t even in the room.

Upcoming Primaries

Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski noted the convention, which is scheduled to run from July 18 to 21, “is very shortly before my primary. So I’m going to be home with Alaskans.”

Asked whether fissures in the party over leading candidates Trump or Cruz contributed to her decision, she responded, “I won’t be there.”

Of course, it isn’t unprecedented for senators to skip the event. In 2008, when the Republican brand was damaged in the wake of the George W. Bush administration, a handful of vulnerable senators skipped the GOP convention in Minneapolis, including Pat Roberts of Kansas, Susan Collins of Maine, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Ted Stevens of Alaska.

‘Trump Coronation’

Trump’s bullying rhetoric and Cruz’s history of bucking his party’s Senate leaders could lengthen the list of lawmakers planning to sit out this year’s convention.

Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, who earlier endorsed Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, said he’ll decide whether to go based on “whether it’s a Trump coronation or not. If it is, I see no reason to go.”

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, an unsuccessful presidential contender who has said Trump’s policy pronouncements endanger stability in the Middle East and leave foreign leaders “dumbfounded,” said he’ll decide later whether to attend based on “how crazy it looks.”

Still, many other Republican senators are planning on going, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Republican Whip John Cornyn of Texas and Rubio, who will arrive with some delegates won in primaries before his March 15 decision to suspend his presidential campaign.

At least one senator running for re-election will also be there: Rob Portman of Ohio, who would have trouble skipping such a gathering in his home state. He is, however, planning his own parallel convention, which could offer him some separation.

‘People With Brains’

Some senior senators say they will go precisely because the wisdom of party elders may be sorely needed.

"I’ve never missed one," Orrin Hatch of Utah said, adding he plans to go even if the convention gets messy. "Especially, because they’re going to have to have some people with brains, you know. I shouldn’t say that."

Among those vulnerable senators on the ballot, a few are weighing making just brief trips to Cleveland. Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, who won his last election with 54 percent of the vote, said that if he goes it will only be for “a day or two.” He’s more focused on his Aug. 2 Republican primary, he said, and doesn’t plan to be a convention delegate, anyway.

Brokered Convention?

Blunt said there’s some benefit to staying away for those up for re-election. If the convention is contested, he said, some will inevitably describe it as a “brokered” one, where powerful people in the party swoop in to help steer the outcome, rather than the delegates themselves.

“Certainly, elected officials who aren’t there are unlikely to be accused of being the people who are trying to broker the convention,” he said. Asked whether he’s concerned about being labeled a “broker,” he said, “I shouldn’t even be talking about this, because I haven’t decided what I’m going to do.”

Other senators up for re-election who are planning brief stays include Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Richard Burr of North Carolina. They each insist their past experiences have taught them that conventions suck up valuable time.

“I’ve gone to every convention since 1980, and every time I get done going I wonder why I went to the convention,” Grassley said. “And I think this time I’m going to talk to myself beforehand instead of afterwards. You waste a lot of time.”
 
one more to show things are interesting in the gop.... don't look like Trump or Cruz going to make it!

GOP leaders reject change in presidential nominating rules

Republican Party leaders have turned aside an effort to change the rules at the party's upcoming national convention to make it harder for the GOP to nominate a fresh presidential candidate

HOLLYWOOD, Fla. (AP) -- Republican Party leaders turned aside an effort Thursday to change the rules at their national convention to make it harder for the GOP to choose a fresh presidential candidate, a prelude to what may be sharper battles ahead.

The showdown, which pitted the top echelons of the Republican National Committee against a renegade party committeeman from Oregon, came at a time when many in the GOP believe that top presidential contenders Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz are likely losers in this November's general election. Some have been hoping a new candidate will emerge at the party's gathering in Cleveland, a scenario that has drawn the wrath of Trump and Cruz backers and many of the party's grassroots conservatives.

Though the party's 56-member rules committee rejected the proposal by voice vote, Thursday's showdown was likely a mere skirmish compared to the battles that may occur in Cleveland over the bylaws the party will to choose its standard-bearer in this fall's elections.
The RNC and its rules committee can recommend changes in the processes the 2,472 convention delegates will use to crown a nominee. But only the delegates themselves can approve which rules they will use — a decision they won't make till they gather in July.

Solomon Yue, the RNC committeeman from Oregon, said the House of Representatives rules that the party has long used at its presidential conventions give the presiding officer too much power. Yue proposed instead using Roberts Rules of Order, which he said would enable a majority of the delegates to block an effort by the presiding officer to open the proceedings to fresh nominations.

Yue said that 2016 has been "a politically supercharged year" and warned that efforts by party leaders to dictate events in Cleveland "would blow up the convention and cause us to lose in November the White House fight."

Party leaders worked to defeat the plan, saying that by making any rules changes, they would be accused of trying to unfairly help a presidential hopeful. Trump has repeatedly clashed with RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, saying his party's rules for collecting delegates are "rigged."

"Our making a change of this magnitude at this point is the worst possible thing that we could do to inspire the confidence of the delegates in our home states that we are not putting our finger on the scale for any candidate," said Enid Mickelsen, an RNC committeewoman from Utah.
 
My prediction? I think there may be an independent coming out of left field that will catch both parties flat footed.
starting to look like that guy coming out of left field is....... Paul Ryan

but I don't think he can save the day... the Trump supporters are just as whacky as he is... so they will stick with him even when he loses the nomination and goes independent... that will ******* the republican vote......as for Cruz... no one wants him to begin with... the only real support he has is the "anti-trump" vote.... but they will rally around Ryan in a heart beat.... with things so divided... that brings us back to MADAM PRESIDENT!

just my opinion....and opinions are like assholes.... everyone has one
 
well Torpedo... looks like we both could be wrong.... gop warming up to the Trump idea?

looking that way
Trump is right about one thing..... I think Cruz is pretty much history... he probably still has some sneaky ******* going on... but don't think anyone trusts him... his only reason for getting the votes was because a lot were anti-Trump.... but that might be changing
 
If any of the half dozen of you that read this thread have read God and Gold by Walter Russell Meade, or The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism, by Michael Novak, send me a private note.
 
Back
Top