info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Trump and foreign policy.
29 views
Skip to first unread message
Ignoramus28785
Jul 24, 2016, 10:24:24 PM7/24/16
to
On 2016-07-24, Jim Wilkins <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Larry Jaques" <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote in message
> news:8pdapbh42jqpbl053...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 20:08:37 -0500, Ignoramus3825
>> <ignora...@NOSPAM.3825.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>It is a little difficult to talk about "Trump's ideas" with a
>>>straight
>>>face, but what he says about his future direction of foreign policy
>>>is
>>>a extremely radical departure from used to be the cornerstones of
>>>Republican foreign policy.
>>>
>>>I find it fascinating that this difference is so little discussed.
>>
>> They're too busy pissing and moaning about the length of his tie.
>
> They are too afraid of throwing rocks that could rebound into their
> own glass house:
>
> http://observer.com/2016/03/its-time-to-talk-about-hillarys-foreign-policy-faux-pas/
>
> http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron
>
> http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/08/hillary_clintons_foreign_policy_failures.html
Jim, I agree that Hillary is horrible and her foreign policy
stinks. It is dogmatic, unimaginative and highly adventurist.
Can we please leave Hillary alone for a bit and think about Trump for
just a few minutes.
The foreign policy of the United States in general is at a dead end
at the moment, with
1) very costly Middle East entanglements with no end in sight
2) other countries such as China catching up to the US in GDP
and military potential
3) Cost of effective military technology dropping dramatically
and becoming affordable to many players
4) Old alliances such as the EU and NATO becoming more fragile and
less appealing to some members
5) Direct democracy and grass roots level exchange of information
getting in the way of the usual US methods of influencing the
public
All that, and probably more, show that our future foreign policy
initiatives may fall flat just like the recent ones did.
With that in mind, let's look at Trump. What he says is not without
merit, such as
1) Questioning the need for the cornerstones of US influence
such as institutions of EU and NATO
2) Questioning US commitment to NATO members
3) Demanding that some old US clients of the US such as Japan
and South Korea "pay for protection".
4) Building a "Great Wall of USA" on the mexican border and
general aggrandizement at the expense of Mexican nationals.
This does not even approach dealing with Russia, with I would rather
not discuss personally because of some of my inherent biases.
These are decidedly NOT senseless ideas if you look at them with a
fresh mind.
However, they are almost polar opposites of the usual Republican
neocon dogma, centering on global domination, exerting influence
through NATO and EU, and subtly and not subtly imposing "protection"
as means to control and influence many nations.
And now those above proposals belong to the presidential candidate
from the Republican party!
John McCain is probably having nightmares right now, along with the
rest of the old Republican establishment. They swallowed their pride
and principles, however flawed, to let the Republican party have a
candidate for this election. But how does this portend for the future
of the party that just gave up its guiding principles of foreign
policy just to placate one candidate?
I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
institution.
I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
books.
i
> "Larry Jaques" <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote in message
> news:8pdapbh42jqpbl053...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 20:08:37 -0500, Ignoramus3825
>> <ignora...@NOSPAM.3825.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>It is a little difficult to talk about "Trump's ideas" with a
>>>straight
>>>face, but what he says about his future direction of foreign policy
>>>is
>>>a extremely radical departure from used to be the cornerstones of
>>>Republican foreign policy.
>>>
>>>I find it fascinating that this difference is so little discussed.
>>
>> They're too busy pissing and moaning about the length of his tie.
>
> They are too afraid of throwing rocks that could rebound into their
> own glass house:
>
> http://observer.com/2016/03/its-time-to-talk-about-hillarys-foreign-policy-faux-pas/
>
> http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron
>
> http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/08/hillary_clintons_foreign_policy_failures.html
Jim, I agree that Hillary is horrible and her foreign policy
stinks. It is dogmatic, unimaginative and highly adventurist.
Can we please leave Hillary alone for a bit and think about Trump for
just a few minutes.
The foreign policy of the United States in general is at a dead end
at the moment, with
1) very costly Middle East entanglements with no end in sight
2) other countries such as China catching up to the US in GDP
and military potential
3) Cost of effective military technology dropping dramatically
and becoming affordable to many players
4) Old alliances such as the EU and NATO becoming more fragile and
less appealing to some members
5) Direct democracy and grass roots level exchange of information
getting in the way of the usual US methods of influencing the
public
All that, and probably more, show that our future foreign policy
initiatives may fall flat just like the recent ones did.
With that in mind, let's look at Trump. What he says is not without
merit, such as
1) Questioning the need for the cornerstones of US influence
such as institutions of EU and NATO
2) Questioning US commitment to NATO members
3) Demanding that some old US clients of the US such as Japan
and South Korea "pay for protection".
4) Building a "Great Wall of USA" on the mexican border and
general aggrandizement at the expense of Mexican nationals.
This does not even approach dealing with Russia, with I would rather
not discuss personally because of some of my inherent biases.
These are decidedly NOT senseless ideas if you look at them with a
fresh mind.
However, they are almost polar opposites of the usual Republican
neocon dogma, centering on global domination, exerting influence
through NATO and EU, and subtly and not subtly imposing "protection"
as means to control and influence many nations.
And now those above proposals belong to the presidential candidate
from the Republican party!
John McCain is probably having nightmares right now, along with the
rest of the old Republican establishment. They swallowed their pride
and principles, however flawed, to let the Republican party have a
candidate for this election. But how does this portend for the future
of the party that just gave up its guiding principles of foreign
policy just to placate one candidate?
I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
institution.
I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
books.
i
Jim Wilkins
Jul 24, 2016, 10:42:44 PM7/24/16
to
"Ignoramus28785" <ignoram...@NOSPAM.28785.invalid> wrote in
message news:Rr2dnZmiV83P5QjK...@giganews.com...
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-foreign-policy-speech
https://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/
Scroll down to On Free Trade.
--jsw
message news:Rr2dnZmiV83P5QjK...@giganews.com...
https://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/
Scroll down to On Free Trade.
--jsw
edhun...@gmail.com
Jul 24, 2016, 11:57:57 PM7/24/16
to
He's gone back to Ricardo but he should have gone back a bit further, to Adam Smith. And then he should have fast-forwarded to Milton Friedman. (For this purpose, you can skip "New Trade Theory" and "New-New Trade Theory.") Finally, he should look at what happened to Friedman's ideas in the real world. They got badly beaten up.
What the author is advocating is "domestic substitution." There's an entire theory behind it. For advanced economies, it does not work. It results in a recession.
--
Ed Huntress
John B.
Jul 25, 2016, 4:46:25 AM7/25/16
to
The Japanese government paid ¥217 billion (US$ 2.0 billion) in 2007 to
the U.S. as annual host-nation support called Omoiyari Yosan.
The term "Omoiyari Yosan"is a popular term for funds provided by Japan
as host nation support for the U.S. forces stationed in Japan. The
official term is Cost Sharing for the US Forces Stationed in Japan,
Although the term technically only covers the portion of financial
support not mandated under the 1960 U.S.-Japan Status of Forces
Agreement (SOFA), it is popularly used to refer to Japanese support as
whole.
The term originates from comments made in 1978 by the then
Director-General of the Japan Defense Agency, Shin Kanemaru, in
defense of the Japanese government's decision to share financial
responsibilities for the American bases in Japan.
The information regarding the above is public information and can be
easily found if looked for.
> 4) Building a "Great Wall of USA" on the mexican border and
> general aggrandizement at the expense of Mexican nationals.
>This does not even approach dealing with Russia, with I would rather
>not discuss personally because of some of my inherent biases.
and 38.7 of total gas supplies. Of course this is not the entire story
as in return for all that oil and gas Russia gets a whole bunch of
money, but still. "Igor, run out there and close that valve marked "G"
a half a turn.... You were saying, Mein Herr?"
>
>These are decidedly NOT senseless ideas if you look at them with a
>fresh mind.
>
>However, they are almost polar opposites of the usual Republican
>neocon dogma, centering on global domination, exerting influence
>through NATO and EU, and subtly and not subtly imposing "protection"
>as means to control and influence many nations.
>
>And now those above proposals belong to the presidential candidate
>from the Republican party!
>
>John McCain is probably having nightmares right now, along with the
>rest of the old Republican establishment. They swallowed their pride
>and principles, however flawed, to let the Republican party have a
>candidate for this election. But how does this portend for the future
>of the party that just gave up its guiding principles of foreign
>policy just to placate one candidate?
>
>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>institution.
>
>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>books.
>
>i
cheers,
John B.
John B.
Jul 25, 2016, 5:18:57 AM7/25/16
to
statements, that I suggest anyone that actually read what he says and
possess a modicum of intelligence will see as rhetoric, but the media
coverage may be the significant factor and Trump's media coverage from
may 2015 to April 2016 has been 85% favorable.
In contract Hillary, for the same period, rates 70% favorable.
It is not accurate, but a great news headline might read, "30% Of
Voters Think Hillary Is An Idiot..... while only 15% consider Trump a
fool".
Might even be worth a raise, on certain newspapers, for the reporter
that wrote that :-)
I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
candidates.
--
cheers,
John B.
Jim Wilkins
Jul 25, 2016, 7:36:38 AM7/25/16
to
"John B." <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote in message
news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
> ....
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/aug/11/biography.highereducation
http://mobile.businessinsider.com/president-johnsons-naked-press-conference-and-5-historic-events-from-the-first-air-force-one-2016-3
In America, the race goes to the loud, the solemn, the hustler. If you
think you're a great writer, you must say that you are.
--Gore Vidal
news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
> ....
> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
> candidates.
> --
> cheers,
>
> John B.
Trump is polite and tactful compared to LBJ:
> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
> candidates.
> --
> cheers,
>
> John B.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/aug/11/biography.highereducation
http://mobile.businessinsider.com/president-johnsons-naked-press-conference-and-5-historic-events-from-the-first-air-force-one-2016-3
In America, the race goes to the loud, the solemn, the hustler. If you
think you're a great writer, you must say that you are.
--Gore Vidal
edhun...@gmail.com
Jul 25, 2016, 7:53:11 AM7/25/16
to
Jim Wilkins
Jul 25, 2016, 8:51:48 AM7/25/16
to
<edhun...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:077c860b-9e8e-45b9...@googlegroups.com...
=========
Then it should be driving China broke while we blindly pretend we have
free trade with them. But is it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_substitution_industrialization
"Many economists contend that ISI failed in Latin America and was one
of many factors leading to the so-called lost decade of Latin American
economics, while others contend that ISI led to the "Mexican Miracle,"
the period from 1940 to 1975, in which annual economic growth stood at
6% or higher."
Pick which expert you believe is right, there are so many choices.
--jsw
news:077c860b-9e8e-45b9...@googlegroups.com...
Then it should be driving China broke while we blindly pretend we have
free trade with them. But is it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_substitution_industrialization
"Many economists contend that ISI failed in Latin America and was one
of many factors leading to the so-called lost decade of Latin American
economics, while others contend that ISI led to the "Mexican Miracle,"
the period from 1940 to 1975, in which annual economic growth stood at
6% or higher."
Pick which expert you believe is right, there are so many choices.
--jsw
Larry Jaques
Jul 25, 2016, 9:05:02 AM7/25/16
to
On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:24:18 -0500, Ignoramus28785
<ignoram...@NOSPAM.28785.invalid> wrote:
<ignoram...@NOSPAM.28785.invalid> wrote:
>With that in mind, let's look at Trump. What he says is not without
>merit, such as
>
> 1) Questioning the need for the cornerstones of US influence
> such as institutions of EU and NATO
> 2) Questioning US commitment to NATO members
> 3) Demanding that some old US clients of the US such as Japan
> and South Korea "pay for protection".
> 4) Building a "Great Wall of USA" on the mexican border and
> general aggrandizement at the expense of Mexican nationals.
They can afford a fence. I'd prefer that Mr. Fox -himself- pay for
it, too. ;)
>This does not even approach dealing with Russia, with I would rather
>not discuss personally because of some of my inherent biases.
>
>These are decidedly NOT senseless ideas if you look at them with a
>fresh mind.
>
>However, they are almost polar opposites of the usual Republican
>neocon dogma, centering on global domination, exerting influence
>through NATO and EU, and subtly and not subtly imposing "protection"
>as means to control and influence many nations.
>And now those above proposals belong to the presidential candidate
>from the Republican party!
>
>John McCain is probably having nightmares right now, along with the
>rest of the old Republican establishment. They swallowed their pride
>and principles, however flawed, to let the Republican party have a
>candidate for this election.
have kept their assinine pride and continue to thwart Trump, both in
spirit and print. It's disgustingly vile and separationist. What
Cruz did on stage was the last straw for the people, too. He's outta
there, for good! In any case, had they -not- nominated the people's
choice, it would certainly have destroyed whatever we have left of the
Republican Party.
>But how does this portend for the future
>of the party that just gave up its guiding principles of foreign
>policy just to placate one candidate?
mess in recent decades) straighten up and fly right.
I don't know about your supposition that the guiding principles have
been upended, though. Only recently applied (failing) techniques have
been upended.
>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>institution.
have been almost entirely subverted of late.
>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>books.
to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
the face of the population.
--
It is easier to fool people than it is to
convince people that they have been fooled.
--Mark Twain
Jim Wilkins
Jul 25, 2016, 9:17:29 AM7/25/16
to
"Larry Jaques" <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote in message
news:692cpb1e4dkl3v8hf...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:24:18 -0500, Ignoramus28785
> <ignoram...@NOSPAM.28785.invalid> wrote:
>
> ....
> <ignoram...@NOSPAM.28785.invalid> wrote:
>
> I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get
> back
> to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
> the face of the population.
In high school after studying the muddle of French partisan politics
> back
> to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
> the face of the population.
we learned that American parties are election machines more than the
guardians of sacred principles. They have to parrot whatever their
chosen portion of the public believes but their practices don't follow
their claims.
http://robertreich.org/post/104684097130
"To find the real reason Democrats didn't close the loophole, follow
the money. Wall Street is one of the Democratic party's biggest
contributors."
--jsw
Larry Jaques
Jul 25, 2016, 9:23:52 AM7/25/16
to
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:37:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
<murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"John B." <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote in message
>news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:57:53 -0700 (PDT), edhun...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> ....
>> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
>> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
>> candidates.
That is entirely by choice on his part, too. I think he follows P.T.
<murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"John B." <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote in message
>news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:57:53 -0700 (PDT), edhun...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> ....
>> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
>> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
>> candidates.
Barnum's line of thought that all publicity is good publicity. Even
if it is embarrassing, it keeps people thinking about you.
>Trump is polite and tactful compared to LBJ:
>https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/aug/11/biography.highereducation
>
>http://mobile.businessinsider.com/president-johnsons-naked-press-conference-and-5-historic-events-from-the-first-air-force-one-2016-3
Jim Wilkins
Jul 25, 2016, 9:50:28 AM7/25/16
to
"Larry Jaques" <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote in message
news:0c4cpb5uj2l0c6kmo...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:37:34 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"John B." <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote in message
>>news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:57:53 -0700 (PDT), edhun...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ....
>>> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
>>> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than
>>> other
>>> candidates.
>
> That is entirely by choice on his part, too. I think he follows
> P.T.
> Barnum's line of thought that all publicity is good publicity. Even
> if it is embarrassing, it keeps people thinking about you.
>
>
>>Trump is polite and tactful compared to LBJ:
>>https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/aug/11/biography.highereducation
>>
>>http://mobile.businessinsider.com/president-johnsons-naked-press-conference-and-5-historic-events-from-the-first-air-force-one-2016-3
>
> All I can say is "WOW!"
Another account I read long ago but couldn't confirm with a Net
> <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"John B." <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote in message
>>news:kqkbpb9r8u8djcsnr...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 24 Jul 2016 20:57:53 -0700 (PDT), edhun...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ....
>>> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
>>> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than
>>> other
>>> candidates.
>
> That is entirely by choice on his part, too. I think he follows
> P.T.
> Barnum's line of thought that all publicity is good publicity. Even
> if it is embarrassing, it keeps people thinking about you.
>
>
>>Trump is polite and tactful compared to LBJ:
>>https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/aug/11/biography.highereducation
>>
>>http://mobile.businessinsider.com/president-johnsons-naked-press-conference-and-5-historic-events-from-the-first-air-force-one-2016-3
>
> All I can say is "WOW!"
reference stated he gave the press conference while drying himself
after a shower. Some noted world leaders were privately very crude.
http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/vodka-as-a-political-lever-little-water-part-ii/
"Occasionally, Khrushchev bore the brunt of the torment; his comrades
once pinned the word "prick" to the back of his coat, and sometimes
slipped rotten tomatoes on his chair as he sat."
--jsw
edhun...@gmail.com
Jul 25, 2016, 10:56:30 AM7/25/16
to
--
Ed Huntress
Gunner Asch
Jul 25, 2016, 1:26:35 PM7/25/16
to
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 06:05:01 -0700, Larry Jaques
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>>institution.
>
>But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
>have been almost entirely subverted of late.
>
>
>>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>>books.
>
>I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
>to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
>the face of the population.
+
<lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>>institution.
>
>But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
>have been almost entirely subverted of late.
>
>
>>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>>books.
>
>I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
>to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
>the face of the population.
Bravo! Well put! Hear hear!!
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
edhun...@gmail.com
Jul 25, 2016, 1:46:37 PM7/25/16
to
On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 1:26:35 PM UTC-4, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 06:05:01 -0700, Larry Jaques
> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
> >>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
> >>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
> >>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
> >>institution.
> >
> >But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
> >have been almost entirely subverted of late.
> >
> >
> >>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
> >>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
> >>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
> >>books.
> >
> >I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
> >to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
> >the face of the population.
> +
>
> Bravo! Well put! Hear hear!!
>
Reactionary populists like you and Larry subverted the "root" Republican values 25 years ago. You are the "changelings."
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 06:05:01 -0700, Larry Jaques
> <lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
> >>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
> >>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
> >>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
> >>institution.
> >
> >But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
> >have been almost entirely subverted of late.
> >
> >
> >>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
> >>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
> >>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
> >>books.
> >
> >I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
> >to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
> >the face of the population.
> +
>
> Bravo! Well put! Hear hear!!
>
But now, you seem to be upset about a new generation of "changelings." Who would you be referring to? The Tea Party Reactionaries? The Trumpista Revanchists?
It sounds like you're saying you have to get rid of people like yourselves. This wouldn't be a surprise, actually, because you don't what you're talking about. If the Republican Party, by some quirk of fate, managed to restore its fundamental principles and goals, the two of you would find yourselves looking up from the gutter and wondering what had just happened.
--
Ed Huntress
Jeffrey VanRensselaer
Jul 25, 2016, 3:41:52 PM7/25/16
to
John B.
Jul 25, 2016, 8:58:13 PM7/25/16
to
statements" - as a confirmed "smartass" I must note that the addition
of the "s" to the word "statement" changes its meaning to the plural
form :-)
>
>> In contract Hillary, for the same period, rates 70% favorable.
>>
>> It is not accurate, but a great news headline might read, "30% Of
>> Voters Think Hillary Is An Idiot..... while only 15% consider Trump a
>> fool".
>>
>> Might even be worth a raise, on certain newspapers, for the reporter
>> that wrote that :-)
>>
>> I have also read that, at least partially due to his outrageous
>> statements, Trump has had far more free "News" coverage" than other
>> candidates.
>> --
>> cheers,
>>
>> John B.
cheers,
John B.
alvin...@geemail.org
Jul 25, 2016, 9:04:59 PM7/25/16
to
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:21:59 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 06:05:01 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>>>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>>>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>>>institution.
>>
>>But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
>>have been almost entirely subverted of late.
>>
>>
>>>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>>>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>>>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>>>books.
>>
>>I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
>>to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
>>the face of the population.
>+
>
>Bravo! Well put! Hear hear!!
>
Thus speaks the indomitable political pundit.... who failed the
intelligence test and was deemed too dumb to be employed by
Freto-Lay.
--
Alvin D.
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 06:05:01 -0700, Larry Jaques
><lja...@invalid.diversifycomm.com> wrote:
>
>>>I myself do not know what to think about this. I do think that this
>>>contradiction is indicative of the loss of relevance of the old guard
>>>of the Republican party, or perhaps even the whole party as an
>>>institution.
>>
>>But is it? Or is it a trend toward embracing our old values, which
>>have been almost entirely subverted of late.
>>
>>
>>>I find this to he highly unsettling. This might end up the way I
>>>predicted earlier, with the two party system evolving to be a democrat
>>>vs socialist party, with the republican party belonging to history
>>>books.
>>
>>I think we good Republicans need to oust the changelings and get back
>>to our roots, while embracing a few more of the necessary changes to
>>the face of the population.
>+
>
>Bravo! Well put! Hear hear!!
>
intelligence test and was deemed too dumb to be employed by
Freto-Lay.
--
Alvin D.
mog...@hotmail.com
Jul 26, 2016, 9:40:00 AM7/26/16
to
On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 5:18:57 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
0 new messages