Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Mornac

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 53
1
General Discussion / Re: An appeal
« on: Yesterday at 12:12:40 AM »
You wing nuts killed it with your unrelenting crazy outrageous bullshit.  You were warned, so it shouldn’t be a huge surprise.
--No surprise here, believe me. I've learned from years of experience that if you confront a liberal with reason, he will invariably finish by running for the hills. You need only look around you to see the results.

2
General Discussion / Re: An appeal
« on: February 18, 2019, 02:48:03 PM »
I do believe this forum has died a natural death.
It has exposed the ugly truth about the extreme
left wing agenda that normal average people reject.
--It hasn't died. It's just going through a cyclical slump. If Trump were to loose the next election to a democrat, they'd all come swarming back here like flyboys to shit. I fully expect to see a resurgence for one reason or another.

3
General Discussion / An appeal
« on: February 17, 2019, 11:53:30 PM »
Some of you here from time to time mention other forums you visit. I wonder if you'd mind givin' me a link to some of those places. Don't get me wrong. I'm not lookin' to get out of here. This place is pretty much my home base at this point. It's just that I have so much common ground with those left here that I can't get the mental stimulation I crave. There must be a forum with some sane liberals on it that are capable of carrying on a conversation without havin' a meltdown. I promise that if you just give me a link I'll keep it entirely confidential. No one will have to know that you let me in.

Thank you.

4
Can we have a sane liberal only subforum, free from right wing cult garbage?
--I'd have no objection - as long as the liberals came out of their self-imposed segregation from time to time to engage the others here. Your biggest problem at the moment is that there are next to no liberals left here, having all fled since the last presidential election. I find that peculiar. I for one would like them all to come out of hiding. They have nothing to fear from me (unless they have a problem with reason).

Quote
You would need to block the morons. If you want to block me from their garbage I have no problem. In fact I have them all on ignore.

Thank you.
--A first rate example of liberal tolerance and diversity.

Thank you, BaGua.

5
After El Chapo conviction, use seized $14 BILLION to build border wall?

FEBRUARY 12, 2019
MARTIN WALSH

Could El Chapo’s seized drug money be used to build the border wall?

That’s one of the questions many are asking on Tuesday following news of the former drug kingpin being found guilty on all counts.

Mexico’s most notorious drug kingpin, Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, will spend the rest of his life in prison after a jury found him guilty on all 10 counts following a three month trial.

According to Breitbart, the United States has seized $14 billion from the former drug lord, which gave Sen. Ted Cruz a brilliant idea.

The Texas Republican introduced the Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order (EL CHAPO) Act in April 2017, which calls for the use of the $14 billion seized from the cartel drug lord to be used to pay for the wall.

“Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border,” Cruz said in a statement.


“Ensuring the safety and security of Texans is one of my top priorities,” he added.

Cruz said using criminally forfeited assets from El Chapo and other Mexican cartel members and drug dealers can “offset the wall’s cost and make meaningful progress toward achieving President Trump’s stated border security objectives.”

“The U.S. Government is currently seeking the criminal forfeiture of more than $14 billion in drug proceeds and illicit profits from El Chapo, the former leader of the Sinaloa drug cartel who was recently extradited to the U.S. to face criminal prosecution for numerous alleged drug-related crimes, including conspiracy to commit murder and money laundering,” Cruz added.

Wisconsin Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner proposed similar legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives, which would use money seized from drug cartels to fund a border wall.

“This is a way to fulfill the president’s desire to have Mexico pay for the wall,” Sensenbrenner, a member of the Judiciary Committee, told the Washington Examiner. “Having the money seized from Mexican drug cartels would mean that the bad Mexicans would end up paying for the wall, and the bad Mexicans have been terrorizing the good Mexicans with crime and kidnappings and murders within Mexico itself.”…

“The [Drug Enforcement Agency] has estimated that the gross receipts of the Mexican drug trade or somewhere between $19-$29 billion a year,” he said. “We don’t have to be 100 percent efficient to get the the money we need to completely pay for the wall relatively quickly.”

El Chapo’s $14 billion would fund well over half of the proposed wall along the southern border between the U.S. and Mexico.

Source

6


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/12/mueller-russia-investigation-costs/2736507002/

--Ya mean he was growin' the GNP by being investigated??!? The guy's more talented than I've given him credit for. This really belongs in the Trump prosperity update thread.

7
Politics / Occasional-Cortex hands Donald Trump a second term
« on: February 12, 2019, 12:23:03 AM »
What the Dems need is more wigged-out millennial twits. They're giving hope for the future of the country:


GREEN NEW DEAL: A DEMOCRATIC SUICIDE NOTE
Pat Buchanan says AOC's plan 'reads like it was written by the college socialists club'

PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
2-11-19

After reading an especially radical platform agreed upon by the British Labor Party, one Tory wag described it as “the longest suicide note in history.”

The phrase comes to mind on reading of the resolution calling for a Green New Deal, advanced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and endorsed by at least five of the major Democratic candidates for president.

The Green New Deal is designed to recall the halcyon days of the 1930s, when, so the story goes, FDR came to Washington to enact the historic reforms that rescued America from the Great Depression.

Only that story is more than a small myth.

The unemployment rate when FDR took the oath in 1933 was 25 percent. It never fell below 14 percent through the 1930s. In June 1938, despite huge Democratic majorities in Congress, FDR was presiding over a nation where unemployment was back up to 19 percent.

World War II and the conscription of 16 million young men gave us “full employment.” And the war’s end and demobilization saw the return of real prosperity in 1946, after FDR was dead.

Yet this Green New Deal is nothing if not ambitious.

To cope with climate change, the GND calls for a 10-year plan to meet “100 percent of the power demand of the United States through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.”

This appears to require a phase-out by 2030 of all carbon-emitting power plants fueled by coal and oil and their replacement by power plants fueled by wind and solar.

Will natural gas be permitted? Will nuclear power? There are 60 commercially operating nuclear power plants with 98 nuclear reactors in 30 states. Will they be shut down? Will the greens agree to dam up more U.S. rivers to produce renewable hydroelectric power?

Air travel consumes huge quantities of carbon-producing jet fuel. What will replace it? Perhaps progressive Democratic candidates will set an example by not flying, and then by voting to end production of private aircraft and to ground all corporate jets. Let the elites sail to Davos.

The GND calls for an overhaul of the “transportation systems in the United States to eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector … through … clean, affordable and accessible public transportation; and high-speed rail.”

Gas-powered cars are out. How long will that train trip from D.C. to L.A. take? And if China continues its relentless rise in carbon emissions until 2030, as permitted by the Paris climate accord, while the U.S. spends itself into bankruptcy going green, where would that leave America and China at midcentury?

“By the end of the Green New Deal resolution (and accompanying fact sheet) I was laughing so hard I nearly cried,” tweeted the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel: “If a bunch of GOPers plotted to forge a fake Democratic bill showing how bonkers the party is, they could not have done a better job. It is beautiful.”

The Green New Deal, say its authors, has as a goal “stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, the elderly, the unhoused, peoples with disabilities, and youth.”

Fifty years after the Great Society, apparently half the country consists of victims of oppression.

Who are their oppressors? Guess.

Among the endorsers of this Green New Deal is Sen. Cory Booker, who compares the battle to stop climate change to fighting the Nazis in World War II. Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren have all endorsed it. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who calls climate change “an existential threat,” was an original co-sponsor.

Nancy Pelosi has more sense. Interviewed last week, the speaker batted the Green New Deal aside: “It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive. The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”

With her own agenda and priorities, Pelosi does not want to be dragged into having to defend a document that reads like it was written by the college socialists club.

The question, though, is why Democrats, who, if nominated, are likely to face Donald Trump in 2020, are signing on to so radical a scheme.

In a presidential election, the “out” party candidate usually has an advantage. No record to defend. He or she can choose the terrain on which to attack the incumbent, who has a four-year record.

Rarely does an out party present a fixed and stationary target as exposed as this, as out-of the-mainstream as this, as vulnerable as this.

The only explanation for the endorsement of the Green New Deal by candidates with a prospect of winning the Democratic nomination is that they are so fearful of Ocasio-Cortez and the left for whom she speaks that they must endorse her plan.

That British Tory got it right. This thing reads like a Democratic Party suicide pact.

Source

8
The Trump Administration / Re: President Trump's accomplishments
« on: February 10, 2019, 11:26:40 PM »
Christians Bet on Trump and Won
He has vindicated their support.

 GEORGE NEUMAYR


In 2016, critics of Trump warned his Christians supporters that as president he would revert to his secularist New York roots. He hasn’t. The confidence the religious right placed in him has been largely vindicated. He has turned out to be the most reliable defender of religious freedom since Ronald Reagan.

Barack Obama had spent his presidency marginalizing Christians in his quest to “fundamentally transform” the country. Had Hillary won, she would have intensified that assault. Trump has given Christians some breathing room in the culture war, as evident in his remarks during last week’s National Prayer Breakfast. He made a point of defending the Vice President’s wife, Karen Pence, who has been attacked for simply teaching at a Christian school blacklisted by the LGBT movement.

Trump also spoke strongly in defense of the pro-life movement. “All children, born and unborn, are made in the holy image of God. Every life is sacred and every soul is a precious gift from heaven,” he said. “I will never let you down. I can say that. Never.” The frequency with which Trump speaks on abortion has rankled the media, which had hoped he would go soft on the issue like other moderate-leaning Republicans. Instead, Trump speaks about it directly and without apology. He devoted an important passage of his State of the Union address to the subject: “Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth. These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get the chance to share their love and dreams with the world.”

Trump shows far more reverence for the basic tenets of Judeo-Christian culture than those who have cast him as the callous, amoral plutocrat. His common sense and patriotism lead him to show a respect for America’s theistic traditions and he recognizes that America’s decline is tied to straying from them. He speaks about God in an uncomplicated manner, with far less hedging than modern churchmen. To Trump, it is obvious that rights come not from government but from God. The whole secularist project, consequently, makes no sense to him and he has no qualms about letting Christians live on their own terms without government harassment.

Obama imposed a contraceptive mandate on Christians; Trump has lifted it. One of his finer moments was inviting the Little Sisters of the Poor to the Rose Garden to assure them that their “long ordeal was over.” Only the Obama administration could have been secularist enough to get into a lawsuit with the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Under Obama, the Justice Department and Health and Human Services routinely harassed the religious. Now those agencies have adopted specific policies to protect them. “The sun is shining right now in America when it comes to our First Amendment freedoms,” Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has said.

The State Department has also undergone a major transformation. As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had brought in the NARAL crowd to push abortion rights around the world. Now social conservatives like Sam Brownback work there. Yet the media still pretends not to understand why the religious right supports Trump. Articles continue to pour forth about the impropriety of the alliance. But it reflects the prudence of conservative Christians, who see in Trump an obvious protector. Since when has imprudence been a virtue? Why are Christians obligated to surrender to the other side? They shrewdly placed their bet on Trump and won. Had they placed it elsewhere, they would be in Hillary’s crosshairs at the moment.

Many Republicans, supposedly far more “respectable” than Trump, turned out to be unreliable defenders of the religious right and would often subject Christians to lectures about “adjusting to the times.” Trump has refrained from that kind of brow-beating. He doesn’t join the PC mob in calling them “intolerant.”

His most enduring contribution to the defense of religious freedom is likely to come in the form of an improved judiciary, upon which he has placed a significant number of originalists. This last week on the Supreme Court we saw a Bush appointee, John Roberts, vote to block a pro-life Louisiana law while Trump’s appointees, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, voted to let it go forward — a reminder of why the religious right lost any confidence in the establishment GOP and was willing to give Trump a chance.

The secularist forces continue to gather strength around the country, but Trump has undeniably bought Christians some time. They needed a Constantine and he emerged as one.

Source

9
Politics / Re: Mueller is a coward and liar
« on: February 09, 2019, 01:45:57 PM »
Yes, I do.

--Wow. Can you do me a favor and tell him I'm trying to defend his reputation here and I'd appreciate it if he just stopped by, logged into his old account (it's still active in the memberlist), and just said 'hello' to everyone, thereby exposing the fraud for what he is. Shouldn't take more than five minutes of his time and I think he owes me that much.

10
Politics / How a Democrat games the system
« on: February 07, 2019, 01:11:51 AM »
BOSTON GLOBE: WARREN DOOMED AFTER NEW REVELATION
2020 hopeful wrote 'American Indian' on Texas Bar application

ART MOORE
Feb. 6, 2019



Considered a front-runner for the 2020 Democratic Party presidential nomination, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., has deflected the controversy over her claim to be Native American by declaring she never used the identity for professional advantage.

But in an application to the Texas Bar in 1986 she wrote in her own hand that her “race” was “American Indian.”

That appears to conflict with Warren’s declaration in an address to the National Congress of American Indians one year ago:  “I never used my family tree to get a break or get ahead. I never used it to advance my career.”

The latest revelation means Warren cannot beat President Trump in 2020 and should drop out, contends Boston Globe associate editor and editorial board member Joan Vennocchi.

“When you’re calling out a president as racist, you can’t make excuses for one of your own,” she wrote Wednesday.

The revelation of the Texas Bar application was buried in the eighth paragraph of a Washington Post story, pointed out Powerline blogger Steven Hayward.

“This ought to finish Warren, but probably won’t,” Hayward wrote. “The next step ought to be a release of Harvard Law School’s records to see whether they relied on representations from Warren about her bogus native American heritage in her personnel file, and counted her as such for ‘diversity’ purposes.”

Already, it’s known that in 1996, the Harvard Crimson campus paper described Warren as a woman of color and Native American. And in 1998, Harvard touted her as a Native American, the only minority tenured woman on its faculty.

But Warren recently released the results of a DNA test that showed she may be as little as 1/1,024th Native American and overwhelmingly of European descent. In any case, experts have pointed out that there is no DNA test for being Native American, because culture and identity are the key factors.

Last week, she apologized to the chief of the Cherokee Nation and told the Post she’s sorry for “furthering confusion.”

“I can’t go back,” she told the paper. “But I am sorry for furthering confusion on tribal sovereignty and tribal citizenship and harm that resulted.”

The DNA test indicated she might have had some Native American blood six to 10 generations back, as do many Americans. But she has claimed her parents had to elope because her father’s racist parents rejected their son’s Cherokee girlfriend. And she said her grandfather’s high cheekbones were evidence of Native American descent.


Source

11
Humor / Occasional Cortex: "I think he’s scared"
« on: February 07, 2019, 12:35:15 AM »
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez welcomes Trump's 'socialism' jab, says he's 'scared'

CHEYENNE HASLETT
Feb 6, 2019

President Donald Trump used part of his State of the Union address Tuesday night to argue that socialism in Venezuela had brought "abject poverty and despair" and political unrest -- and then took a jab at members of Congress who align themselves with socialist policies.

"Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new the calls to adopt socialism in our country," Trump declared.

"America was founded on liberty and independence -- not government coercion, domination and control. We are born, and we will stay. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country," he said, as cameras caught shots of members of Congress who call themselves democratic socialists or advocate their ideas, including New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Republicans cheered "USA! USA! USA!" as Trump appeared to be testing what could be a new 2020 campaign theme against Democrats -- including several announced presidential candidates who back Medicare for all -- a concept some Republicans have attacked as socialism.

After the speech, Ocasio-Cortez told ABC News what the moment felt like when the president's words and all eyes seemed to turn toward her. Trump's comments, she said, stiffened her resolve to push socialist policies, such as her proposal to increase tax marginal rates on the very wealthy.

"I think it was great. I think he’s scared," Ocasio-Cortez said. "I thought it was fabulous because it shows that we've gotten under his skin. He sees that everything is closing in on him. He knows that he's losing the battle of public opinion when it comes to the substantive proposals that we're advancing to the public."

"And frankly he has no substantive proposals to counter, he has no vision for this country. Everything is about what he doesn't want, everything is about the bogeyman," Ocasio-Cortez added.

Though socialism was long seen as a dirty word in American politics, it was reclaimed by Sanders, I-Vermont, in the 2016 presidential election -- in which he ran as a Democrat. The term is now more openly embraced by younger Americans and a frequent talking point for some top names recently elected to the Democratic Party.

Ocasio-Cortez and Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, both newly-elected members of the House, are both members of the Democratic Socialists of America, a group that's not a formal political party but believes in socialism over capitalism.

Sanders is not a member of the group but considers himself a "democratic socialist."

Source

12
The Trump Administration / Re: Making America great again
« on: February 06, 2019, 11:58:31 PM »
Trump: ‘All Children – Born and Unborn – Are Made in the Holy Image of God’


5 Feb 2019

President Donald Trump called upon Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit late-term abortion past the time when science has shown an unborn baby can feel pain.

“Let us work together to build a culture that cherishes innocent life,” the president said during his State of the Union Address Tuesday evening. “And let us reaffirm a fundamental truth: all children — born and unborn — are made in the holy image of God.”

Trump contrasted the “beautiful image of a mother holding her infant child” with the “chilling displays” of New York legislators after Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed into law a bill that denies “personhood” to unborn babies and makes abortion on demand a fundamental right.

“Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth,” the president said. “These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get the chance to share their love and dreams with the world.”

Similarly, Trump observed, “[W]e had the case of the Governor of Virginia where he stated he would execute a baby after birth.”

The president referenced the Virginia bill known as the Repeal Act, introduced by Democrat Delegate Kathy Tran and supported by Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam. The legislation created a firestorm as it proposed to allow a woman to request an abortion even moments before giving birth.

Democrats in Rhode Island and Vermont have also proposed bills that would strip most restrictions on abortion and declare the procedure a “fundamental right.”

A recent Marist poll, however, found 75 percent of Americans want substantial restrictions on abortion, including 60 percent of Democrats and 61 percent of those who identify as “pro-choice.”

Source

13
Politics / Re: Mueller is a coward and liar
« on: February 06, 2019, 07:55:20 PM »
But earning a purple heart and bronze star does. Shirking the draft with a made-up ailment certainly does not make one a hero.  Calling Mueller a coward is idiotic, wouldn't you agree?
--And what about someone who steals another person's identity. Do you have any opinion on that?

14
In The News / Re: MAGA assault
« on: February 04, 2019, 11:35:17 AM »
sure has gone quiet hasn't it.
--Strange...when I came here ten years ago, I was in a minority among a swarm gloating, blowhard, insulting liberals. Now, within the course of 24 months they've all evaporated. Ironically, Pepsi is now the proprietor of an all-conservative forum. I say we establish something on the order of a "William F. Buckley Award" and make Pepsi the first recipient.

15
In The News / Re: The Northam Flare out
« on: February 03, 2019, 03:01:52 PM »
I agree.  but it wasn't me that came up with the standard.  It is the democrats.

which is what makes this just so delicious to watch.
--I'm with you, CJ. I have little taste for this sort of thing, but the Dems have made it clear that it's sacred to them. For once I'm willing to appease them - especially if it ends in the removal of a pro-infanticide ghoul from a position of influence.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 53