New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#551 2017-03-17 11:07:47

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

For the wall Trump Seizing Land From Texans to Build His Wall, Letters Going Out that order them to either accept a lowball offer for their land, or have it seized by eminent domain.

http://www.bluedotdaily.com/wp-content/ … .30-AM.png

The Donald Trump administration has been plagued with scandal after scandal in it’s first couple of months, and now it seems like another is brewing, this time with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Hit with Fraud Investigation. “What did the company know about fossil fuels and climate change and when?”  It is likely that Exxon-Mobile knew the environmental damage they were causing for decades and hid it from the public.

Trump Caught in the Middle of Another $400 Million Conflict of Interest Business Deal that Chinese company, Anbang Insurance Group, is investing into a building owned by Kushner’s real estate company, adding to the mountain of other conflicts of interest this Trump has.

You know, save it for the legal weenie lawyers that are actually interested in this stuff. I'm not a lawyer. All I care about is how what Trump is doing affects me and the Space program, if Trump is accidentally making a few bucks on the side, I could care less, Trump obviously didn't get rich by this, Clinton did! If for instance a Russian diplomat checks into the Presidential Suite of a Trump hotel, I could care less, you want to make an issue of this and call it a bribe? That's ridiculous. The most powerful man in the World right now is Donald Trump, Putin has nothing to offer him, a few hundred million on the side is not going to get Trump to change his policies. Trump is 70 years old, he knows he doesn't have many more years left, the Presidency is his legacy, he is not going to mess it up by willingly accepting bribes or kickbacks, Trump has made his billions already, Clinton has not. Everything Trump does while President is all about his legacy and making history, not about enrichment, if you don't know this already, I don't know what else I can say to you.

Offline

#552 2017-03-17 11:20:59

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

You are correct in those that comitted the crimes of burning cars and looting stores need to be caught and jailed after prosecution.

The same holds true for the Trump followers that have killed and burned churches as well....

I heard a black man burnt down a black church and got caught trying to make it look like Trump followers dod this. As for he other Churches, I smell George Soros money, he is paying people to protest, riot, and commit acts of violence attributed to Trump. There were a number of Jewish cemeteries vandalized recently, I wouldn't be surprised if George Soros was paying people to do that in order to make Trump look bad. the whole "good ole boy" Klan connection to Trump is something the Democrats are trying to weld onto Trump, they would even give him a southern accent if the could. Problem is Trump is from New York, not Alabama, he has hired a lot of minorities in his businesses, has a daughter that converted to Judaism, and the Democrats are trying to paint him to look like Hitler! I think that is just dishonest! I think the Democrats should stop trying to be "Boss Hogg" and just accept their losses and try to do better by the American people instead of trying to find angles to impeach the current President, the nation does not need this! Just work the system, run a few candidates and learn from your mistakes, that is all I ask. There will be a Democratic President again someday, if the democrats would stop digging a hole for themselves now, stop conniving and being dishonest. Too many tricks and not enough real work for the people, its time they got back to that, I am sure they can find real issues, and not make up stuff. There is not much stuff the Trump Administration could have done in its first month in office. I suggest they let events happen of their own accord instead of their trying to force events an manufacture a scandal for Trump out of whole cloth. We need a more balanced media too, we are not going to believe "Pinocchio News" when it talks about a "Trump Scandal"! The Media has "soiled themselves" with their bias for the Democrats, we need this to stop!

Trump’s $1.1 Trillion Budget Makes Dramatic Cuts to Federal Government

The axe falls heavily on the Environmental Protection Agency, the Agriculture Department and the State Department. Other programs, from medical research to the arts to those benefiting the poor, would also lose a significant chunk — if not all — of their federal funding. The budget reserves $1.5 billion for building a wall on the southern border with Mexico, with $2.6 billion more allocated for the project in the following fiscal year.

Here are the highlights:

—Twelve of the government's 15 Cabinet agencies would be defunded to some extent, with the biggest losers the departments of Agriculture, Labor, State and the Cabinet-level EPA. The EPA's funding would be down 31 percent, or $2.6 billion; Agriculture would be down nearly 21 percent, or $4.7 billion; and the State Department would be down 28 percent, or $10 billion.

—The departments seeing the biggest funding gains would be the Pentagon, up 10 percent with $52 billion allocated for military spending and $2 billion for national defense programs outside the Defense Department; Homeland Security, up 6.8 percent or $2.8 billion, including for the building of the border wall with Mexico; and Veterans Affairs, up 5.9 percent, or $4.4 billion.

—The Health and Human Services Department faces the biggest cut in dollars — 16.2 percent, or $12.6 billion — with funding eliminated for the Fogarty International Center, whose mission is to support global health. But the budget does address the nation's growing opioid addiction epidemic with a proposed $500 million increase to the health department as well as more to the Justice Department.

—Aside from funding for the border wall, Homeland Security would get a $314 million hiring spree for "500 new Border Patrol Agents and 1,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement law enforcement personnel in 2018, plus associated support staff." Money would also go toward hiring 75 immigration judges and 20 attorneys who can help procure the land in the Southwest for the border wall, as well as for short-term detention space.

—Federal funding would be eliminated for several programs and services, with proposed savings of $2.7 billion. Those include the National Endowment for the Arts, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the Institute of Museum and Library Services, legal aid for the poor and low-income heating assistance.


http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/Politics … NTS%20.jpg

Republicans dismiss Trump's first budget blueprint

Key takeaways from President Trump's new budget blueprint are Families face reality of possible budget cuts killing programs they use

How would Trump's budget hit UN programs?

The U.S. contributes more to the U.N. budget than any other nation: 22 percent of the regular budget ($5.4 billion) and 28.5 percent of the peacekeeping budget ($8.27 billion).

Trump wants to slash State Department budget by 28 percent, shift money to defense

Under executive order reguation roll back
Other changes to Things to know about Trump's rollback of CAFE fuel-economy standards

The standard for passenger cars stayed at 27.5 mpg from 1990 until 2007. In 2009, the government set a fuel economy standard of 34.1 mpg for cars and light trucks by 2016. In 2012, it set a new target of 54.5 mpg by 2025. The number can change depending on the mix of vehicles customers buy. Right now, it stands at 51.4 mpg because people are buying more SUVs and trucks.

So by relaxing the goal the us will sell more oil which will raise the price at the gas pump.. And it will not sell anymore cars made in America than it currently does.

GOP health care bill advances despite opposition from conservatives from the budget panel, voting 19-17, passed the American Health Care Act, which now heads to the House Rules Committee.

Offline

#553 2017-03-17 23:35:48

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

At least Trump has the gumption to propose these cuts, the only things Obama ever wanted to cut was the Defense Department and NASA. Also why are so many liberals worried about Global Warming while at the same time, none of them are worried about the increasing government debt? Both are long term problems supposedly, so why are liberals so eager to make sacrifices to try and solve global warming, but when it comes to the Budget Deficit and debt, they are willing to kick the can down the road? Seems a bit inconsistent, don't you think? You cite all these instances of Trump wanting to cut the budget, but you seem to have no problem with cutting carbon emissions. Cutting carbon emissions means imposing costs on the emitters, but that is fine, however cut government programs and its no no no!

Offline

#554 2017-03-18 08:14:06

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 16,567

Re: Politics

Government programs that feed poeple when cut kill people....A defense department cut does not....
Sure there needs to be a balance and that is the problem when making cuts that could and will kill people as thats the same as a death camp singling out the old and the poor for termination....
That said cutting the amount for global warming a bit does not kill but terminating all research will as people do not move from what they own. Terminating the EPA regulations on pollutions will kill in the name of cuts...
Regulations are not in place to keep corporate business men from profits its there to protect the people.

So choose the cuts wisely

Offline

#555 2017-03-18 09:30:43

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

Government programs that feed poeple when cut kill people....A defense department cut does not....

A Defense Department cut kills soldiers who are fighting to protect us! I think soldiers should have priority over homeless people, we shouldn't be leaving them to die in the battlefield in order to feed and shelter the homeless! and if we lose a war to our enemies there is this:
e_jasenovac28.jpg
buchenwald_dead_bodies.jpg
6420114414534879491.jpg
The Enemy can do some terrible things to us if we lose!, if we get cheap on defending ourselves!

Sure there needs to be a balance and that is the problem when making cuts that could and will kill people as thats the same as a death camp singling out the old and the poor for termination....

At least you stand a chance if you are not in a concentration camp.

That said cutting the amount for global warming a bit does not kill but terminating all research will as people do not move from what they own. Terminating the EPA regulations on pollutions will kill in the name of cuts...
Regulations are not in place to keep corporate business men from profits its there to protect the people.

So choose the cuts wisely

I have not seen any evidence that Global Warming actually kills! We are intelligent creatures, we should be able to adapt to a changing environment over many generations and survive! We don't need those ice caps on the north and south poles, how do we know this? The human population in the Polar Regions is extremely low!

Offline

#556 2017-03-18 19:35:11

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 3,698
Website

Re: Politics

"I have not seen any evidence that Global Warming actually kills! We are intelligent creatures, we should be able to adapt to a changing environment over many generations and survive! We don't need those ice caps on the north and south poles, how do we know this? The human population in the Polar Regions is extremely low!"  -- quoted from Tom Kalbfus in the previous posting.

Tom,  you idiot!  You are so ignorant of the science on this that you do not understand that we do not have have "many generations" to adapt.  We have 1,  maybe 2,  before it gets quite catastrophic. 

What happens at the poles (ice melt) affects everywhere else.  Because sea levels rise by a minimum of the volume of ice melted on land that is above current sea levels,  divided by the ice/water density ratio 0.90.  Max is 1 m rise for the land glaciers,  6 m rise for the Greenland ice sheet,  7 meter rise for west Antarctica,  and 20+ m rise for east Antarctica.  Actuals should be crudely half of those figures,  for 0.5 + 3 + 3.5 + 10+ m = 17 m sea level rise.  Less if less-than-half actually melts,  which is where my 6-10 m rise figure comes from. 

As the waters warm further,  thermal expansion raises sea levels further.  This does take longer.  Geologists have identified fossil beaches as high as 350 feet (107 m) above current sea levels,  and as low as 480 feet (146 m) below current sea levels.  That bounds what can happen.  Because it has happened before. 

What will happen within about 3 generations (2100 AD) is less,  at something closer to my 6-10 m sea level rise (~25% melting),  and some unpredictable but incredible changes in desertification and rainfall patterns (also consistent with the geological record).  Half of humanity lives within 6-10 meters of current sea levels,  and 90+% of them are so poor they cannot move to higher ground.  Nearly all the high-population cities,  and nearly all the business and financial institutions,  fall within this danger range. 

If technological agriculture fails (and it easily could),  90% of humanity dies,  by famine.  And the resulting wars over sharply-dwindling resources.  That is based on pre-industrial agricultural output versus industrial agricultural output,  which is roughly a factor of 10.  Just a matter of the data record.  Screw your politics,  that's just hard historical data. 

Fast yet drastic change.  That's what actually faces us.  You would know that,  if you looked at the real data from real scientists working in the field,  and not that fake-news Breitbart-news and Tea Party shit.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2017-03-18 19:39:34)


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#557 2017-03-18 20:08:38

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

GW Johnson wrote:

"I have not seen any evidence that Global Warming actually kills! We are intelligent creatures, we should be able to adapt to a changing environment over many generations and survive! We don't need those ice caps on the north and south poles, how do we know this? The human population in the Polar Regions is extremely low!"  -- quoted from Tom Kalbfus in the previous posting.

Tom,  you idiot!  You are so ignorant of the science on this that you do not understand that we do not have have "many generations" to adapt.  We have 1,  maybe 2,  before it gets quite catastrophic.

 
2 generations ago, how much lower was the sea level? The ice caps have been melting and shrinking since 18,000 years ago, chance are they will continue to do so until a climatic reversal happens and we begin a new ice age.

What happens at the poles (ice melt) affects everywhere else.  Because sea levels rise by a minimum of the volume of ice melted on land that is above current sea levels,  divided by the ice/water density ratio 0.90.  Max is 1 m rise for the land glaciers,  6 m rise for the Greenland ice sheet,  7 meter rise for west Antarctica,  and 20+ m rise for east Antarctica.  Actuals should be crudely half of those figures,  for 0.5 + 3 + 3.5 + 10+ m = 17 m sea level rise.  Less if less-than-half actually melts,  which is where my 6-10 m rise figure comes from. 

As the waters warm further,  thermal expansion raises sea levels further.  This does take longer.  Geologists have identified fossil beaches as high as 350 feet (107 m) above current sea levels,  and as low as 480 feet (146 m) below current sea levels.  That bounds what can happen.  Because it has happened before. 

What will happen within about 3 generations (2100 AD) is less,  at something closer to my 6-10 m sea level rise (~25% melting),  and some unpredictable but incredible changes in desertification and rainfall patterns (also consistent with the geological record).  Half of humanity lives within 6-10 meters of current sea levels,  and 90+% of them are so poor they cannot move to higher ground.

You are saying they are so poor they cannot move a mere 6 meters to higher elevations? Why is that, are all their legs broken? Is the air too thin for them to breathe at 6 to 10 meters altitude? I know there are a lot of poor people in Appalacia, there are poor people living in Tibet and Nepal, these are high altitude places, and poor people can live here, and if most of them live in cardboard boxes and other shanties, moving shouldn't be such a big problem for them.

Nearly all the high-population cities,  and nearly all the business and financial institutions,  fall within this danger range.

High population cities can move, if the ocean level rises, you get new coast lines and people can live their, move their shanties and cardboard boxes to higher elevation, they are light enough, I think they can carry them!

If technological agriculture fails (and it easily could),  90% of humanity dies,  by famine.

 
Oh please, because the oceans rose 6 to 10 meters? 90% is hyperbole. More melted ice means more water not less! Also your talking about 2100 AD, well into the age of robots, on what basis would people be poor that they can't move their legs?

And the resulting wars over sharply-dwindling resources.

 
What are the resources of the Solar System anyway, You saying that humanity would use them up by 2100. We can dump more water from Europa on Earth if you think that would help, but I think the ice sheets of Antarctica contain enough water in them'

That is based on pre-industrial agricultural output versus industrial agricultural output,  which is roughly a factor of 10.  Just a matter of the data record.  Screw your politics,  that's just hard historical data.

 
Why are you concerned about preindustrial, there won't be any preindustrial in 2100? You know for a guy in the New Mars forums, you really have little faith in the future!

Fast yet drastic change.  That's what actually faces us.  You would know that,  if you looked at the real data from real scientists working in the field,  and not that fake-news Breitbart-news and Tea Party shit.

GW

Offline

#558 2017-03-18 22:23:00

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,813
Website

Re: Politics

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

The Enemy can do some terrible things to us if we lose!, if we get cheap on defending ourselves!

NAZI death camps were what the government of Germany did to their own people! This was never done by a foreign invader, it was what the government did to their own. So now ask what the government of the US will do to you. And you want to support the US government taking more money from you? Look at those pictures again? Now think of a US marine standing in front of a truck with US citizens piled inside. That's what you are funding.

A couple people told me the US government has secret trains hidden somewhere; passenger cars with handcuffs built into each seat. What do you think those are for?

Tomi Lahren likes to refer to American liberals as "snowflakes". You realize the term "snowflake" refers to a prisoner in a NAZI death camp. After they were burned, sometimes burned alive, in cremation ovens, their ashes would float up the chimney and come down as "snowflakes". When you call someone a "snowflake" you are threatening them with death in a NAZI death camp. That means you call yourself a NAZI.

Offline

#559 2017-03-18 22:58:31

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,813
Website

Re: Politics

17021342_755128901278814_5802556401113592127_n.jpg?oh=976a0a63be603acdb82e1326007bfef7&oe=593187EA

Offline

#560 2017-03-19 03:24:13

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 3,139
Website

Re: Politics

You realize the term "snowflake" refers to a prisoner in a NAZI death camp. After they were burned, sometimes burned alive, in cremation ovens, their ashes would float up the chimney and come down as "snowflakes". When you call someone a "snowflake" you are threatening them with death in a NAZI death camp. That means you call yourself a NAZI.

Lolwut.

You *do* realise that the term snowflake comes from the term "special snowflake", referring to people who believe themselves to be special and unique, just as snowflakes are supposed to be?

But don't mind me.

?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimages4.fanpop.com%2Fimage%2Fphotos%2F18900000%2FMJJ-micheal-jacksons-thriller-18980702-720-540.jpg&f=1


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#561 2017-03-19 06:05:36

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

The Enemy can do some terrible things to us if we lose!, if we get cheap on defending ourselves!

NAZI death camps were what the government of Germany did to their own people! This was never done by a foreign invader, it was what the government did to their own. So now ask what the government of the US will do to you. And you want to support the US government taking more money from you? Look at those pictures again? Now think of a US marine standing in front of a truck with US citizens piled inside. That's what you are funding.

My wife is from Poland, I visited one of those Death Camps in Poland. In fact most of those Death Camps were built by slave labor in Poland directed by the conquering Germans, most of those people exterminated in those camps weren't German citizens, the Germans didn't have to invade Poland so they could have a site to kill their own citizens. About half the people killed in those Death camps were Jews, but if you categorize those populations differently, it is also true that half of those people killed in the Death Camps were Poles, many were also Jews, but they were still Poles as well. The Germans invaded Poland without provocation and then they built the Concentration Camps an started killing Poles and many other Europeans in them. I would suggest you read up on your World War II history. The Germans would not have had access to all those Europeans, if those European states had not cut their defense budgets so much because of the Great Depression! It is a mistake to think that Defense Spending is what causes wars, that is "Hippie Think!" Hippies tend t have this simplistic answer to what causes wars, they see a soldier in uniform with a gun and instead of seeing someone who is defending their rights and freedoms against a foreign aggressor, they see a warmonger intent on starting a war for his own enjoyment! Hippies were spoiled rotten after World War II, they were never taught what caused it, they mistook America's reaction to if for the cause of World War II! They figured that because we put a gun in a soldier's hand, that is why he was sent to Europe, forgetting there was something called the Enemy that started this War. Most Hippies weren't Poles. Most Poles realized that having an ill-equipped armed forces defending Poland did not stop the Germans from invading, most hippies in America embrace this dangerous myth!

A couple people told me the US government has secret trains hidden somewhere; passenger cars with handcuffs built into each seat. What do you think those are for?

Tomi Lahren likes to refer to American liberals as "snowflakes". You realize the term "snowflake" refers to a prisoner in a NAZI death camp. After they were burned, sometimes burned alive, in cremation ovens, their ashes would float up the chimney and come down as "snowflakes". When you call someone a "snowflake" you are threatening them with death in a NAZI death camp. That means you call yourself a NAZI.

Yet those "snowflakes" don't melt, ours do! What you are attempting here is guilt by association, because we happened to use the same word or phrase that might have been used by the Nazis, you try to label us as such. One could also perhaps label Eisenhower a Nazi, because he had a program to build highways just like the Nazis did in Germany before the war. All those Hippies driving around in Volkswagen Beetles and Campers could be called Nazis because they are driving "Nazi-mobiles" those cars were invented during the Hitler era in Nazi Germany, don't you know! This is guilt by association.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2017-03-19 06:06:06)

Offline

#562 2017-03-19 06:13:46

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

RobertDyck wrote:

17021342_755128901278814_5802556401113592127_n.jpg?oh=976a0a63be603acdb82e1326007bfef7&oe=593187EA

Those two in the middle picture aren't Republicans, the one on the left is Debbie Wasserman Shultz, I recognize her face! We're 20 trillion in debt because of the Democrats, the Republicans are only beginning to get to work, but they find it easier just to let the Democrats destroy the country as the have been doing. Republicans or at least the career Republicans don't like this responsibility, they do like their jobs and their perks however, so they won't willingly vacate their seats so some real Republicans can get to work on our Nation's problems

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2017-03-19 06:14:16)

Offline

#563 2017-03-19 06:28:12

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

GW Johnson wrote:

Hey,  somebody unplugged the sewer for the politics!

Keep the flushed amounts smaller,  and maybe it won't get plugged up/shut down again!

I see I'm not the only one to notice the analog to 1932 Germany.

At this point in time,  the evident alternative to the con man is just another con man.  Trump stole the angry-voter insurgency role from Cruz,  being a better rabble-rouser. 

That leaves Cruz as just a Trump "mini-me".  He's just as much a con man,  too.  He has no plans other than to exercise personal power and to shut the government down if he doesn't get what he wants (something he has already done).

We don't need either one of them.

GW

This is so far from the reality of Donald Trump, here you are trying to paint him as a Nazi, this is all fake news, 99% of all of this was made up by the Democrats and distributed by the media in order to smear Trump, and it didn't work! Trump is President, and we are not finding an "Adolf Hitler" in the White House! The Democrats and the Media's attempt to smear Trump has failed, and now the truth I coming out, and hopefully the Media will pay for this!

Offline

#564 2017-03-19 08:40:30

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 16,567

Re: Politics

Here's how the budget would affect key medical and scientific agencies:

CDC: The budget "reforms" CDC with a $500 million block grant to states. The White House says the idea is to allow states flexibility. "Devastating impacts on state asthma programs, tobacco prevention and cessation and tuberculosis control.

FDA: The budget doesn't say much about the FDA but specifically doubles user fees — money paid by pharmaceutical companies to speed approvals, from $1 billion to $2 billion.

NIH: NIH had just gotten a big boost in the budget resolution Congress passed in December — a 6.6 percent funding increase to $32 billion. Trump's budget takes $6 billion of that back out, and eliminates the Fogarty International Center, which coordinates international medical research. Pretending that Ebola doesn't exist and that it doesn't come into our country.

In Appalachia, Trump's proposed budget has people worried

Trump's budget proposal has alarmed much of the region, including longtime Republican Congressman Hal Rogers, who represents the mountainous eastern Kentucky coal region where Trump won every county, a first for a Republican presidential candidate.

"I am disappointed that many of the reductions and eliminations proposed in the President's skinny budget are draconian, careless and counterproductive," Rogers said.

SO with the AG's gone we now know whom will be getting fired next as Former dairy farmer leads Trump-Russia investigation from the rural Central Valley of California is running one of the most scrutinized, complex and politically fraught congressional investigations in recent memory.

Offline

#565 2017-03-19 11:13:55

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,813
Website

Re: Politics

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Those two in the middle picture aren't Republicans, the one on the left is Debbie Wasserman Shultz, I recognize her face! We're 20 trillion in debt because of the Democrats, the Republicans are only beginning to get to work, but they find it easier just to let the Democrats destroy the country as the have been doing. Republicans or at least the career Republicans don't like this responsibility, they do like their jobs and their perks however, so they won't willingly vacate their seats so some real Republicans can get to work on our Nation's problems

OMG! Are you really that stupid? The first picture criticizes Democrats for criticizing Republicans for doing something trivial. The second criticizes Republicans for criticizing Democrats for doing something trivial. The third picture says the rest of us are concerned about a very real and very serious problem.

You can't blame the debt on either party. The debt has been growing for so long that I don't even know when the US federal government was debt free. Ronald Regan started massive debt with his Star Wars program. He left with $3 trillion debt. Trillion, with a "T". Bill Clinton just balanced the budget for his last year in office, but exaggerated. He claimed surpluses in his last 3 years of office; reality was 1998 and 1999 were still in deficit, and the surplus of year 2000 was much smaller than he claimed, so ridiculously small that it was practically non-existent. George W. Bush massively and irresponsibly over-spent on military, throwing America back into massive deficits. Barack Obama failed to slash military spending, but instead went on a massive domestic spending program, making the deficit even worse. Both parties are to blame.

Offline

#566 2017-03-19 12:38:00

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 3,698
Website

Re: Politics

Call it "Tex" instead of "Texas".  We sent too many Tea Party asses to DC. 

I have never seen anybody misinterpret and distort things to back up ridiculous political positions as Tom.  He's actually worse than Team Trump's propagandists. 

GW


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#567 2017-03-19 16:26:39

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,813
Website

Re: Politics

C2zzEFrUQAATG1k.jpg

C7Lo08eVsAEc92u.jpg

1209toonwasserman.jpg

Offline

#568 2017-03-19 18:04:15

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 16,567

Re: Politics

Trumps closest are full of the dispicable as another top Trump Adviser Faces Calls For Resignation After Reports Of Ties To Nazi-Aligned Group. Sebastian Gorka proudly wears a medal from a Hungarian group that collaborated with Nazis during World War II. The group, known as Vitézi Rend in Hungarian, collaborated with the Nazi government during World War II, according to the State Department. Members of the group are ineligible for American visas born in the United Kingdom, “falsified his naturalization application or otherwise illegally procured his citizenship” by failing to disclose his membership in the banned Hungarian group.

This is not the first time that Trump and members have been likened to being part of the Nazi-Themed, which we did see during his election campaigning from those that heard make america great as a call for make america white. A Billboard is to Stay Up As Long As He’s President, Owner Says. The explosive sign, recently erected in Arizona, features dollar-sign swastikas and mushroom clouds.

58ce8d842c00002000fef2cd.png?cache=cscncno9ez

Another part of that capaigning heard make America white....A small group of protesters flew a large Confederate flag from the top of a parking garage next to the arena hosting two men's NCAA Tournament games.

Then again with all the Russian flap of hacking and so much more its should be no surprise that that ship is back.... Russian Spy Ship Back on East Coast but Making No Waves in Washington

Then everyweek he is down to Margo to vacation and we pay the bill for his stay at his own place.... How Much Does Trump Actually Work At Mar-A-Lago? Maybe Not So Much, Staff is cagey about how much time president spends golfing on pricey trips to his resort president’s fifth trip to Mar-a-Lago in eight weeks in the White House each trip to Mar-a-Lago costs taxpayers at least $3 million. (Protecting wife Melania and son Baron back in New York has been estimated to cost an additional $1 million a day.) But then again Secret Service Racks Up Bills for Trump Kids' Trips. Next Stop Aspen? There are no hotel bills for Aspen in the Federal Procurement Data System yet, but the database does show a $12,208.25 contract by the Secret Service with Aspen Valley Ski/Snowboard Club for "recreational good rental/ski equipment lease" between the dates of March 10 and March 23.
    $53,155.25 during Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Tiffany Trump's business trip to Vancouver in late February.
    $16,738.36 during Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump's business trip to Dubai in mid-February.
    $97,830 for Eric Trump's business trip to Uruguay in early January.
Sure is nice to spend americans money... not....

Offline

#569 2017-03-19 21:12:11

kbd512
Moderator
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,996

Re: Politics

SpaceNut,

We don't need federal funding for special interests programs.  If you feel strongly about particular causes, then give your own money to those causes.  All special interest programs should be locally funded by municipal or state governments and charitable contributions from private citizens who are part of the community.  Every layer of bureaucracy added siphons off money for "administrative costs", which is a quaint way of saying the "charitable" contributions of tax payers is used to line someone else's pockets.

Every year, like most other Americans, I give money to charitable causes I consider worthwhile.  I don't claim charitable contributions on my taxes.  Every time we make a donation to goodwill, they constantly ask us whether or not we want a form to file with the IRS.  Perhaps other Americans differ on this matter, but I don't want anything from them.  When I think of charity, it think of freely giving my time and/or money with no expectation or desire for remuneration.  To my way of thinking, that's real charity.  My tax money, on the other hand, is not for special interest programs or charity.  There will always be poor people in every society.  If you truly care about the poor, then volunteer your own time and money to help them.

The new "State Criminal Alien Assistance Program" is called deportation.  ICE assists illegal aliens, all of which are criminals, by deporting them back to where they came from.  The tax payers' have already paid for their trial-by-jury.  Their countries of origin can pay for incarceration costs, if they so choose.  I don't care if we have to put illegal aliens on planes to take them to east outer Mongolia.  If they didn't come here legally, then take them back to where they came from.

Offline

#570 2017-03-20 04:57:28

kbd512
Moderator
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,996

Re: Politics

Rob,

The real problem to address is that every single US President since WWII has added to the debt, irrespective of which political party they belong to, without exception.  Apart from the US military, which you constantly advocate taking more money from, there has been no decrease of our federal government since WWII.  Our federal government only expands and consumes more money and natural resources as time marches on, despite the fact that there is no demonstrated need for half of our federal government's workforce.

It's crystal clear to me that liberals have no desire to fix any of our problems.  The only activities they seem readily willing to engage in are propaganda campaigns against their political opponents, spending us into oblivion with expansive and unsustainable entitlement programs, importing economic (illegal alien) and religious (muslim) subversives, and rendering our military ineffective, presumably so that an outside force can complete our destruction.  All the political propaganda that you and SpaceNut constantly post vividly illustrates that you have no answers for any our problems.  If you did, you'd spend all your time making reasoned arguments about why it is that we need more unsustainable entitlement programs, why it is that we need to grant citizenship to any foreigner who crosses our border, and why it is that you think that the Russians and Chinese won't invade our country or your country after we de-fund our military.

We've already tried maintaining a simple self defense force similar to the force Japan presently has.  That resulted in WWII and the deaths of about 3% of the world's population when the human filth of this world felt emboldened to rape, rob, and murder their neighbors because there was no one there who could stop them.  Apart from whatever revisionist history you choose to believe in, Britain and Canada aren't the reason why Europeans didn't speak German (briefly) and then Russian.  And that'd be why we're not taking military advice from foreigners who never served a day in the military and haven't the slightest inkling of what total war entails.

The utility of and capacity for economic sustainment is finite.  Expending more resources on special interest programs that make you happy is not an answer to our problems.  Any belief to the contrary is merely a continuation of the nonsense that contributed mightily to the economic predicament we find ourselves in today.

Governance - A government that governs best is not a government that governs the least nor governs the most.  A government that governs most effectively and efficiently is a government that governs best.  Neither political party has learned this.  That said, expansive bureaucracies combined with a plethora of special interest groups do not contribute to effectiveness or efficiency.  The evidence for that is readily apparent to anyone who is not a political ideologue.

Education - Our non-educational system is what it is because subversives require a plentiful supply of useful idiots that are easily manipulated.  Easily manipulated peoples can be, and frequently are, tools for unscrupulous people to use to rape, rob, and murder other people.  In this country, there is a near uniform effort to prevent people from thinking for themselves.

Health Care - Apart from enforcing ethics guidelines for corporations to follow, government has no business involving itself in private matters between patients and health care professionals.  If insurance companies or health care services providers fail to adhere to ethics guidelines, then and only then should the government get involved, and only to the extent required to correct unethical behavior.

Infrastructure - The failure of our federal government to properly disburse funding for critical conveyances and utilities once again illustrates why no political influences should be permitted to affect how or where tax money is allocated for public works.  The only people who should decide how funding is allocated should be engineers who are accountable to the public safety agencies.

Housing - Government bears complete responsibility for royally screwing up this sector of the economy.  Apart from enforcing ethics guidelines, government has no business here, either.  If the government hadn't forced banks to grant loans to people the banks knew or should have known couldn't pay, then the last recession would have been far less severe than it was.

Energy - With all the trillions of dollars of tax money given to our federal government, there have been no serious attempts to research, develop, and implement the most power dense and sustainable energy production technology available since the 1950's.  Thus far, that'd be nuclear fission.  Nobody alive in America today who isn't ready to retire should know what the hell a coal or gas power plant is.  Solar panels and wind farms are a sick joke, by way of comparison.  If the anti-nuclear nutwhacks weren't allowed to have their way, solar panels or wind farms would be off-grid power for people living in deserts or near oceans.

Military - As much as it pains me to acknowledge it, the clowns in DC (inexcusably poorly) run our military.  However, we have to have a clear command structure and the Office of the President represents the top of that structure.  Thankfully, some politicians realize that defunding our military can, and has, caused the type of destructive global warfare that threatens all of humanity.  If our military power had not been abused by President Bush (Afghanistan and Iraq) and President Obama (Libya and Syria), there'd be far fewer and less severe economic effects and far fewer civilian casualties from the employment of our military.  Apart from immediate defense against military attacks upon our people, no one person should ever have authority to take our country to war.

Foreign Policy - Our allies need to act like our allies and abide by their defense agreements.  If our allies fail to do that, then we need to revisit our military alliances with those countries.  Our enemies need only understand that we will do whatever it takes to defend ourselves and our allies.  If our allies spend less on their defense, then we'll inevitably spend more.  If our allies want us to spend less on defense, then they should start honoring their defense spending agreements.

Offline

#571 2017-03-20 08:31:04

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

Here's how the budget would affect key medical and scientific agencies:

CDC: The budget "reforms" CDC with a $500 million block grant to states. The White House says the idea is to allow states flexibility. "Devastating impacts on state asthma programs, tobacco prevention and cessation and tuberculosis control.

FDA: The budget doesn't say much about the FDA but specifically doubles user fees — money paid by pharmaceutical companies to speed approvals, from $1 billion to $2 billion.

NIH: NIH had just gotten a big boost in the budget resolution Congress passed in December — a 6.6 percent funding increase to $32 billion. Trump's budget takes $6 billion of that back out, and eliminates the Fogarty International Center, which coordinates international medical research. Pretending that Ebola doesn't exist and that it doesn't come into our country.

In Appalachia, Trump's proposed budget has people worried

Trump's budget proposal has alarmed much of the region, including longtime Republican Congressman Hal Rogers, who represents the mountainous eastern Kentucky coal region where Trump won every county, a first for a Republican presidential candidate.

"I am disappointed that many of the reductions and eliminations proposed in the President's skinny budget are draconian, careless and counterproductive," Rogers said.

SO with the AG's gone we now know whom will be getting fired next as Former dairy farmer leads Trump-Russia investigation from the rural Central Valley of California is running one of the most scrutinized, complex and politically fraught congressional investigations in recent memory.

That is why it is difficult to cut the budget for most politicians, Donald Trump however has not developed those political instincts not to offend anyone, he thinks like a businessman, he makes the decision on what needs to be cut, and not everyone is going to like the cuts he makes. Unlike most politicians, Donald Trump isn't there to have a career, the perks and privileges of the office of President are something he can replicate himself, he is President to get something done, something that he feels most other politicians won't do of their own accord. It is much easier for the average politician to deficit spend than to offend potential voters by making budget cuts that they don't like. Donald Trump doesn't care, he is not thinking like a politician, he knows he has at least 4 years, and he needs to get something done in those 4 years, and he wants to get something done in those four years, if the people reelect him fine, if they don't, then he had better have what he intended completed by the time those four years are over with, if he gets another four years, that is a bonus but he shouldn't tailor his actions so as to get reelected by avoiding the hard stuff. I think its refreshing that he is willing to make some unpopular decisions in order to cut the budget, that to me is a good sign! Also it is clear to be that spending a billion dollars on something will not always get you your money's worth. Trump is going to try to do stuff cheaply rather than trying to "create jobs" by throwing taxpayer money around! Growth is created by money people don't pay in taxes and invest rather than on what government spends. The government doesn't care if it throws you money away creating a useless job that doesn't contribute to the economy, it can always reach into your pocket and grab more after all! Spending money to directly create jobs for government workers is bad policy and will wreck the economy in the long run!

Offline

#572 2017-03-20 08:48:45

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

RobertDyck wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Those two in the middle picture aren't Republicans, the one on the left is Debbie Wasserman Shultz, I recognize her face! We're 20 trillion in debt because of the Democrats, the Republicans are only beginning to get to work, but they find it easier just to let the Democrats destroy the country as the have been doing. Republicans or at least the career Republicans don't like this responsibility, they do like their jobs and their perks however, so they won't willingly vacate their seats so some real Republicans can get to work on our Nation's problems

OMG! Are you really that stupid? The first picture criticizes Democrats for criticizing Republicans for doing something trivial. The second criticizes Republicans for criticizing Democrats for doing something trivial. The third picture says the rest of us are concerned about a very real and very serious problem.

You can't blame the debt on either party. The debt has been growing for so long that I don't even know when the US federal government was debt free. Ronald Regan started massive debt with his Star Wars program. He left with $3 trillion debt. Trillion, with a "T". Bill Clinton just balanced the budget for his last year in office, but exaggerated. He claimed surpluses in his last 3 years of office; reality was 1998 and 1999 were still in deficit, and the surplus of year 2000 was much smaller than he claimed, so ridiculously small that it was practically non-existent. George W. Bush massively and irresponsibly over-spent on military, throwing America back into massive deficits. Barack Obama failed to slash military spending, but instead went on a massive domestic spending program, making the deficit even worse. Both parties are to blame.

50% of the national debt rests solely on the shoulders of the Obama Administration and the democrats in congress and the feeble republicans that let the Democrats walk all over them, the Media shares a blame portion of the blame by stacking the cards against the Republicans in Congress with their reporting. When Obama shut down the government because he wasn't getting everything he wanted from the Republican Majority in Congress, the Media portrayed it as the Republicans in Congress shutting down government, this is when Ted Cruz led the filibuster to shut down spending for Obamacare, the Republican leadership quickly gave in due to pressure from the Media, which was under the control of the Democrats. The Media also arranged to nominate Donald Trump as the Republican candidate in 2016, most of the American People weren't paying much attention until the general election started, most Americans do not vote in primaries, so it was easy for he media to influence those who do! Most Americans vote between two candidates that the two major parties give them on the first Tuesday of November, they don't typically participate in the selection process of those two candidates presented. Now the second 50% was primarily the fault of the Democrats, and the weak limbed Republicans who are only in Congress because they want a job. The first 50% of the debt, that is the first $10 trillion of it was about 50% the responsibility of the Republicans and 50% the responsibility of the Democrats, but the Obama Administration doubled the debt in only 8 years, and he was mostly interested in borrowing and spending, and raising taxes so he looks responsible while doing so, the only thing he cut was defense spending, but he was willing to give the Iranians billions of dollars and $100 million per person for four American hostages he wanted released. Obama sent billions of dollars to the Third World at US taxpayers expense!

You really think George W. Bush overspent on the military? I take that to mean we won the war on terrorism but we just kept spending money on the military afterwards, is that what you mean by overspending? Did FDR overspend on fighting World War II? Was there a cheaper way to do it? Are you unhappy with the results? I do know one thing though, there wasn't a Cold War between the US and Russia when Obama was first sworn into office in 2009, that is entirely on him, and Trump inherits Obama's Cold War because of the actions and inactions of the Obama Administration that allowed us to get to this point! So now the Democrats are pretending to be Cold War Hawks in this new Cold War that began during Obama's Administration and all the while they advocated cutting the defense budget as the World got more dangerous! Do you see something wrong with this picture?

Offline

#573 2017-03-20 08:59:54

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

SpaceNut wrote:

Trumps closest are full of the dispicable as another top Trump Adviser Faces Calls For Resignation After Reports Of Ties To Nazi-Aligned Group. Sebastian Gorka proudly wears a medal from a Hungarian group that collaborated with Nazis during World War II. The group, known as Vitézi Rend in Hungarian, collaborated with the Nazi government during World War II, according to the State Department. Members of the group are ineligible for American visas born in the United Kingdom, “falsified his naturalization application or otherwise illegally procured his citizenship” by failing to disclose his membership in the banned Hungarian group.

You mean they were fighting the Soviets, and thus by extension Joseph Stalin? Unforgivable! Stalin was murdering millions of people by the time Germany got around to invading that country, to many non-Jews in Eastern Europe, Hitler represented an opportunity to turn the tables on Joseph Stalin, if Hitler gave them weapons to do so, they would use them! Now lets look at Spain, the only reason Spain is not under a Communist dictatorship like Cuba's is because of the Nazi's participation in the Spanish Civil War, because of Franco and Hitler's support of him, Spaniards today get to vote in a multi-party election instead of having a pretend vote in a one-party state as the Cubans do.  Of course it all depended on the Germans losing World War II and Spain staying neutral in that conflict and making nice with the victorious allies afterwards and joining NATO.

This is not the first time that Trump and members have been likened to being part of the Nazi-Themed, which we did see during his election campaigning from those that heard make america great as a call for make america white. A Billboard is to Stay Up As Long As He’s President, Owner Says. The explosive sign, recently erected in Arizona, features dollar-sign swastikas and mushroom clouds.

http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/cro … cscncno9ez

Another part of that capaigning heard make America white....A small group of protesters flew a large Confederate flag from the top of a parking garage next to the arena hosting two men's NCAA Tournament games.

Then again with all the Russian flap of hacking and so much more its should be no surprise that that ship is back.... Russian Spy Ship Back on East Coast but Making No Waves in Washington

Then everyweek he is down to Margo to vacation and we pay the bill for his stay at his own place.... How Much Does Trump Actually Work At Mar-A-Lago? Maybe Not So Much, Staff is cagey about how much time president spends golfing on pricey trips to his resort president’s fifth trip to Mar-a-Lago in eight weeks in the White House each trip to Mar-a-Lago costs taxpayers at least $3 million. (Protecting wife Melania and son Baron back in New York has been estimated to cost an additional $1 million a day.) But then again Secret Service Racks Up Bills for Trump Kids' Trips. Next Stop Aspen? There are no hotel bills for Aspen in the Federal Procurement Data System yet, but the database does show a $12,208.25 contract by the Secret Service with Aspen Valley Ski/Snowboard Club for "recreational good rental/ski equipment lease" between the dates of March 10 and March 23.
    $53,155.25 during Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Tiffany Trump's business trip to Vancouver in late February.
    $16,738.36 during Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump's business trip to Dubai in mid-February.
    $97,830 for Eric Trump's business trip to Uruguay in early January.
Sure is nice to spend americans money... not....

Offline

#574 2017-03-20 19:59:07

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

I think the Democrats deserve to be replaced with either the Green Party of the Libertarian Party after trying to run Hillary Clinton as their candidate for President and rigging the primary so she would win! Candidates need t get back to serving the public and having ideas that work instead of demagoguery and a political machine that gets them elected no matter who they are! Bernie Sanders had an unfair contest in that primary, and that's wrong! The Democrats need to learn to be competitive and not rely so heavily on trickery propaganda and their control of the media to get them elected, and we need a more unbiased media, not the one we have now! We need a media that is mostly fair and balanced, not one that is partisan and Pro-Democrat, this yellow journalism has got to stop for the good of the country, Americans deserve to know the truth and not hear on party's propaganda only when they turn on the supposed news! Also we should be more interested in the welfare of the country than in whether the Democrats win or lose. and most of all, you need to give Donald Trump a chance to do right by the American people instead of attacking him from day one! I don't think every candidate that Trump nominates has a scandal or some skeleton in his or her closet that the media needs to expose, this level of scandal is extremely unrealistic and I think the liberal media is making this stuff up and trying to smear nominees and obstruct the Trump Administration from doing its job, rather than the media doing its job of reporting the news and not fighting to achieve specific political results that they want through propaganda and slanted biased reporting! Lets get back to the job a journalist is supposed to be doing, and they are not supposed to be politicians!

recently Chuck Schumer has been complaining that Trump wants to cut the homeland security spending for New York, and I'm thinking, well maybe Chuck Schumer should have thought of that before attacking the President from day one of his inauguration! Maybe he shouldn't have been such a booster of bringing all sorts of refugees from the middle east, who may be terrorists, if he is so concerned about homeland security!. I think Trump simply assumes that if Chuck thinks terrorism isn't a problem and that we should roll out the red carpet for Middle East refugees, then the homeland security budget becomes a target for cuts. One follows from the other, and maybe of Chuck wasn't acting like such a jerk towards Donald Trump, he could serve his constituents better!
Charles_Schumer_official_portrait.jpg

Offline

#575 2017-03-21 10:15:26

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Politics

How much did Poland spend on National Defense in 1939? Was that a sustainable Defense Budget?

RobertDyck wrote:

Yes, I said military spending has to be sustainable. The last year the US federal government had a balanced budget was year 2000. Every budget since has to be compared to that. The military and national security budget that year was $288 billion. Apply inflation from that year to today, you get $398 billion. I said you have to cut military spending to that. It would still leave you with 60% more than Russia plus China plus North Korea combined. Canada's military budget last year was CAD$19.7 billion. Canada's population is 35 million, the US has 324.7 million. The American equivalent based on population and exchange of the dollar would be $182 billion. So the US military budget I asked is still generous.

So in that case, what's wrong with Donald Trump cutting the budget of PBS and the National Endowment of the Arts? Those contribute nothing to the National Defense, and Trump needs to find money to increase the Defense Budget by $50 billion in order to undo the damage Obama wrought. I don't think we need the Federal government subsidizing art, especially such examples as Jesus on a cross in urine, and a painting of the Virgin Mary made with elephant dung, do we need the Federal government paying for that, when we still have not solved the terrorist problem?

RobertDyck wrote:

Military - you said "no one person should ever have authority to take our country to war". The Constitution of the United States says Congress has that authority. The President administers the war once declared, but only Congress can decide to go to war. This has been abused more time than I can count. Congress must defend its authority.

Sept-11-plane-grab_1987483i.jpg
What about when war comes to our country? Is the President of the United States allowed to defend the American People without the Congress giving him permission? What if instead that airplane had flown into the Capitol Building while Congress was in session, would the President have the authority to act then if given that most of Congress was killed in that attack?

There was a book written by Tom Clancy that began with that premise.

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2017-03-21 10:16:34)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB