Listening to John McCain today, he is ready to start Iraq 2.0. he wants to give arms and funding to Syrian freedom fighters and is ready to rush in and kill thousands.
Presidient Trump remember your base is opposed to prolonged military action in Syria.
Apparently John McCain knows who the good guys are in Syria?
Listening to John McCain today, he is ready to start Iraq 2.0. he wants to give arms and funding to Syrian freedom fighters and is ready to rush in and kill thousands.
Presidient Trump remember your base is opposed to prolonged military action in Syria.
Trump has a base? He abandoned the people who voted for him.
Not to worry.
President Trump is doing what Obama failed to do.
Dozens of cruise missiles launched in response to chemical weapons attack
Majority Of Republicans Said ‘No’ When Obama Wanted To Launch A Strike On Syria
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-strike-syria-trump_us_58e6f71de4b051b9a9da355d?tjb&
Majority Of Republicans Said ‘No’ When Obama Wanted To Launch A Strike On Syria
The neo-cons would've said 'no' because it didn't go far enough. The rest of the Republicans wrestled with becoming more entangled in foreign civil wars or would've voted no as a result of their distrust of Obama.
Support among Democrats wasn't there either. Following the ThinkProgress link in the Huff Post article shows that only 30 Dems were a yes or leaned yes, compared to 58 Dems being no or lean no and 112 being undecided or unknown. Republicans didn't support it either 13 yes or leaned yes with 180 being opposed, 41 undecided unknown. Support in the Senate which was Democrat controlled wasn't clearly in the President's corner either in 2013.
Majority Of Republicans Said ‘No’ When Obama Wanted To Launch A Strike On Syria
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-strike-syria-trump_us_58e6f71de4b051b9a9da355d?tjb&/blockquote >
_________________________________________________________________________________The upside this time is that President Trump is getting full support for this long over due action against a dictator and war criminal from both sides of the aisle and world wide.
The use of chemical weapons is not only forbidden by the International Community it is inhumane and must be stopped.
Listening to John McCain today, he is ready to start Iraq 2.0. he wants to give arms and funding to Syrian freedom fighters and is ready to rush in and kill thousands.
Presidient Trump remember your base is opposed to prolonged military action in Syria.
Trump has a base? He abandoned the people who voted for him.
Fools gold. Trump never cared about the people he enticed to vote for him. His salesmanship and amped up rhetoric got him elected. Fools vote against their own self interest.
The orange guy has eliminated by executive order mortgage rules to help first time home buyers. Wonder how many of Trump's loyalists fall into that group of screw overs?
How many of his voters, their children, and grandchildren will be impacted by his lifting of EPA regulations?
How many will stand to suffer from Trumpcare / Ryancare if / when they can get enough support to replace ACA?
In the end, will his voters even know they're being screwed by the one they carry water for?
Oh lets just reply to one:
"mortgage rules to help first time home buyers"
It was the Clinton/Democrats sub-prime mortgage fiasco that led so many people to lose their homes and that also was the driving force behind the 2008 recession.
President Trump took the necessary action to ensure first time home buyers could actually afford to buy a home and keep it.
Lets do another.
"lifting of EPA regulations"
And now people can actually go back to work at jobs destroyed by Obama's politically motivated EPA regulations.
Real jobs that pay well, not the Obama jobs, formally known as McJobs that were part-time and very low wage.
Obama used the EPA to force his political agenda.
His over regulation killed jobs and ruined peoples lives.
President Trump promised to and is fixing that mess.
Since Trump took credit for the Feb. jobs report, he's also responsible for the puny 98,000 jobs in March.
Since Trump took credit for the Feb. jobs report, he's also responsible for the puny 98,000 jobs in March.
________________________________________________________________________________
Unemployment dropped to 4.5%, the lowest since 2007.
Real jobs began coming back within days of the election. and the stock market soared. Consumer confidence is at the highest level now since 2001.
The American People and businesses believe in President Trump.
For the first time in 8 years the dark cloud of doom is lifting from our county.
Once the tax cut is in place, starting with corporate taxes, American companies that fled overseas will return and real jobs will surge.
The U.S. problem will them be having enough people with the proper skills to fil them.
Back in the 1980s President Reagan pleaded with people to get trained in high-tech and engineering skills.
So many people went off to college to get a liberal arts degree or concentrated on such high demand concentrations as African/Euro fashions.
We do now and will continue to have a shortage of correctly skilled workers.
The H1B visa program is a government run mess so there is a lot of work to be done.
Majority Of Republicans Said ‘No’ When Obama Wanted To Launch A Strike On Syria
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-strike-syria-trump_us_58e6f71de4b051b9a9da355d?tjb&/blockquote >
_________________________________________________________________________________The upside this time is that President Trump is getting full support for this long over due action against a dictator and war criminal from both sides of the aisle and world wide.
The use of chemical weapons is not only forbidden by the International Community it is inhumane and must be stopped.
Yes the use of those weapons is inhumane, but how many countries have them? ALL must agree to destroy their stockpile and submit to an international monitoring agency, and NONE of the countries including the US who also has these weapons will do it. So how do we get this done?
Other point - we do not really have a legal right to go to another country and depose their leaders. Just because we have been doing so for a long time, does not make it internationally acceptable. The people can rise up and do it if they want to. Isis is already in Syria, if the people were opposed to Assad, they could support Isis and Isis would depose Assad. Then the US could go in with all it's bravado and come down on Isis, and put in some other regime that it is pleased with. Isn't that how it is usually done?
Assad never asked us to come to Syria and help him get rid of Isis. Russia flat out said at one point that we were in the way, and that they would handle that, so the problem over there was between Syria, Russia vs. Isis. We really had no say in that.
Isis was not involved in any BIG attacks in the US, so what right to we have chasing them all over globe? It started as a local Iraqi problem, blowback after ousting Saddam, who also did not do anything to us.
If we stayed out of other countries, we would not have to worry so much here. Our foreign policy should be one of non-interventionalism. Respond if attacked, if not, leave other nations and their regimes alone. It is not that complicated.
[Edited on 4/9/2017 by gina]
Yes the use of those weapons is inhumane, but how many countries have them? ALL must agree to destroy their stockpile and submit to an international monitoring agency, and NONE of the countries including the US who also has these weapons will do it. So how do we get this done?
Other point - we do not really have a legal right to go to another country and depose their leaders. Just because we have been doing so for a long time, does not make it internationally acceptable. The people can rise up and do it if they want to. Isis is already in Syria, if the people were opposed to Assad, they could support Isis and Isis would depose Assad. Then the US could go in with all it's bravado and come down on Isis, and put in some other regime that it is pleased with. Isn't that how it is usually done?
Assad never asked us to come to Syria and help him get rid of Isis. Russia flat out said at one point that we were in the way, and that they would handle that, so the problem over there was between Syria, Russia vs. Isis. We really had no say in that.
Isis was not involved in any BIG attacks in the US, so what right to we have chasing them all over globe? It started as a local Iraqi problem, blowback after ousting Saddam, who also did not do anything to us.
If we stayed out of other countries, we would not have to worry so much here. Our foreign policy should be one of non-interventionalism. Respond if attacked, if not, leave other nations and their regimes alone. It is not that complicated.
It's not that complicated...or is it?
The projection of US influence and power anywhere and everywhere...the belief that all people want to be free and the US offers assistance for these people to realize their dreams of freedom by undermining or directly attacking their authoritarian dictators.
Does that philosophy create more problems, or is it in someway helpful.
I agree that the US should mind our own business if you will and if we bothered less countries we would have less problems on one hand. But then on the other hand, if we allow the world to go to hell around us, what problems then wash upon our shore and is it better to deal with certain issues before they become large problems and it is too late?
I struggle with it.
Regarding radical islamic terrorism the genie is out of the bottle now. I do not think we can totally abandon the middle east, pull out and ignore the region completely. Some say this would send a message to the radicals and that they then would leave us alone. But we can't do that now, if by some means we could travel back in time I think we could change a series of events that may have altered the course of history and the future of now, but then at the same time we don't know what that alternate time would look like and what unforeseen problems may lie within it? I like to think it would be better yes, but we are where we are.
I do think that military intelligence and often military action should "chase ISIS all around the globe" whenever possible or appropriate. Because of where we are at this point in time, failing to do so is very dangerous. Then the question becomes, does our fight against ISIS or radical islam in general help to degrade their ability, or does it help their growth? Frankly I'm afraid if we do nothing they will grow anyway and become stronger.
Assad never asked us to come to Syria, nor did the Russians. We are their because it is one battle field against the enemy of our time. Assad or Russia isn't fighting ISIS as a primary objective. Their objective is to maintain power and control in Assad's regime and fight any and all opponent rebels, that may be ISIS one day or it may be some other group of rebels the next day. I'm not sure we can leave it to them to fight ISIS because I don't think they share the same objective we do in the fight. We aren't defending Assad, obviously. We have some common enemies, but we have very different ideas on what the end game looks like.
The US needs to have some strategic engagement with the world. And we need to listen to allies and countries we are friendly with. As much as we might think it is arrogant for us to throw our weight around and meddle in the affairs of foreign nations, perhaps on some level other countries like that. We can take care of the dirty business that nobody else seems to want to deal with. But then it can go too far. I just hope that Trump isn't transitioning to a cookie cutter Republican neo-con type. I don't believe that is in his soul, but he can be influenced and the military industrial complex and neo-con agenda is very strong in our government.
For those who believe Trump abandoned his base, I'd say you are wrong. His most loyal supporters love him only because of his willingness to insult and attack people and groups that they don't like. The appeal is not about policy - it's an admiration of seeing those they hate take a beating. The other 16 Republican candidates wouldn't take that low road so therefore they didn't get the nomination. Trump supporters, along with all Americans, will go about their daily lives with no real change. The only difference for Trump supporters is they get a daily chuckle every morning when they see our leader insult people on Twitter. Every administration in my lifetime seems pretty much the same - say whatever sounds good. But no President seems capable of redirecting the ship that is Washington.
For those who believe Trump abandoned his base, I'd say you are wrong. His most loyal supporters love him only because of his willingness to insult and attack people and groups that they don't like. The appeal is not about policy - it's an admiration of seeing those they hate take a beating. The other 16 Republican candidates wouldn't take that low road so therefore they didn't get the nomination. Trump supporters, along with all Americans, will go about their daily lives with no real change. The only difference for Trump supporters is they get a daily chuckle every morning when they see our leader insult people on Twitter. Every administration in my lifetime seems pretty much the same - say whatever sounds good. But no President seems capable of redirecting the ship that is Washington.
________________________________________________________________________________
Isn't that cute.
However Donald Trump won and the liberals got beaten at every level of the Federal government and in the majority of States.
Get over it.
Maybe you should get over Obama? I can't be the only one here tired of hearing you cry about him on a daily basis. When will you get over him? But you just proved my point. Notice how you glow that the "liberals got beaten". Personally, I could care less about political policies, whether from Obama or Trump. Neither affects my daily life.
[Edited on 4/10/2017 by BoytonBrother]
Maybe you should get over Obama? I can't be the only one here tired of hearing you cry about him on a daily basis. When will you get over him? But you just proved my point. Notice how you glow that the "liberals got beaten". Personally, I could care less about political policies, whether from Obama or Trump. Neither affects my daily life.
[Edited on 4/10/2017 by BoytonBrother]
_________________________________________________________________________________
Obama the failure must be exposed to remind people that the liberals, bowing before their false god screwed the country.
I admire your honesty that you cannot and will not ever get over Obama.
I admire your honesty that you cannot and will not ever get over Obama.
The corrupt liberal media gave Obama a pass and now they are being exposed for the fraud they peddled.
America needs an honest media that does the two things expected of them; report the news and hold the government accountable.
It is essential for our Democracy that the people be informed accurately and without political bias.
Currently that is not happening.
I admire your honesty that you cannot and will not ever get over Obama.
The corrupt liberal media gave Obama a pass and now they are being exposed for the fraud they peddled.
America needs an honest media that does the two things expected of them; report the news and hold the government accountable.
It is essential for our Democracy that the people be informed accurately and without political bias.
Currently that is not happening.
interesting take on media in america today.....interesting
America needs an honest media that does the two things expected of them; report the news and hold the government accountable.
It is essential for our Democracy that the people be informed accurately and without political bias.
Currently that is not happening.
Wrong. We have Fox News reporting accurately and without bias. They say so in their slogan. Did you forget about them? Or are they an example of a dihonest outlet reporting with bias? Just curious to see how your brain navigates this one.
The legit media outlets are plentiful. Only a fool would not know about them. Only a fool would believe 24-hour cable news networks represent all of our media.
America needs an honest media that does the two things expected of them; report the news and hold the government accountable.
It is essential for our Democracy that the people be informed accurately and without political bias.
Currently that is not happening.Wrong. We have Fox News reporting accurately and without bias. They say so in their slogan. Did you forget about them? Or are they an example of a dihonest outlet reporting with bias? Just curious to see how your brain navigates this one.
The legit media outlets are plentiful. Only a fool would not know about them. Only a fool would believe 24-hour cable news networks represent all of our media.
________________________________________________________________________________
The far-left hates Fox News because they report the news. They do not filter out reports that may paint one politician or another poorly.
The left constantly claims that Fox News lies.
Of course when you ask a liberal specifically when and what was the lie they cannot say.
Many of the far-left extremists cannot tell the difference between hard news and opinion.
Every time someone asks a liberal why Fox news is the most watched and most trusted they instantly run away and change the subject.
Fox news is quite a contrast from say CNN which is the very definition of fake news and their news operation is corrupt.
See for example their paid contributor Donna Brazile, who was also at the same time the DNC Chair giving debates questions to the Clinton campaign is advance of the debate.
The list is long and well documented.
You mean sexual harrassment network? I think they are changing their name to SHN..... 😛
Many of the far-left extremists cannot tell the difference between hard news and opinion.
Says the guy who thinks Fox News is legit. LOL!!!! If you put as much effort into your career, as you do here writing about how much you hate liberals, you'd be a very rich man. Carrying around that much hate everyday must be exhausting. Good luck to you Mule.
Many of the far-left extremists cannot tell the difference between hard news and opinion.
Says the guy who thinks Fox News is legit. LOL!!!! If you put as much effort into your career, as you do here writing about how much you hate liberals, you'd be a very rich man. Carrying around that much hate everyday must be exhausting. Good luck to you Mule.
If you don't think Fox news is "legit" then why are they the most watched and most trusted?
BTW - I already put in much effort in my career which is why I hold the position I do and have the compensation package to go with it.
And I do not hate liberals. My boss, our President and CEO is a liberal and she can't stand Obama and the rest of that crowd including their lapdogs in the media.
Liberals are fine with me.. It is the far-left extremists, well represented here, that I have a problem
with.
Since you showed some decency in your last post, I'm happy to answer your question. Keep in mind that I worked in the media for 10 years in a major market. Regarding your comment that FOXNews is the most watched and most trusted, those are the results from ratings polls. The opinions of the general public in a survey do not determine whether a media outlet is legit or not. Those results only prove what is more popular. Being popular does not answer whether the media outlet is following a code of ethics or not.
Furthermore, FOXNews admits to being biased to the right. Their slogan, fair and balanced, refers to their attempt to counter the liberal CNN. They are not saying that their reporting is fair and balanced-they are saying that their existence on cable is fair and balanced since CNN was spinning news to the left. They admit this, and it's obvious to most people.
The legit outlets usually get low ratings because unbiased truth isn't as exciting or interesting as spin.
Since you showed some decency in your last post, I'm happy to answer your question. Keep in mind that I worked in the media for 10 years in a major market. Regarding your comment that FOXNews is the most watched and most trusted, those are the results from ratings polls. The opinions of the general public in a survey do not determine whether a media outlet is legit or not. Those results only prove what is more popular. Being popular does not answer whether the media outlet is following a code of ethics or not.
Furthermore, FOXNews admits to being biased to the right. Their slogan, fair and balanced, refers to their attempt to counter the liberal CNN. They are not saying that their reporting is fair and balanced-they are saying that their existence on cable is fair and balanced since CNN was spinning news to the left. They admit this, and it's obvious to most people.
The legit outlets usually get low ratings because unbiased truth isn't as exciting or interesting as spin.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Nielsen shows Fox News to be far in the lead over all competitors and their data is certainly not a popularity poll.
A legitimate news outlet conforms to the two standards established for the press:
1.) Report the news to the public
2.) Hold the government accountable.
Fox News adheres to both standards while few others do.
[Edited on 4/11/2017 by Muleman1994]
Yes, they lead among cable news networks. Yes, it's about popularity. That's the exact definition of "ratings". Mule, if you come here to goof around then fine, but if you hate the extreme-left for being too extreme and foolishly following CNN, then you are no different than they are if you follow FoxNews and believe in extreme-right views like you've demonstrated. You are the exreme-right version of the people you hate.
