ABF | Modern Day Politics

Here is the article on march I can't find where she inciting violence http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/22/politics/hillary-clinton-tweet-womens-march/index.html you said it was on CNN
They had plenty of opportunities to ask their followers to "just cool it" and please demonstrate in a peaceful manner. Do not destroy. Do not burn. Do not desecrate our flag. Respect law and order. Do not destroy public or private property. Do not threaten to kill anybody (especially a US President)> Did Hillary, Obama or any other Democrat official do any of that? NO. By their silence, they were encouraging the riots to continue. Obama even said "March On".
 
You Dems keep forgetting to say "illegal" or "unvetted". Why is that? Are you in favor of another 11 million illegal immigrants streaming across our southern border? Are you OK with allowing just anybody, with no knowledge of their intentions or past possible connections to terrorist organizations, into this country? How's that working out for Germany, France, Sweden and Denmark?
https://definitions.uslegal.com/u/undocumented-immigrant/ Here you go
 
They had plenty of opportunities to ask their followers to "just cool it" and please demonstrate in a peaceful manner. Do not destroy. Do not burn. Do not desecrate our flag. Respect law and order. Do not destroy public or private property. Do not threaten to kill anybody (especially a US President)> Did Hillary, Obama or any other Democrat official do any of that? NO. By their silence, they were encouraging the riots to continue. Obama even said "March On".
Man I sent you a reply where Obama is on record not condemning violent protest read that first.
 
Last edited:
Never got your reply on Trump will allow undocumented immigrants citizenship.
I didn't hear that. Maybe in some isolated cases it is justified. Maybe YOU can't seem to ever hear his call for "criminal illegal immigrants" to be deported. Even the Hispanics that are legally here are in favor of deporting or jailing the criminal elements that prey on them, too. The drug smugglers, The human smugglers. The "skin traders".
Why are so many Dems unable to say "illegal" or "criminal" or "un-vetted" ? That was referred to as "selective hearing" when my kids were growing up.
 
"Undocumented - immigrant".......A PC term for illegal border jumper....just jumping the border is illegal in itself.
An action that in many counties can get you shot. Al illegal entry into MEXICO will get you automatic prison time in MEXICO.
Border jumpers caught here coming over from MEXICO get royal treatment - much better than any homeless US military vet.
 
I didn't hear that. Maybe in some isolated cases it is justified. Maybe YOU can't seem to ever hear his call for "criminal illegal immigrants" to be deported. Even the Hispanics that are legally here are in favor of deporting or jailing the criminal elements that prey on them, too. The drug smugglers, The human smugglers. The "skin traders".
Why are so many Dems unable to say "illegal" or "criminal" or "un-vetted" ? That was referred to as "selective hearing" when my kids were growing up.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...right-deportation-numbers-wrong-talks-about-/
 
For now , yes , I agree with you. But I have doubts and concerns about Trump - number one being that he has a long track record of having been a Democrat , a Democratic supporter , being a New York Liberal , and spending other people's money ( while preserving his own ) - I believe in being fiscally conservative and having governmental accountability. The laws that govern the rest of us SHOULD also apply to those that write and enforce the laws.

So far , Trump and his administration have set a less than stellar example. Trump is a leader which means you SET the example that others follow. I can't ignore all of the stupidity that swirls around him just because he's done a few things I approve of.
If you expect to be a successful businessman, sometimes you have to "hold your nose" or "shake hands with the devil" especially if you expect to get "big city" contracts. Those big cities are almost always Democrat controlled as are most construction company unions. Trump was not a politician until 2015 - he was a businessman. If ANY businessman refuses to do business with one political party or the other, he will not be in business for very long. I spent more than a few years in Chicago - and NOTHING gets built there without first "greasing a lot of palms" of both Dems and Repubs. Like it or not - that's just how business and politicians have to work in the real world and in the big city.
 
In you article it says according to ICE 2 million illegals were deported during Obama's term. but according to the PEW Hispanic Research center there is now just over 11 million illegal immigrants in the US (some say closer to 12 million). So considering the ICE claim of 2 million deported in Obama's 8 years, you can compare it to a bucket with water pouring into it from above with a 1 inch hole at the bottom. Yes there is some water going out, but not enough to keep the bucket from running over. There needs to be a much bigger hole at the bottom to just stabilize the water level OR slow the water intake at the top. Doing nothing will not work.
 
Never got your reply on Trump will allow undocumented immigrants citizenship.

I think he (and congress) would be stupid not to come up with some path to citizenship for the otherwise law abiding illegals living in this country. The criminals need to go, and I'm fine with whatever means necessary to keep them from coming back and harming American citizens. But the problem is so big that there's no way we can just ship 'em all back. First we need to come up with a way to secure our borders, and if it means building a wall, fine. If it means stationing active duty military along the border, fine. We've done it in Korea since the '50s. I think a great path to citizenship for non-criminals would be a certain length of conscription in the military for those able to do so, or possibly a nominal tax rate increase for a time levied on those known to have entered our country illegally. Possibly a 4 year waiver of voting rights. They broke the law coming here and need to be punished for doing so, but there's no way we can ship these folks back where they came from. Too expensive and ineffective.
 
Here is the article on march I can't find where she inciting violence http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/22/politics/hillary-clinton-tweet-womens-march/index.html you said it was on CNN
While "scrolling through" the pictures and news reports, did she also "not see" the stretch limo (that belonged to a Muslim businessman) burning, or the windows being smashed or her pal Madonna threatening and "dreaming about" violence or the pig known as Michael Moore who is actually an anarchist and socialist professional demonstrator paid by Lefty extremists like Geo Soros. Moore actually was saying the demonstrations were not violent enough, scolding Democrats for not doing more.
Unfortunately, too many young people are buying into that anarchist stuff, making a party out of most of these "demonstrations" where a good number of them are paid to be there. When asked what they were protesting, most can't answer. For them, it's just fun to be there, while the real anarchists are prodding them on. They are being used - and Hillary condones it.
Setting a good example? NO Showing leadership qualities? NO Promoting a "Peaceful transition of power"? NO
 
I think he (and congress) would be stupid not to come up with some path to citizenship for the otherwise law abiding illegals living in this country. The criminals need to go, and I'm fine with whatever means necessary to keep them from coming back and harming American citizens. But the problem is so big that there's no way we can just ship 'em all back. First we need to come up with a way to secure our borders, and if it means building a wall, fine. If it means stationing active duty military along the border, fine. We've done it in Korea since the '50s. I think a great path to citizenship for non-criminals would be a certain length of conscription in the military for those able to do so, or possibly a nominal tax rate increase for a time levied on those known to have entered our country illegally. Possibly a 4 year waiver of voting rights. They broke the law coming here and need to be punished for doing so, but there's no way we can ship these folks back where they came from. Too expensive and ineffective.
I agree. The "problem" was allowed to get out of control over the last 10 years or so, with nobody willing to enforce the EXISTING LAWS. It's been all political. The Dems see 99% of those jumping the border as likely Dem voters while some big business fruit and veggie growers in CA see them as cheap labor. So it's been a standoff. Nobody did anything. The "elephant in the room" has been allowed to grow and grow and grow- the drug cartels and the cross border smugglers have benefited the most. The drug epidemic is now out of control. THOSE PEOPLE must be removed somehow. It's not going to be easy with the Dems preferring to ignore the fact that a LARGE part of those illegals are criminals of all types, not only drug dealers. Unfortunately the Dems in power just like to lump them ALL into the "innocent" refugee or immigrant status - just poor moms and dads and innocent children - no bad guys. It IS a major problem with no good way out now that it has been allowed to grow to what it is now - but we (or President Trump) must start somewhere and that is what he is proposing. Slow the flow (with the wall) and reduce the illegals (catch and deport as many illegal criminals as possible). Doing either task at 100% efficiency is impossible.
 
Last edited:
Just in case you forgot still waiting on that Trump immigrant reply
P.S. I like your truck pictures. I now have a whole, long string of those pictures in my "ALERTS" column. For many years, I used to drive one like it - but not as new and shiny as yours. No alum tanks either - a Cornbinder and I hated it.
Keep 'em coming - pretty soon I'll have a whole fleet of my own.
 
S
Never got your reply on Trump will allow undocumented immigrants citizenship.
Trump never said ALL illegal illegal ILLEGAL immigrants. He also did not say anything about Legal immigrants tat have come here with green cards or work permits (those are documents). Undocumented is just a PC word invented by the Dems because they don't like the word illegal pertaining to likely future Dem voters. Illegal means that something illegal was done (like crossing into another country without their knowledge or permission or passport)
Undocumented is simply not having proper paperwork (but otherwise legal) - like having a car that doesn't have registration. Like being a college grad that has misplaced his diploma. Or like not having your Driver Licence and proof of insurance handy when a trooper pulls you over. That is undocumented (and you still get a ticket just for that)......... comprende ?
 
$9.7 Trillion in new debt over 10 years. $10 billion in non-military infrastructure spending slated for Afghanistan ( on top of the $100 billion in non-military infrastructure spending that has already happened )

The new budget that is on the way. Republican , House , Senate , and President.
Still not as bad as Obama's $10 trillion added to the nat'l debt in only 8 yrs, with nothing to show for it. He even gutted the military in the process with the GDP staying flat or losing ground. The only thing that went up (besides the nat'l debt) was the number of food stamp recipients (Up from 28 million in '08 to 45 million in 2015) costing taxpayers $50 billion in "09 and up to $66.6 billion in 2016, According to the Center for Immigration Studies, welfare use by households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico is at 73% , Caribbean 51% and Africa 48%. The lowest is So Asia at 28%. So do the math. We HAVE TO stop or at least stop the illegal immigration and even seriously slow down the immigration of all kinds.
 
Thank you for your service.

Did you ever say you wouldn't follow the orders of a commanding officer because someone else was due to take over or you simply did not agree?

I ask because I'm curious as to how you view the refusal of the majority in the senate to follow through on their constitutional duty to offer advice and consent when President Obama offered a nominee for the Supreme Court.

Your posts point toward a belief in law and order and your sense of duty to this Country and the Constitution. How do you square this total disregard of the law by those SWORN to uphold it?

While reading , I saw this potential solution - :::shit::: or get off the pot. In otherwords , the Senate has a given amount of time to act , and if they don't it's considered a nomineeof their power , allowing the President to move forward with an appointment.
Refusal of the Senate to consent on a Supreme Court nominee. I believe that would come under past practice. The Biden rule.
 
$9.7 Trillion in new debt over 10 years. $10 billion in non-military infrastructure spending slated for Afghanistan ( on top of the $100 billion in non-military infrastructure spending that has already happened )

The new budget that is on the way. Republican , House , Senate , and President.

$100 billion

$9.7 trillion
That is why we must stop or seriously slow down the influx of free loaders from Mexico, Cent America and the Middle East. We must also demand that other members of NATO and the UN pay their fair share in money, troops and equipment. We have been paying way too much in both money and blood in the conflicts around the world. We can no longer be the "world's police dept." or the "world's ATM machine".
 
Top