[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD" "Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy" Woodworking and Construction Hacks "CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination" "NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law" "Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing" Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn. After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending. Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar” "Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny" "Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is" Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner. Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally "It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive' (Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl "Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race" He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom! "Kamala’s Inane Talking Points" "The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics" Easy Drywall Patch Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind" Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’ Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer? hurricanes and heat waves are Worse 'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA. Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence. Tenn. AG reveals ICE released thousands of ‘murderers and rapists’ from detention centers into US streets Status: Not Logged In; Sign In The Establishments war on Donald Trump See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles Title: Why I like Trump Source: the7lastplagues.com URL Source: http://the7lastplagues.com Published: Oct 15, 2016 Author: Barry Midyet Post Date: 2016-10-15 23:38:44 by interpreter Keywords: None Views: 5769 Comments: 62 Many of you have guessed, because I am predicting him to win, that I like Trump. And that is basically a true assumption, except I do criticize him for his anti-science stance on global warming. The main thing I like about Trump is his foreign policy which is correct in every way. We should indeed ban all Muslims, and I suggest going one step further, and making the ban permanent. You never know when a "peaceful" Muslim will turn on us and kill as many Christians as he can. This will of course require that the "Immigration Reform Act of 1965 that LBJ, a false prophet, pooped out --- which let Muslims in for the first time (legally). I think Trump should repeal that Act within his first hundred days, and also Obamacare, and Roe vs. Wade all the other bad things that the Democrats have enacted since the days of Johnson. (In my view, Kennedy was last "good" Democratic president). But we do need to keep the recent Paris agreement, which Trump has also threatened to veto. But I'm pretty sure he will change his mind when he sees all of his water-front property (including his campaign headquarters) going underwater, making most of his real estate investments , now worth $10 billion he says, worth about 10 cents. Otherwise, if he doesn't keep the Paris agreement, he wont have a dime left to leave his children. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest #1. To: interpreter (#0) (In my view, Kennedy was last "good" Democratic president) If you believe that, you are much too feeble minded to reason with. rlk  posted on  2016-10-15   23:46:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #2. To: rlk (#1) (Edited) If you believe that, you are much too feeble minded to reason with. Well I am pretty old, but I am not feeble-minded yet. And I will admit that JFK was not perfect, but is there some particular reason you dont like him? I think that, like Reagan, he stood up to Atheist Russia pretty dam good if you ask me. But Russia has repented and is no longer an atheist nation, and we should make friends with them now (as Trump is trying to do). We very much need Russia to be our ally in the Battle against ISIS, otherwise we may loose the final battle between good and evil. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-16   0:07:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #3. To: interpreter (#0) Roe v Wade was not enacted by Democrats. It was imposed in 1973, during Richard Nixon's second term, by a Republican-majority Supreme Court. It was further extended in 1986, during Reagan's second term, by a Republican-dominated Supreme Court. Mitt Romney, Republican governor of Massachusetts, imposed his "Romneycare", which included public financing of abortion, and Obamacare is patterned on that. Obamacare, with its public financing of abortion, was challenged and went to the Supreme Court, where a Republican majority could have shot it down. Instead, Chief Justice John Roberts, a W appointee, sided with the Democrat minority to give Obamacare judicial sanction. Looking back to 1973, it is the Republican Party, not the Democrats, that imposed Roe v Wade, then expanded it, then ensured public financing of abortion. In the first three cases, it was Republican ACTIVISM that imposed it. In the final case, it was the Republicans refusal to assert their power to prevent it. The Republicans have played a good game at deceiving conservatives for decades, focusing conservative eyes on the fact that Democrats enthusiastically support Roe. Truth is, the Democrat didn't impose Roe on the country, and haven't been the ones to protect Roe, keep it alive and extend it. It has been the Republicans, through their control of the Supreme Court. They have been decisive. Unfortunately, this gets lost in the weeds behind Republican rhetoric. Trump is the first Republican candidate to say he is pro-life, and to ALSO accompany that statement with a list of conservative judges from which he will choose his Supreme Court appointments. So, with Trump we actually have a Republican President who will DO something about Roe judicially (which is the only place it can be struck down). As far as the global warming bit, sea levels have been steadily rising 3 millimeters per year since we started keeping track of this in the 1800s. It's not rising faster. At that rate, the sea level will rise 1 foot in a hundred years. Trump's waterfront buildings won't be underwater for 10,000 years. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-16   8:48:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #4. To: Vicomte13 (#3) Well, I will double-check when I have the time, but I'm pretty sure most of the justices who voted for Roe vs Wade were Democrats. Anyhow, Trump says he will reverse it (by appointing pro-life justices). That's another reason I like Trump. And scientists predict that, if Trump shoots down the Paris agreement and nothing is done about global warming, sea levels will rise by up to 22 feet in about a hundred years or so. Maybe not in Donald's lifetime, but in his children's lifetime. That will flood half of Florida and all of Manhattan (where 90 % of Trump's properties are). So I'm pretty sure he will soon change his mind about global warming. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-16   9:42:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #5. To: interpreter (#4) Well, I will double-check when I have the time, but I'm pretty sure most of the justices who voted for Roe vs Wade were Democrats. The Supreme Court was controlled by the Republicans in 1973. And every year since. The court has been entirely replaced since then, also, by Republican Presidents who all claimed to be pro- life, and yet they did not put a pro-life majority on the Supreme Court, not ever. Whenever they put up a pro-lifer, they then put one or two pro-choicers - consistently. The Republicans gave us Roe, they extended Roe, and they made sure that a pro-choice majority stayed on the court. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-16   16:40:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #6. To: interpreter (#4) The scientists who predict a 22 foot sea level rise in 100 years are like the doctors who recommended Camel cigarettes, and the scientists who said that Thalidomide was safe and effective but eggs were bad for your health: in serious error. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-16   16:42:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #7. To: Vicomte13 (#6) (Edited) The scientists who predict a 22 foot sea level rise in 100 years are like the doctors who recommended Camel cigarettes, and the scientists who said that Thalidomide was safe and effective but eggs were bad for your health: in serious error. Evidently you failed science class and/or have never watched the news. It's already happening. About 90 percent of the Arctic ice has already melted (at least in the summer time) and while there is still a lot of ice in Greenland, it too is melting very fast. There is just a lot more ice there and it takes longer to melt. Scientists say when all of the Greenland ice has melted, it will raise sea levels 2 or 3 feet. And without ice, many animals in the arctic will become extinct. And the biggest ones are always the first to go. Polar bears are getting very hungry, and now for the first time, bears are coming into human campsites and eating humans (or trying to, and unless you are carrying a gun, you get eaten). Now lets talk about the south pole. This year, for the first time in recorded history, Antarctica has started to melt. That's because, for the first time in the earth's history, a thick cloud of greenhouse gasses has appeared over Antarctica. It used to be far enough away from civilization so that greenhouse gasses couldn't reach it but not anymore. And it is melting fast. And it may take a hundred years or so, but when all of Antarctica's ice has melted, it will have raised sea-levels by 19 or 20 feet. So add it all up and you get 22 feet, and Trumps campaign headquarters will be about 6 feet underwater. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   9:57:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #8. To: Vicomte13 (#5) The Supreme Court was controlled by the Republicans in 1973. And every year since. The court has been entirely replaced since then, also, by Republican Presidents who all claimed to be pro- life, and yet they did not put a pro-life majority on the Supreme Court, not ever. Whenever they put up a pro-lifer, they then put one or two pro-choicers - consistently. The Republicans gave us Roe, they extended Roe, and they made sure that a pro-choice majority stayed on the court. Even if what you say is true, it makes no difference whatsoever. Trump will repeal (or reverse) Roe vs Wade irregardless of who is responsible for the abomination. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   10:08:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #9. To: interpreter (#7) Evidently you failed science class and/or have never watched the news. I graduated with honors and a B.S. from an engineering school and then from pre-med. And had perfect SATs and ACTs to boot. You? As to watching the news, American media is less reliable than Pravda was. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   11:08:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #10. To: interpreter (#8) Even if what you say is true, it makes no difference whatsoever. Trump will repeal (or reverse) Roe vs Wade irregardless of who is responsible for the abomination. "Irregardless" is not a word. You meant "regardless". Trump cannot "repeal" or "reverse" Roe. Only the Supreme Court can do that. Trump can appoint justices to the Supreme Court whom he expects to do that, when a case comes up, but he cannot enforce it. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   11:16:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #11. To: Vicomte13 (#9) To: interpreter "Evidently you failed science class and/or have never watched the news." I graduated with honors and a B.S. from an engineering school and then from pre-med. And had perfect SATs and ACTs to boot. You? As to watching the news, American media is less reliable than Pravda was. Well, I also have a degree in BS (electronics actually, and I used to work on vacuum-tube computers, but I am presently working on a BS in Theology) And I have an IQ of 140. And I have found American news programs to be pretty reliable overall (compared to other nations and especially Pravda). interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   13:08:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #12. To: Vicomte13 (#10) "Irregardless" is not a word. You meant "regardless". Trump cannot "repeal" or "reverse" Roe. Only the Supreme Court can do that. Trump can appoint justices to the Supreme Court whom he expects to do that, when a case comes up, but he cannot enforce it. Irregardless is a good Texas word and we Texans use it a lot. Let me define it for you. It basically means "There's no way in hell you're right." And irregardless of what you say, Trump is going to reverse Roe vs Wade one way or another. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   13:18:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #13. To: interpreter (#11) Well, I also have a degree in BS (electronics actually, and I used to work on vacuum-tube computers, but I am presently working on a BS in Theology) And I have an IQ of 140. And I have found American news programs to be pretty reliable overall (compared to other nations and especially Pravda). I'm glad you're smart too. Now stay smart and don't insult other people's intelligence. That's dumb. You believe that the sea level is going to rise 22 feet in this coming century. Apparently you really believe it. If you were working on vacuum tubes in electronics, you're probably in your late 60's or your 70's, retired, collecting Social Security, which gives you time to study theology - a B.S., not a B.A., in theology? Really? Through Liberty U online, perhaps? Statistically speaking, you only have a few more years to live, so you won't see the flooding you expect during your lifetime. Of course, if the sea level rise is linear, the seas should be a foot or more higher already by the time you shuffle off this mortal coil, because they should be rising at a rate of over 2.5" per year to get to 22 feet by 2116, assuming linear rises. If you live as long as Jean Calment did, you've got another 50 years or so, and you should see ten feet or more in that time. Considering that China and India and Indonesia and Brazil aren't going to give up their development, the ongoing pollution is a given, and that will mean that the global warming will continue apace, no matter what we do. It's always interesting to see how people really believe certain things with such certitude. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   13:26:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #14. To: interpreter (#12) And irregardless of what you say, Trump is going to reverse Roe vs Wade one way or another. If he wins, you're right. If he doesn't, then nope. For my part, I hope he wins. I support his plan for peace with Russia. I support his protectionism. I support his plans to throttle illegal immigration. I expect he will convert Obamacare to single-payer, which he used to support. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   13:29:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #15. To: Vicomte13 (#14) (Edited) If he doesn't, then nope. For my part, I hope he wins. I support his plan for peace with Russia. I support his protectionism. I support his plans to throttle illegal immigration. I expect he will convert Obamacare to single-payer, which he used to support. Well blow me down. If you actually support Trump, I will have to take back most of the stuff I said about you. My apologies. And as for what University I am going to end up getting a degree in Theology from, I really have no clue at this juncture. Basically I want to obtain a degree of some sort in Biblical Greek and Biblical Hebrew without having to study someone else's theology (because I have my own and generally speaking, I do not agree with anyone else's except perhaps the conservative wing of the Episcopal/Anglican Church). interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   13:48:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #16. To: interpreter (#12) And irregardless of what you say, Trump is going to reverse Roe vs Wade one way or another. First he has to win. Given your claims to be 100% in your predictions, you have quite a mountain to climb for Trump to get to 270 electoral votes. Are you still sticking with a Trump victory? redleghunter  posted on  2016-10-17   13:50:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #17. To: redleghunter (#16) First he has to win. Given your claims to be 100% in your predictions, you have quite a mountain to climb for Trump to get to 270 electoral votes. Are you still sticking with a Trump victory? Yes I am, and I have never been wrong with my predictions for 25 years now. But I am now having to get on the internet 24/7 (except when I'm asleep) to make sure it happens. Otherwise I will be a failed prophet, and those types are to be stoned to death (according to the Old Testament) and I for sure don't want that to happen. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   14:16:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #18. To: interpreter (#15) If you actually support Trump, I have supported Trump since the beginning, since way back last year, because I agree with his policies: Stop illegals at the border, end the free trade nonsense, make peace with Russia to fight the Muslim terrorists, and appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court (who will, among other things, overturn Roe v Wade). That's why I support Trump. It's also why I don't care about his sex life. I'm not marrying him, I'm hiring him to advance an agenda. His agenda is essentially opposed to everything that the Republican Party has stood for (or done behind the scenes, in the case of abortion) for a long time. I don't like Republicans. Their economics are stupid and they plunge us into wars we lose. I don't like Democrats: they're babykillers. But I DO like Trump, because he's a nationalist, protectionist who would end the Cold War. And he's pro-life. That's why I've supported him - to the point that I will very grudgingly vote for a Republican, even after I said "No Mas" after holding my nose and voting for Romney in the last election. If Trump loses, Hillary gets the court and with it, the Republicans never win another election...which will be time to say "Fuck it" and move to France where the food is better and living is easier. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   14:44:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #19. To: redleghunter (#16) First he has to win. Given your claims to be 100% in your predictions, you have quite a mountain to climb for Trump to get to 270 electoral votes. Are you still sticking with a Trump victory? I'm not a prophet, but I also still think he will win. I think the media has done their absolute worst, and the real polls are still practically at the margin of error. And I think that people know that this time it's IT. I think that the Trump vote will be the American Brexit, and that he will win. If I'm wrong, nobody needs to stone me, because I'm not a prophet. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   14:46:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #20. To: Vicomte13 (#18) (Edited) I have supported Trump since the beginning, since way back last year, because I agree with his policies: Stop illegals at the border, end the free trade nonsense, make peace with Russia to fight the Muslim terrorists, and appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court (who will, among other things, overturn Roe v Wade). That's why I support Trump. It's also why I don't care about his sex life. I'm not marrying him, I'm hiring him to advance an agenda. His agenda is essentially opposed to everything that the Republican Party has stood for (or done behind the scenes, in the case of abortion) for a long time. I don't like Republicans. Their economics are stupid and they plunge us into wars we lose. I don't like Democrats: they're babykillers. But I DO like Trump, because he's a nationalist, protectionist who would end the Cold War. And he's pro-life. That's why I've supported him - to the point that I will very grudgingly vote for a Republican, even after I said "No Mas" after holding my nose and voting for Romney in the last election. If Trump loses, Hillary gets the court and with it, the Republicans never win another election...which will be time to say "Fuck it" and move to France where the food is better and living is easier. I agree with everything you said, except perhaps for a little minor detail, and it has to do withe the "illegal" Mexican immigrants. First of all, most of them are not rapists or whatever Trump said. Most of them are actually very devout Roman Catholics and would't harm a flea. And secondly, it is mostly American farmers who hire them and they badly need them to harvest their crops, because as a general rule, no American wants to do it So I think Trump should let all the Mexicans who want to come into America at harvest season (after they are properly vented as he likes to say) and make all the money they want to legally. And after the harvest season, send them home to their families. And I'm not going to France if Hilary wins. I'm going to Mexico where I like both the food and the women, and it also helps that the cost of living is very cheap there. Gonna have to brush up on my Spanish though. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   16:59:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #21. To: interpreter (#20) of hillary wins im going to quebec. Titorite2  posted on  2016-10-17   18:15:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #22. To: Titorite2 (#21) if hillary wins im going to quebec. That's also a good choice. I've been to Canada and I love the Canadians. They are always very honest and friendly and helpful, good people. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-17   20:36:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #23. To: interpreter (#20) because as a general rule, no American wants to do it Americans will do that work for the appropriate wage. Wages have to be living wages. That means that the price of food will have to go up. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-17   20:45:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #24. To: Vicomte13 (#23) Americans will do that work for the appropriate wage. Wages have to be living wages. That means that the price of food will have to go up. I for one don't want the price of food going up. That's because I live on a very limited fixed income and I'm getting less than a 1% increase in my SS check and cant afford to pay more for food. I say bring in the Mexicans, all who want to come. May the Lord bless them. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   11:16:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #25. To: interpreter (#24) I for one don't want the price of food going up. That's because I live on a very limited fixed income and I'm getting less than a 1% increase in my SS check and cant afford to pay more for food. I say bring in the Mexicans, all who want to come. May the Lord bless them. If we're going to let in the Mexicans, then I say they get minimum wage and exactly the same labor protections and social welfare as everybody else. Human beings are human beings, and we have no right to force them to raise their children in poverty, working in this country for cheaper food. If paying everybody a living wage forces the prices up, then I say that Social Security must be fully increased to cover the cost differential, and food stamps or other means found to make it possible for you to eat healthy while the people all the way down the food chain to the bean picker below you ALSO gets paid a living wage. That will mean, inevitably, that profit concentration will have to be taxed at the top, and redistributed downward. And that is the very reason why Democrats are the majority party in America over time - because their economics are that of a living wage for all, while Republicans stubbornly refuse to care about the people at the bottom, and pretend that there is a way they can live without having to be paid more. Well, there isn't. There isn't a way for you to do it, and there isn't a way for the Mexican illegals to do it either, without living in squalor without health care or protection. Anybody living on the soil of the United States is entitled to live at a basic level of dignity. We can do that either by a guaranteed wage from government, or through private wages, or a combination of the two. But we cannot exploit illegal Mexican beanpickers and make them live little better than slaves to keep the cost of our food low. That is evil and immoral and it must be stopped. Republicans have never been willing to face the truth of economics, which is why they find it harder and harder and harder to win elections in a country filling up with poor people on account of their policies. We already have a social safety net, paid for by wealth redistribution through taxes. That net will get thicker and more protective, and there will be more wealth redistribution. If we don't want taxes too high, then we have to STOP the foreign military adventures and imperialism that devour about 30% of our money (taxed and borrowed). IF we want to continue to be big swinging dicks on the world stage, then we have to accept higher taxes on the top. Republicans want to be big swinging dicks on the world stage AND to not have wealth redistribution sufficient to have a social safety net. That's why Republicans are losing the country: it's a ridiculous and unsustainable set of beliefs. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-18   11:30:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #26. To: Vicomte13 (#25) Sorry but I'm not a fan of Bernie Sanders or socialism like you espouse. And Mexicans make far more money in the US than they can at home, and they are perfectly happy with their wages. And my family, my cousins in the valley, happen to pay the Mexicans very well thank you and they are not mistreated in any way. And right now they need orange and grapefruit pickers if you are willing to go there and work for the minimum wage. No? I thought not. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   12:57:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #27. To: interpreter (#26) Sorry but I'm not a fan of Bernie Sanders or socialism like you espouse. And Mexicans make far more money in the US than they can at home, and they are perfectly happy with their wages. And my family, my cousins in the valley, happen to pay the Mexicans very well thank you and they are not mistreated in any way. And right now they need orange and grapefruit pickers if you are willing to go there and work for the minimum wage. No? I thought not. Ok, then: be stubborn about it and continue to lose your country. Hillary will probably win. I don't want her to, but she probably will. Democrats have the innate advantage in American politics because of the social safety net. Hillary will grant amnesty and a path to citizenship to the illegals, and then you will have beanpickers earning minimum wages and unionizing - with government support - and you'll have all of those millions of new Democrat voters voting to redistribute the wealth. If Hillary wins this election, you will never again see a Republican President. It's over. And the REASON it's over is that the Republicans have been resisting the social safety net since FDR, and over time they have lost the electorate. As long as there was ANOTHER issue - the Cold War - to keep them in the game the Republicans could occasionally eke out a win, but they never were able to unravel the social safety net, despite talking about doing so and making runs at it. Let Hillary run the place with a Democrat Supreme Court, and the world changes quickly and permanently. I'm fine with it. Import 11 million Catholics and let's see what happens. The country comes to meet me more. But you're not going to be fine with it. You've painted yourself into a corner. There's no way out. You better hope that Trump wins, as I do. If he loses, I'll be fine. You'll see the pillars of your world, your belief systems, crumble around you BECAUSE those beliefs were not founded on the bedrock of truth. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-18   13:13:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #28. To: Vicomte13 (#27) (Edited) I can make the same argument for Trump. If Hillary looses the election, you will probably never see another Democratic President because their lies they've been telling ever since LBJ will all be debunked once and for all. Christians are ordained to rule the earth, and not Muslims and atheists. The end of the world as we now know it is now upon us, never to be heard from again because "politically incorrect" Christians like Trump will rule the earth's politics for the next 1000 years. The US election is part of the final battle between good and evil. Hilary is the evil one (working for Satan) and Trump is clearly the "good" one working for Christians and everything that is good. It is like the difference between night and day, and it is as obvious as the nose on your face. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   16:42:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #29. To: interpreter (#28) I can make the same argument for Trump. If Hillary looses the election, you will probably never see another Democratic President because their lies they've been telling ever since LBJ will all be debunked once and for all. Christians are ordained to rule the earth, and not Muslims and atheists. The end of the world as we now know it is now upon us, never to be heard from again because "politically incorrect" Christians like Trump will rule the earth's politics for the next 1000 years. The US election is part of the final battle between good and evil. Hilary is the evil one (working for Satan) and Trump is clearly the "good" one working for Christians and everything that is good. It is like the difference between night and day, and it is as obvious as the nose on your face. Republicans gave us Roe v Wade and Casey. Republicans are opposed to social welfare and quite cold to the plight of the poor. Republicans plunged us into disastrous forever wars in the Middle East (Democrats did that in Korea and Vietnam, but Republicans continued Vietnam for twice as long as the Democrats). The notion that Republicans are more moral than Democrats is risible. I'm voting for Trump because he opposes free trade, which I also hate, because he wants to control the Border, which I also want done, and because he wants to make peace and alliance with the Russians - the very opposite of what EITHER the Democrats OR Republicans want to do. That's why I support Trump, and it'll be a shame if he loses. But even if he wins, the Democrats won't be finished for good, because the Republicans still, as a party, oppose the social safety net, and with the huge Hispanic population here already, having children who are born citizens, the weight of Democrat demographics becomes heavier and heavier on one side of the scale. Trump has said he will try to reverse that, but while Clinton can move by Executive Orders, Trump can't - he'll be constrained by Congressional Republicans, and THEY have always connived at open borders, precisely for the reason you like them: cheap labor. I recognize, too, that if Trump loses you're going to have an existential crisis of faith, so for your sake I hope he wins. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-18   17:47:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #30. To: Vicomte13 (#29) (Edited) I disagree completely with your basic premise. It is up to the Churches to care for the needy, not the government. According to the Bible, the only job of the "king" (or president, whatever) is to defend the Church and to conquer on its behalf. (and of course that involves assessing taxes to support the military and police). Other than that, the government has no other function in the proper marriage between Church and State, period, no exceptions or ifs, ands, or buts. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   21:40:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #31. To: interpreter (#30) "According to the Bible..." I have heard that tripe from many Republicans. It is false. Read Exodus again. Read about the tithe. Read the Prophet Amos and the Prophet Malachi. Read the accusations by God against the kings of Israel for not taking care of the poor, the sick, the widow and the orphan. You have gotten the Bible wrong. So many Republicans have. And the net result of your getting it wrong is that you justify callous indifierence to the poor by the government. Republicans have systematically opposed the social welfare state since the 1930s. The end game of that evil stance may well be the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the end of the Republican Party as a viable force. I still want Trump to win, but if he doesn't, there is plenty about what Hillary will do that is decent and reasonable. She will do it in a dicatorial manner, and not bother to try to bring you in using Christian logic. But the Biblical logic is certainly THERE. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-18   21:47:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: Vicomte13 (#31) (Edited) I can guarantee you that I have not gotten anything in the Bible wrong because I have been studying it since I was knee-high to a duck (2 years old). Dad taught me how to read by reading the King James Bible to me. And before I could say Mommy and Daddy I could say "God is love." And I have been studying that particular verse for 67 years now, and I've come to the conclusion that yes God is love, but His love is a very tough love. And, although 99 % of preachers wont say this anymore (because it is considered to be politically incorrect) anyone who does not accept God's love is going to hell, and that's a very tough love if you ask me. And as for the bible criticizing any Hebrew king for not helping the poor, I am not aware of any such incidence anywhere in the Bible (because that was not his job). His only job was to conquer the holy Land and protect the Israelites from harm. Maybe you are reading another Bible. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   22:20:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #33. To: Vicomte13 (#31) Read the Bible again you're wrong again. A K A Stone  posted on  2016-10-18   22:27:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #34. To: Vicomte13 (#31) You support the cunt again huh sick head. A K A Stone  posted on  2016-10-18   22:28:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #35. To: A K A Stone (#34) No, I support Trump. But if Hillary wins, it will be because the GOP has so weakened itself demographically that even Trump could not save it. In a democracy, if you refuse to take care of your own people, you don't stay in power. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-18   22:44:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #36. To: A K A Stone (#33) (Edited) Read the Bible again you're wrong again. I have read the entire Bible from cover to cover several times now, and I know every single word it says. How many times have you read it? interpreter  posted on  2016-10-18   22:44:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #37. To: interpreter, A K A Stone (#36) I have read the entire Bible from cover to cover several times now, and I know every single word it says. How many times have you read it? You have failed your own thread because you are defensive. Stone is a devout Christian. As much as I don't defend his methods of outrageness MADDNESS as the administrator of LF, I am cautioning you, that he just might want kick your ass out of here. buckeroo  posted on  2016-10-18   22:55:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #38. To: buckeroo (#37) You have failed your own thread because you are defensive. Stone is a devout Christian. As much as I don't defend his methods of outrageness MADDNESS as the administrator of LF, I am cautioning you, that he just might want kick your ass out of here. Well, you can try to shut me up if you want, but I will never stop speaking the truth as long as I have a breath left in my body. And i'm sorry if I've offended a few Christians in the process, but my main objective on this site, and any website I post on, is to convert the hard-core atheists and not Christians who are already Christians. My apologies to any Christians I have "offended" in the process. interpreter  posted on  2016-10-19   1:00:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #39. To: interpreter (#32) So, then, do you want me to take you through the Bible to show you what you missed, to show you that the Social Security upon which you depend for life is not some sort of sinful apparatus that should, instead, be provided by private Christian charity? I can. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-19   8:19:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #40. To: interpreter (#38) Well, you can try to shut me up if you want Ahhhh ... SHADDUP already. buckeroo  posted on  2016-10-19   8:26:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply   #41. To: interpreter (#30) (Edited) I disagree completely with your basic premise. It is up to the Churches to care for the needy, not the government. According to the Bible, the only job of the "king" (or president, whatever) is to defend the Church and to conquer on its behalf. (and of course that involves assessing taxes to support the military and police). Other than that, the government has no other function in the proper marriage between Church and State, period, no exceptions or ifs, ands, or buts. So, Social Security is evil. And so is Medicare. Vicomte13  posted on  2016-10-19   9:49:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply         .       .       . Comments (42 - 62) not displayed. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com