Democrats in disarray and rudderless

You mean you don't know enough about him yet?

 

Wow. You must get paid by the word. Or, maybe by the pounds of condescension you include in your replies. I was going to wait for the Cliff Notes but decided, instead, to number a few of your more questionable statements and reply to just those. And, yes, I do consider your overall message to be a thorough rewrite of history. By the way, I’m not a Democrat. I’m an Independent who holds both parties in nearly equal disdain. But I am in complete shock that this nation could elect an orange cockroach, like trump, as it’s would-be ‘president’.

1) You deny waterboarding is torture. But most REAL experts absolutely DO consider it torture. So you are pretty much alone in your belief. ‘Course you’re welcome to your opinion, no matter how wrong-headed it is. There is no way you could know how waterboarding was conducted in the realities in which they were applied. It’s easy to sit behind a keyboard and claim that waterboarding is harmless, maybe even fun. So you are claiming, again, to know something you cannot actually “know.” You are obviously good and well-practiced at doing just that.

2) Second point. You said, “I understand the housing collapse.” I truly doubt that you understood anything about the housing collapse, at the time it was happening. Though, in RETROSPECT you may have read some sensible things about it, and now claim to have known those thing back then. BUT, when the market was getting ready to collaps, the very best REAL experts in the country missed the dangers that were present in the mortgage market — at that time. But it’s nice that you have such a high opinion of yourself. Good self esteem is healthy, if it’s not carried to extremes. You are already in the danger zone, there.

3) The refugee problem would NEVER have happened if Bush had NOT attacked Iraq for NO reason. No matter how you spin it. You are wrong.

5) Another gross lie: “Democrats are sworn by law to attack the man.” How can anyone take you seriously when you make statements like that? I mean, how can you even think up something that silly? Or maybe that's it — you're a comedian !

And you think 600,000 American lives were not worth losing in order to keep the America together. I don’t know why you even brought that up. It has nothing to do with the millions of lives lost because of George W Bush LYING us in to completely insane and NEEDLESS wars (plural) in the middle east. A shyte-hole we should NEVER have gotten involved in, in the first place.

Now, go soak your fingers. They must hurting like crazy after writing, or rather, re-writing, the history of our disastrous activities in the middle east.

 

The Democratic Party will be just fine, folks.
Demographics is destiny in politics. The Republican brand is something of a joke among younger people. And it's not even a very good joke.

 

Trump is too old to be president. He's not very well informed and he can't or won't learn.

If he were smart and really wanted to fix healthcare he would use his considerable sales skills to sell single-payer healthcare...

The old fool is a disaster and there will be a human toll for his ignorance and arrogance.

 

Are you a spring chicken? Watch whom you insult. Trump became president and you and I lag far behind doing that.

Single payer won't work in America. Even the poor would have to kick in 20 percent of their entire revenue. They will raise the roof.

 

Really?????????????? You type that with a straight face given your many many losses nationally? OK then. LOL

 

I am not young.. but that has NOTHING to do with Trump's competence.

Healthcare costs would go down for all Americans with single payer private delivery. The VA is the most expensive healthcare in the US... half again more than Medicare or private healthcare.

 

I tried to do your long post justice by being more complete.
You actually come across more biased, more ideology based than when I was a Democrat. And I always hammered republicans through the heart. I woke up and did so via study.

There is a sadness when your well known arguments include calling Trump names.
I am really not alone in saying as done by the CIA under Bush, it was not torture. Not all agree but that does not make me wrong since I base it on two major facts. It is used in Seal Training. Second to do it, Bush got hands on legal advice first. I say Bush knowing it was not his idea, but he was legally cleared even if you or I hate how it was done.

John Yoo and a team of lawyers told the CIA it is legal so long as they followed some very explicit rules.

It is amusing to visit online with a real history rewriter. I am pleased to duel with you. Rarely is it this easy to expose any poster and you are like the red cloth to the bull.

Look, I simply retort back in the style you seem to love using.

I admit to being an expert and one that myself missed the collapse was going to take place. See I was far too busy doing the work for clients who wanted home loans. I never loaned on personal chattel, but spent years being approved by wholesale lenders who then would closely examine the loans I submitted to them. The typical borrower has no clue what I had to do so they got the loan. In my case my borrowers were told I did submit packages for wholesale approval so I went the extra step. The State of CA has declared me to be an expert. I can't duck this in a court of law.

Congress was warned and rejected changes that definitely could have saved the system. Dodd Frank did not solve a thing.

Maybe on that note, i am biased since I am directly impacted/hurt by Dodd Frank.

Bush was president for long enough to see if there were refugees, which there were, and where they went. I happen to know in Iraq, a lot headed to Jordan. Syria could also be a place they went. But once Obama crapped his pants over Libya and Yemen, we know they now spread globally. Obama ran them out.

You rush to defend Democrats yet allege to be independent. Many of them are simply democrats for 99 percent of the time.

So you don"t mind losing over 630,000 lives over Abe's excuse? That is very cruel in my view.

You totally ignore the role of Clinton in Iraq and ignore the congress was rip roaring to wage war. I saw it when Clinton bombed Yugoslavia for three months. maybe in your world that was not war, but it is war in my world. It was war when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. We have to be thankful that Clinton picked on defenseless countries.

I won't get suckered into posting in your ad hominem style.

 

If you mean I am to judge Donald Trump and hammer the man, I plan to wait more months to see how things play out. So far, he has assembled the start of an exceptional cabinet. Unless they are mere window dressing, I plan to see what they all manage to do first. If Trump ends up ineffective or keeps pulling things like this health care solution failure, he could still end up on top. But he might fail. I wanted a Governor if you recall. Democrats have no clue how to solve health care. This they proved with the ACA.

 

Even were that true, and well it could be true, the taxes required be imposed on Americans of all incomes would fast blow such a system to bits. Seth came up with a great analysis of why what worked for Germany is not suited to this country.

I have not checked on the VA for costs and that is a single payer system for some vets. Even though I am a vet, I am not allowed into a VA hospital for treatment. A lot of we vets never got included.

So you want the failed VA system imposed since that is single payer? I know you slammed the VA and not going to the VA myself I can't be certain.

 

How many times do you have to be told that the VA system is only one model for single payer?

The government owns and operates the hospitals and employs the doctors, nurses and techs for the MOST expensive healthcare in America.

Single payer private delivery is another model.. .. that works.. has been proven to work.

 

Pffft... You need to triangulate your news better...

"And, in discussing the threat posed by Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Bush said: "After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad.""

http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/27/bush.war.talk/

 

What falsehood did I spread about Reagan? When he was Governor of California, he railed against Chavez for attempting to get humane conditions for farm workers. He sat there eating grapes with a bunch of greasy haired guys in suits during the grape strike in '68 led by Chavez which was used to call attention to the totally ihumane conditions suffered by the farm workers he represented. It is well documented sir. Regarding Governor Browns efforts to build a high speed rail system which would act as a new model for an much needed upgrade to our outdated infrastructure here in America, I applaud his initiative. Brown has always been socially liberal and fiscally conservative. He has also fought against corruption both as Governor and as Attorney General of our great state.

 

2 million Iraqis went to Turkey. Everyone who knows the ME.. the Arabs, the oil men, diplomats and historians knew the invasion of Iraq would be an expensive, long, drawn-out disaster.

It was a huge blunder in US foreign policy .. Its destroyed the Dual Containment Policy and made Iran ascendant.

 

Trying to ‘talk’ to you is like trying to follow the bounces of a deranged Ping Pong ball.

I don’t “defend Democrats” — they’ve screwed up royally, just like the republicans. Both parties are corrupt.

I didn’t say that I “don’t mind losing over 630,000 lives” in the Civil War. You asked if it was worth the loss to keep America together, and I said YES. That’s different from “not minding” the loss. The Civil War was NOT even part of the earlier topic. You are so disingenuous that you make it impossible to exchange posts with you. So, you’re off to the Ignore trash heap where you’ll find other irrational people, like yourself. It’s just a waste of time reading through your long-winded posts.

Why do you keep bringing Obama and Clinton into this. They're long gone. George W. Bush, ALONE, LIED us into attacking Iraq, AND there was no good reason for attacking them. It was HIS decisions that have nearly destroyed the middle east, just as they nearly destroyed the American and world economies. He even sent the one person in his administration who had integrity, to lie to the UN about our intelligence on Iraq: Colin Powell. Then he kicked him to the curb.

Ad hominem style? You don’t engage in it? What a laugh. Or course you do. Only you couch your insults in the never-ending condescension that fills every one of your posts. Your opinion of yourself is through the roof, for some reason. Lol... So long... Mr. Expert.

 

I deleted your whining, more ad hominem and went to your only point.

As I quite accurately pointed out, not just to you, but the forum .... I post to the forum and to be frank don't mind you dropping out.

Pointed out the invasion of Afghanistan did not happen. That Bush cleverly (thanks to general Tommy Franks) used the domestic forces native to Afghanistan to wage war. Bush bombed and gave them money, arms and supplies. But after the war was won, the country of Afghanistan voted for leaders. I call that free.

What Bush stated was what Clinton stated. I can't forget Clinton who signed the law to get rid of Saddam. How can you expect me to ignore Clinton?

I might agree there was no good reason to attack Iraq but had the Democrats not done years of it, I could see them being rebuked over this. Frankly the difference in you and Democrats is as fine as a piece of hair. i see no difference in you and them.

Bush worked with the congress and goofed off for months until they wanted him to attack.

When it was going to happen, I then made the argument it was a feint. I believed that Saddam was too smart to get conquered when he could simply take his money and run. Bush would not chase him down. But Saddam did not believe Bush so as it turned out it was not a feint. I use feint as a threatening military move. I was wrong about Bush not invading. For a poster, you sure have a mighty thin skin.

 

Bush moved assets from Afghanistan to Iraq and prolonged both wars.... Saddam was NO threat to anyone. Iraq was crippled by two decades of war and sanctions before Bush invaded.

 

Incidentally, my saying by law I am an expert set a fire in a posters mind and he resents it.

Take a lawyer, if he pleads to a court he does not understand law, the court will laugh and tell him by law he is an expert. I can't get away in a court of law telling the Judge .... i don't get this law stuff. I am charged with knowing it very well. We take plenty of courses on law. Personally it would relieve me of a burden if CA did not claim I am an expert.

 

What assets do you mean? When Bush whipped Afghanistan, the numbers of troops was not even a Battalion size. When i was in the Army, that unit was about 2000 men. If Bush needed part of those 2,000 the plan sucked. Franks made those decisions anyway. Franks book claims he did not have 1000 of our guys there during the war.

Actually Saddam's combat forces were defeated in about 20 days. That is remarkable to me. Clinton and his big mouth should not have kept claiming Saddam was a serious danger and has WMD if that is not the case. Bush had to work with what was there when he showed up.

Do you see sanctions as a form of war? Do you recall who got hurt by sanctions on Iraq? Bush got those relieved.

 

Maybe that magic vanishing Army of Saddam's headed to Turkey. But they first had to get by the Kurds. I would not try that.

Based on your claims we all know the war in France, England, the USA, etc and so forth is a long drawn out war. Do you want us to stop trying to defeat bombers and machine gunners?

I see Iraq as it really was.

1. Bush invaded. Franks took Saddam out in several weeks. But later, after what was a cooling off time, then thugs used planted bombs and explosives on wheels to kill civilians. Bush did not go there for that. But he kept the pressure on and stood up the army that vanished in front of everybody.

Obama's reaction was more war. More hundreds of thousands killed and Hillary played her role in that such as in Libya. Obama was one major cluster sex act.

 

I agree with what you say here but, keep in mind that they were not that far off winning the last election even though they had the most horrible candidate imaginable. Hillary was just so bad, in so many ways.

She was the consummate establishment insider in an election where the people had turned anti-establishment.
She had numerous scandals - Benghazi - Email - a husband who was charged with numerous sex offenses
She gave nothing to vote for. All she did was talk about Trump in the last month of the campaign.
Then there is the fact that people just find her nauseating ... both men and women.

And she still came close.

Here is the problem. Next election the Dems will have a much better front runner (how could it be worse ?) and they will have a message.

The GOP is facing demographic obsolescence. Maintaining their current platform on Abortion (and other things) is not doing them any favors among the younger demographic - and nor will the war on Pot.

 

Except Hillary.

 

What did it have to do with Democrats?

 

Let's hope the GOP can drive down costs for everyone, including veterans.

But I'd rather spend twice on a veteran who risked their neck to serve, than normal rate for welfare rats.

 

I think that our veterans would be better served if they could go to any hospital or doctor of their choosing like Medicare for everyone.