B-Man
-
Posts
69,613 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by B-Man
-
-
11,300,000 unauthorized people here illegally and you consider that good?
Jim,
Gator cannot understand the point of the thread is the deliberate undermining of the law and the Border service.
The amount of illegal immigrants under Bush or Obama is superfluous (one might say, obfuscating) nonsense.
It doesn't matter if it's one or eleven million.
The ordering of U.S. security to be ignored is the important thing.
That's why Gator cannot figure out anyone's responses.
.
-
Seen at Governor Christie's press conference (also held today)
Christie: *holding up today's newspaper* For those concerned know that I have been well treated. Please send donuts.
-
"Since March of 2010, the American people have had to suffer under the incredible economic burden of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare," "This legislation, passed by totally partisan votes in the House and Senate and signed into law by the most divisive and partisan President in American history, has tragically but predictably resulted in runaway costs, websites that don’t work, greater rationing of care, higher premiums, less competition and fewer choices."
Trump said in a statement.
It's mostly positive.
Trump commits in substance to a repeal of ObamaCare and the exit of the federal government from management of the health-care markets.
It returns oversight over plan coverage to the states, where it was before ObamaCare got imposed, and would allow for greater competition through interstate sales.
It also returns HSAs to the center of policy regarding insurance management for individuals and price transparency as a way to blunt utilization, hinting — not explicitly stated, though — that an emphasis will fall on tailored coverage rather than demanding expensive comprehensive coverage for those who don’t need it and won’t ever use it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/03/trump-releases-health-care-plan-based-on-obamacare-repeal/
-
Sounds reasonable.
Perhaps we could have an actual discussion in the house and senate now, and not behind-doors BS
#6 is a good idea also.
.
-
Here are some other sources for the committee testimony, from last month
Border agent: 'We might as well abolish our immigration laws
www.washingtonexaminer.Obama Tells Border Agents To Stand Down | Daily Wirewww.dailywire.com/.Border Agents Ordered To Stand Down: 'Might As Well ...nation.foxnews.com/"Not only do we release these individuals that by law are subject to removal proceedings, we do it without any means of tracking their whereabouts. Agents believe this exploitable policy was set in place because DHS was embarrassed at the sheer number of those who choose not to follow the law by showing up for their court appearances.
-
Not from the Onion.........................IRS and EPA honchos receive public service awards. No… seriously.
.
-
“Europeans are trying to wrap their heads around Trump’s popularity…with little success.”
I don’t understand why not. The Europeans have long been fans of strong left-leaning men with gigantic egos and ambitions to match
-
I hope Tom has the correct "phone and pen" to get past that pesky PPP checks and balances.
.
It's good to be the King
-
-
Have they called the general election for her yet?
They did that in December.
Change.....Clinton Camp to Hold Fundraiser With Wall St. and Big Pharmacy Lobbyists
Bernie Sanders supporters will surely be excited to know that the Hillary Campaign has planned a little after party for Super Tuesday.
The International Business Times reports:
Hillary Clinton 2016: DC Lobbyists Set To Raise Cash For Hillary Victory FundThe Democratic National Committee’s recent move to end its ban on contributions from federal lobbyists was widely seen as a boost to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, which has ties to the Washington lobbying community. Clinton already appears to be taking advantage of the shift.On Mar. 21, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and a handful of lobbying titans are scheduled to host a fundraiser for the Hillary Victory Fund, a joint fundraising account for the Clinton campaign, the DNC and 32 state parties. According to an invitation obtained by the Sunlight Foundation, Podesta’s co-hosts include Steve Elmendorf, Jeff Forbes and Susan Brophy — all of whom were government officials before becoming lobbyists at top D.C. firms. The event with Podesta — whose brother is a corporate lobbyist and fundraising bundler for Clinton — follows a recent fundraising blitz by Clinton in which her campaign raised money from financial, energy and other industries that expect to have business before the next president.The DNC’s prohibition on lobbyist donations was instituted in 2008 at the behest of then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, who told voters: “They will not fund my party.” Clinton’s current Democratic primary opponent, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, has pushed her to demand the DNC reinstate the lobbyist contribution ban. Clinton is already the top recipient of money from lobbyists in the 2016 campaign, the New York Times reported.You may recall an exchange between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton during the MSNBC Democrat debate during which Clinton called Sanders’ suggestion that she takes money from Wall Street and big pharma an “artful smear.”
-
Matt Miller's post-combine 2 round mock draft
Shaq Lawson to Bills Rd1
Jarron Reed to Bills Rd 2
This would be fantastic
-
Cmdr. Mike Varney, commander, USS Connecticut. Relieved June 6 after investigation found he obstructed an inquiry into the mishandling of classified material.
So....................he's democrat presidential material ?
.
-
You only have yourselves to blame.....................
Correcting a fool never works.
Proverbs 19:19: “A man of great anger shall bear the penalty, for if you rescue him, you will only have to do it again.”
One of the reasons we keep trying to get through to our fools is that we believe that if we could just come up with the right words or the right way to say them, our fool will finally “get it” and change. The light bulbs will turn on. They’ll cry out, “Oh! NOW I GET IT! I will change my foolish ways!”
Not happening.
-
You're giving him too much credit. Racists, to Gatortard, are defined by which political party they vote for. Otherwise, why would he be on here supporting a woman who called the former head of the KKK "noble" and her "mentor"?
Gator doesn't care about race issues. His full blown support of a candidate who has supported racist sentencing and mass incarceration of "super predators".
He's a fraud.
I like how yesterday he misinterpreted the "Donald Trump phenomenon is like the Obama one in 2008" stories as,
Obama is responsible for Trump...............................and he went scrambling to find an article to counter it
Oh well, it keeps him busy til dinnertime at least
poor comprehension.....imagine that......
.
-
WELL, TO BE FAIR, THE WHOLE THING IS ABOUT VIRTUE-SIGNALING AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR GRAFT. PLANET-SAVING IS JUST AN EXCUSE, AND THUS OPTIONAL.
A Hollow Treaty: The EU Can’t Keep Its Climate Promises.
-
So far, Trump wins open primaries and Cruz wins closed … and the calendar is starting to change toward more closed primaries
By Todd Zywicki March 2 at 8:30 AM
Following the South Carolina primary, an interesting article by Michael Harrington went around Facebook that speculated that Donald Trump’s victory in the South Carolina primary was attributable to Democrats voting in the Republican (open) primary. One of the good things about Harrington’s article is that he put out a testable hypothesis — that turnout in the Democratic primary a few days later would be less than 390,000. In fact, it was 367,000. Harrington concludes that had South Carolina had a closed primary, Ted Cruz would have won the primary there. I don’t know him and the author seems to be anti-Trump based on other things he has written — but the fact that his prediction was borne out adds some independent verification to his thesis. So that got me to thinking.
If true, why does this matter? Because so far the primary calendar has been heavily tilted toward open primaries. But there have been four closed elections: the Iowa caucus, the Nevada caucus, and Super Tuesday’s Oklahoma primary and Alaska caucus. Ted Cruz won three of those four closed elections.
So here’s where it potentially gets interesting. Although the media are looking forward to March 15, this Saturday (March 5) there are four Republican primaries/caucuses: Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Maine. All are closed.
Then, once the winner-takes-all states begin, a large number of those are closed primaries and caucuses as well (including Florida, for what it’s worth).
That suggests at least two things.
First, the fact that South Carolina and most of the SEC primaries were open primaries may very well explain why those states did not turn out to be Ted Cruz’s firewall or launch states as he had predicted. Oklahoma did perform as expected, being a fairly comfortable win for Cruz. The timeless Pauline Kael quote that has been back in circulation lately may not necessarily be incorrect among actual Republicans.
Second, the four closed primaries and caucuses this Saturday could be very interesting to watch, particularly to see whether Trump can maintain his momentum in closed primary states where he will have to appeal to the traditional Republican base. I haven’t gone through the remainder of the states to calculate in detail how many delegates will be selected through this series of closed primaries and whether those are enough to win. Trump also might start winning closed primaries and caucuses. But this has been his Achilles heel so far.
As I read the headlines today, I have seen no discussion of this bimodal phenomenon that has held so far. The Wall Street Journal’s front page, for example, doesn’t mention it. This suggests that although the media are focusing on Florida and Ohio, there is another story here that is being overlooked as to whether Trump can consistently establish himself with the traditional Republican base.
-
Why not Hillary?
by Jane
Look, Trump is spectacularly awful. Cruz is just bad. And Rubio? Well, I support him, but his chances of pulling this off and getting the nomination are discouragingly slim. At the same time, if you asked me whether I’d vote for Trump if it came to that, I’d admit that I’m not ready to contemplate that scenario, because it’s such a nightmare.
At the same time, there are Republicans who are saying, “I’ll vote Hillary over Trump.” I can’t say that, either. There’s a good chance that I’d just not vote for that election, just the down-ticket ones.
And, no, it’s not because I’d vote for a chimpanzee if he had R behind his name — I have voted for a few Democrats, especially the pro-life ones (hard to believe that they once existed) or when both candidates were abortion-rights anyway, or for local offices where social issues don’t matter, though these days in federal elections anyway, the particulars of a candidate’s own platform don’t matter as much.
But I just can’t vote for Hillary. Three reasons:
- Corruption
- Incompetence
- Policies
{snip}....multiples example of corruption given
Second, incompetence. Just a few words here.
Does Hillary have any signature legislation from her time as Senator? No, not really. Her credentials rest solely on her tenure as Secretary of State, during which time:
The Obama administration supported the regime change in Libya, then enabled Islamists to come to power, leading to the failures at Benghazi.
At the same time, they sat silent as the Iranian people tried their hand at the Arab Spring, as Clinton herself later admitted was a mistake.
The claimed Russian “reset” ended with Russia building its power and becoming a threat to the West.
Third, policy.
Let’s take a gander at her website.
She supports, perhaps not as massive an expension of federal governement entitlement and other spending programs as Sanders, but pretty nearly so
Much more at the link: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/janetheactuary/2016/03/why-not-hillary.html
.
-
-
Federal Government Tells Parents: “We Are Your Equals”
William A. Estrada
Last December, the United States Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services released a draft policy document outlining how the federal government can better “help” children and families. On page one, the federal agencies made this stunning declaration:
“It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.” (emphasis added)This one sentence unmasks the federal government’s true philosophy behind decades of federal involvement in welfare, kindergarten through 12th grade education spending and policies, programs like Head Start, and now the push to create universal early education for young children from birth through age 5: the federal government believes that its role is equal with the role of parents.
A redefinition of the family
Not only does this draft document expose the federal government’s breathtaking arrogance, a footnote at the bottom of page one goes so far as to redefine the family:
The term “family” is used to includeall the people who play a role in a child’s lifeand interact with a child’s early childhood program or school. This may include fathers, mothers, grandparents, foster parents, formal and informal guardians, and siblings,among others.“All the people who play a role in a child’s life.” All those who “interact with a child’s early childhood program or school.” “Informal guardians.” According to this footnote, a close family friend (an “informal guardian”) could be considered part of a child’s family. This could include a parent’s boyfriend or girlfriend, even if the relationship is temporary or uncommitted. There have already been cases in which custody of a child was granted to the parent’s former lover, against the parent’s wishes. And a child’s siblings are also important to family, but siblings shouldn’t have the legal authority to make parenting decisions.
Having a relaxed definition of family is fine at Thanksgiving and Christmas, but parents, not the government, should be the sole decisionmakers where their children are concerned. This casual and open-ended (“among others”) definition of family sets up a slippery slope for parental rights and family freedom.
More at the link: http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/2016/201603010.asp
-
ANGELO CODEVILLA: Donald Trump Is The Next Barack Obama.
“Obama has been our first emperor. A Donald Trump presidency, far from reversing the ruling class’s unaccountable hold over American life, would seal it. Because Trump would act as our second emperor, he would render well-nigh impossible our return to republicanism.”
Trump and the Obama Model -
-
Clinton checks with staff to see if a message on her email is classified. If not, she says, send to the @nytimes
So she didn't KNOW what is or is not classified & forwarded it to people without clearance to check?
.
-
Americans Don’t Know What ‘Single Payer’ Means: And when they find out, they don’t like it.
Not really a surprise.........
ADDED:
From Hillary's e-mail dump......................"dirty little secret"..............not to anyone with common sense. (Click to enlarge)
-
Trump and the Obama Modelby Kevin WilliamsonDonald Trump, all the best people insist, represents something radical and new on the American political scene. There’s something to that, though it’s not entirely true: Woodrow Wilson had similar strong-man fantasies, and Franklin Roosevelt had admiring words for Benito Mussolini. But Donald Trump also represents something that should by now be utterly familiar.He is, of course, the second coming of Barack Obama.As David French points out today, every election is a test of character, and Americans are just now giving every indication that they intend to flunk this test in spectacular fashion. Why shouldn’t they? They flunked the last two, too, for similar reasons.Barack Obama had, and has, a remarkable ability to inspire irrational devotion among his minions, whom he holds in more or less open contempt. The Hollywood types were literally singing hymns to his name, you’ll recall. Trump inspires a similar abject devotion. Observe that his actual history in business suggests very strongly that he was lucky to inherit a great deal of money – 2006 was “a great time to start a mortgage company,” he insisted – or that the man himself has confessed to exaggerating his wealth, and you’ll get a stammering: “B-b-b-b-b-b-but, you’re not a billionaire!” Suggest that his fundamental rejection of basic things like property rights and free speech means that he isn’t a conservative, much less a constitutionalist, and they’ll scoff that you’re a purist.{snip}Like Obama before him, Trump promises his followers that they can have their cake and eat it, too, so long as they invest him with power. For Obama, the promise was that we could enact universal health-insurance coverage and end up spending less money on health care, because he was so goddamned smart. For Trump’s whey-faced horde, the promise is that they can have more welfare benefits, lower taxes, and less debt, all at the same time, because Trump, who doesn’t know how a bill becomes a law, is so goddamned smart.“If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” was last season’s “I’ll build a wall and make the Mexicans pay for it.” This season’s version will work out the same same, if American voters are in fact childish and unpatriotic enough to invest Trump with the power of the presidency in a fit of pique.I hope they don’t. But I don’t put it past them, either. They’ve done it before. Immediately before, in fact. Yes, Trump is a con artist. No, he isn’t the first. The last one didn’t work out too well.
Trump Alone at the Top
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
I may have to re-consider my support for Cruz.................
.