Author Topic: U.S. Politics 2018  (Read 88486 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #325 on: February 08, 2018, 19:54:57 »
Minus the attacks on decorated war vets, gold star families and then expect to have a military parade in your honour...

So is President Trump declared a draft dodger according to law? If so then many millions of other men would have to be put in that category as well.
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 87,400
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,912
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #326 on: February 08, 2018, 20:02:06 »
I could care less that he dodged the draft.  Plenty did.  It was a complicated time.  I accept that.

But he’s attacked people’s service, some people’s sacrifice and now he wants a parade.  Most of those other dodgers like Biden haven’t done those things.  So yeah, he’s in a category all on his own.
Optio

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #327 on: February 08, 2018, 20:08:03 »
I could care less that he dodged the draft.  Plenty did.  It was a complicated time.  I accept that.

But he’s attacked people’s service, some people’s sacrifice and now he wants a parade.  Most of those other dodgers like Biden haven’t done those things.  So yeah, he’s in a category all on his own.

I ask you not to call people who obtained deferments dodgers. They are honourable citizens.
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 87,400
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,912
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #328 on: February 08, 2018, 20:14:52 »
I ask you not to call people who obtained deferments dodgers. They are honourable citizens.

Sorry.  Didn’t mean to trigger anyone.  I’m sure there’s a safe space somewhere here...
Optio

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #329 on: February 08, 2018, 20:15:53 »
Sorry.  Didn’t mean to trigger anyone.  I’m sure there’s a safe space somewhere here...

You are casting aspersions on millions of men, I am livid!!!!
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 20:25:07 by kkwd »
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 151,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,747
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #331 on: February 08, 2018, 20:27:27 »
You are casting aspersions on millions of men, I am livid!!!!

Calm down.

Draft dodging, or perhaps more properly "draft evasion", is nothing more or less that a "successful attempt to elude government-imposed obligation to serve in the military service of one's nation". In can be either legal or illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_evasion

The term can be used pejoratively or non-judgmentally or even as an honorific. Many who evaded the Vietnam draft refer to themselves quite proudly as draft dodgers. How any one of us views the term is quite subjective.

 [cheers]

Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 206,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,209
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #332 on: February 08, 2018, 20:34:23 »
Trump is the least popular president at least as far back as 1945.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-in-trumps-approval-rating/

I think President Roosevelt 1933-45 was also popular.

Be interesting if the base will accept the 2020 Popular Vote results any more than they did the 2016?

Yes, all of those polls proved s-o-o-o-o-o accurate right up through the first week of last November. Except the one that I followed.

Here's one that differs: http://www.newsweek.com/trump-approval-rating-obama-same-761948

He has been hammered incessantly by blatantly Hillary-loving media that will twist anything that he says or does (not that he is incapable of some truly cringeworthy tweets and such himself).

His State of the Union address was widely accepted, despite that. And I seriously doubt that many of those who will benefit from his tax cuts, real wage improvements, and job creation will disapprove, nor those who have been fined for not taking Obamacare and have now been freed from it. His ratings will more than likely improve over time.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/a-new-poll-looks-mighty-grim-for-democrats.html

http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/01/31/new-poll-trump-approval-rating-jumps-gop-pulls-within-two-generic-ballot

The Democrats have no leader, nor one likely to be effective, and have no platform. They voted against the tax cuts. Who in their right mind would vote for them and risk losing those cuts, and the resulting wage increases and bonuses that many employers gave?

http://time.com/5120377/anti-trump-democrats-2018-midterms/

I was the only one at work who expressed a real possibility (not certainty), based upon several sources and observations, that then-Mr Trump would win. Many would not believe me. There were plenty of indicators, for those who chose, or were able, to see them.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2518

"With a boost from the U.S. economy, President Donald Trump gets a negative 40 - 55 percent approval rating, still under 50 percent, but his best overall score in seven months, according to a Quinnipiac University National Poll released today.

"President Trump had a negative 40 - 55 percent approval rating in a June 29, 2017, survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll.

"In a survey conducted February 2 - 5, a total of 70 percent of American voters say the U.S. economy is "excellent" or "good," the highest rating since Quinnipiac University first asked this question in 2001 and up from 66 percent "excellent" or "good" January 10.

"For the first time in a year, voters say 48 - 41 percent that President Trump is more responsible for the state of the economy than former President Barack Obama.

"American voters approve 51 - 43 percent of the way Trump is handling the economy, his highest score on this issue since he was inaugurated.

"A total of 75 percent of American voters say their financial situation is "excellent" or "good."

And that is despite the most hostile press that any major American politician that I have ever seen.

Yes, there is much improvement to be made in his ratings

Don't be surprised if the Republicans hold both houses in the next mid-term election, and don't be surprised if President Trump wins a second term - barring something catastrophic, of course.

But keep hammering that irrelevant popular vote. It won't count for anything more in 2020 than it did in 2016.

There may be a few less illegal immigrants to inflate it, though, and a few more citizens happier with their jobs and tax breaks.

Think President Trump an idiot all that you want, but he is still a successful businessman and performer, knows how to influence the right people, surrounds himself with good advisers, beat the Republican establishment, the media, the Democrat establishment, the Clinton mafia, and the "most-qualified presidential candidate ever".

Like it or not, those who underestimate him do so at their peril.

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #333 on: February 08, 2018, 20:49:06 »
Calm down.

Draft dodging, or perhaps more properly "draft evasion", is nothing more or less that a "successful attempt to elude government-imposed obligation to serve in the military service of one's nation". In can be either legal or illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_evasion

The term can be used pejoratively or non-judgmentally or even as an honorific. Many who evaded the Vietnam draft refer to themselves quite proudly as draft dodgers. How any one of us views the term is quite subjective.

 [cheers]

Anyway it is a poor subject for this board. The draft dodger dig seems to me to be meant as a cheap shot at President Trump. I don't want to play into the game. I will never mention it again.
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 206,392
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,209
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #334 on: February 08, 2018, 20:56:05 »
I could care less that he dodged the draft.  Plenty did.  It was a complicated time.  I accept that.

There is a difference between those who found legal deferments (and those who went to jail instead, like Muhammad Ali) and those who dodged. Some/many of those deferments may have been given by sympathetic doctors and the odds of a rich man or celebrity getting one were indubitably greater than those of somebody of lesser status, yes, but can one truly blame somebody for seeking a way out if one was available? I do have more respect for Muhammad Ali and those who stayed true to their conscience and suffered because of it than those who obtained invalid/fraudulent deferments, but we will never know who did and who did not.

I still sympathize with those who actually dodged, though. Vietnam was not a war of national survival as the previous World Wars were, and was not fought well at the political or upper-military levels.

I have much less sympathy, though (like about zero) for more modern deserters, who voluntarily accepted the benefits of their training yet ran when it came to actually perform their jobs for real.

But he’s attacked people’s service, some people’s sacrifice and now he wants a parade.  Most of those other dodgers like Biden haven’t done those things.  So yeah, he’s in a category all on his own.

Yes, extremely bad form, but some of the claims may not have been completely valid, nor have there been all that many (not that that excuses valid ones).

Hillary was more discrete, but Marine One aircrew gave the callsign "Broomstick 1" and she was known to disdain and berate her security people and have them carry her luggage rather than protect her. The Secretary of State's security detail used to be considered a plum job until she occupied that position, then senior staff stopped bidding on it and left it for their more junior colleagues. And she left good people die unnecessarily in Benghazi - and then lied about it and brushed it off: "What difference does it make?"

Whatever President Trump's failings and imperfections, they pale by comparison. It could have been much worse.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #335 on: February 08, 2018, 21:03:37 »
Hillary Clinton not being president is why I'm not too hard on Trump.

That and suddenly a lot of NATO countries are making their way to 2 percent of GDP spent on defense,  France being the latest.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

angus555

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #336 on: February 08, 2018, 21:31:51 »
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/08/george-w-bush-says-theres-pretty-clear-evidence-russia-meddled-in-2016-us-election.html

This piece was posted before your post.

Couldn't find it on their main page, still can't. Must be fake news. It was copy pasted from AP anyway.

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #337 on: February 08, 2018, 21:37:58 »
Couldn't find it on their main page, still can't. Must be fake news. It was copy pasted from AP anyway.

It's under the Politics sub-page of their site.
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

angus555

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #338 on: February 08, 2018, 21:59:56 »
It's under the Politics sub-page of their site.

I had to knock twice on the back door to find it.

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #339 on: February 08, 2018, 22:15:04 »
I had to knock twice on the back door to find it.

Well all stories are just not front page news.

Here is what President Bush said on the subject of ex-presidents talking about current presidents.

http://www.businessinsider.com/george-w-bush-why-i-refuse-to-criticize-obama-2014-11

Quote
"I don't think it's good for the country to have a former president undermine a current president; I think it's bad for the presidency for that matter," Bush said, according to video posted by Mediaite.

A link to the video mentioned.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/bush-tells-hannity-why-he-refuses-to-criticize-obama/
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 482,690
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,710
    • The job.

Offline Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 82,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,824
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #341 on: February 12, 2018, 09:26:45 »
Andrew C. McCarthyis a bestselling author, Contributing Editor at National Review & Fellow at NR Inst. Former Chief Asst. U.S. Attorney

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456287/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier

Grassley-Graham Memo Affirms Nunes Memo — Media Yawns by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY - 10 Feb 18
We need a full-blown investigation of how the FISA court came to grant warrants to spy on Carter Page.

In a word, the Grassley-Graham memo is shocking.

Yet, the press barely notices. Rest assured: If a Republican administration had used unverifiable hearsay from a patently suspect agent of the Republican presidential candidate to gull the FISA court into granting a warrant to spy on an associate of the Democratic nominee’s campaign, it would be covered as the greatest political scandal in a half-century.

Instead, it was the other way around. The Grassley-Graham memo corroborates the claims in the Nunes memo: The Obama Justice Department and FBI used anonymously sourced, Clinton-campaign generated innuendo to convince the FISA court to issue surveillance warrants against Carter Page, and in doing so, they concealed the Clinton campaign’s role. Though the Trump campaign had cut ties with Page shortly before the first warrant was issued in October 2016, the warrant application was based on wild allegations of a corrupt conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Moreover, the warrant meant the FBI could seize not only Page’s forward-going communications but any past emails and texts he may have stored — i.e., his Trump campaign communications.

With its verification by the Grassley-Graham memo, the Nunes memo now has about a thousand times more corroboration than the Steele dossier, the basis of the heinous allegations used by the Justice Department and FBI to get the FISA warrants.

What the Grassley-Graham memo tells us is that the Nunes memo, for all the hysteria about it, was tame. The Grassley-Graham memo tells us that we need not only a full-blown investigation of what possessed the Obama administration to submit such shoddy applications to the FISA court, but of how a judge — or perhaps as many as four judges — rationalized signing the warrants.

We need full disclosure — the warrants, the applications, the court proceedings. No more games.

Continued at link.

Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 151,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,747
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #342 on: February 12, 2018, 21:05:05 »
On the one hand:

Quote
Trump proposes huge increase in military spending
 David S. Cloud

The Trump administration on Monday proposed a defense budget of $716 billion for fiscal 2019, part of an ambitious effort to substantially boost Pentagon spending after years of tight budget limits and refocus the military on countering Russia and China.

The budget blueprint, combined with a defense boost that Congress approved last week, would increase Pentagon accounts for weapons, troops, training and for nuclear arms programs run by the Energy Department by more than $74 billion, a 10% increase over current spending levels.

The budget "is what we need to bring us back to a position of primacy," Defense Secretary James N. Mattis told reporters on a flight to Rome late Sunday, citing plans to buy more F-18 fighters, train more Air Force mechanics, and create new cyberwarfare units as examples of how the money will be spent.

Trump's budget plan was released weeks after the Pentagon issued a national security strategy that called for a shift away from battling terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda and Islamic State, and retooling the military to deter and, if necessary, fight nuclear-armed adversaries such as Russia, China or North Korea.

Though President Trump has frequently called for improving relations with Moscow and enlisting Beijing to put diplomatic pressure on North Korea, Pentagon officials are far more explicit about what they claim is a growing threat from Russia and China to U.S. allies in Europe and Asia.

"It is increasingly apparent that China and Russia want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian values," Undersecretary of Defense David L. Norquist said Monday at a Pentagon news briefing. "We recognize that, if unaddressed, our eroding U.S. military advantage versus China and Russia could undermine our ability to deter aggression and coercion in key strategic regions."

The call for a substantial increase in defense spending also comes months after two Navy guided-missile destroyers collided with civilian cargo ships in the western Pacific, killing 17 sailors. The accidents galvanized concerns by lawmakers and at the top levels of the Pentagon that congressional-mandated spending caps since 2011 had harmed readiness and training in the armed services.

Pentagon officials long have complained that the spending caps had left some combat units unprepared to fight and had delayed maintenance on crucial equipment while the military was still engaged in conflicts around the globe.

With the spending caps lifted at least for the next two years, most major Pentagon accounts would receive budget increases. The money would go for more training, more interceptors for ballistic missile defense, new missile-carrying submarines, a planned new bomber, and modernization of aging nuclear warheads.

The increase in defense spending that lawmakers approved last week went beyond what the White House had initially sought — $603 billion for the base Pentagon budget, with another $65 billion for war-related costs.

"It's a big jump for fiscal 2018 and fiscal 2019 compared to where we are,'" said Todd Harrison, a defense budget specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonpartisan think tank.

In broad terms, the new budget proposal recommends $617 billion for the base Pentagon budget and $69 billion more for the wars in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and other ongoing military operations.

Another $30 billion would go to the National Nuclear Security Administration, the Energy Department agency that oversees nuclear weapons research. That's an increase of $1.69 billion for weapons activities, including upgrading and building new nuclear warheads.

Trump's proposal now goes to Congress, which is likely to adjust some specifics. The overall spending levels were worked out, however, in an ambitious two-year budget deal reached last Friday with congressional leaders from both parties.

Among the most expensive proposals would increase the size of the active-duty armed forces by 25,900 by next year and by 56,600 by 2023.

The active-duty Army would expand the most, going from a 2018 authorized level of 476,000 to 495,500 over the next six years. By 2023, the Navy would increase by 16,900, the Marine Corps by 1,400, and the Air Force by 13,700, increasing the active-duty military to 1,365,500.

The number of Air Force combat squadrons would increase from 55 to 58 by 2023.

Personnel increases are costly because they include benefits and salary, as well as the costs of training and equipping new service members. Even those increases do not restore the military to the force it was at the height of the Iraq war in 2009, when total active-duty strength was 1.4 million.

Despite the spending hike, the increase is not likely to relieve pressure on many parts of the armed forces anytime soon, Harrison said.

It takes years to recruit and train new forces, and although Pentagon officials want to refocus on preparing for war against other major powers, U.S. forces are still deployed in substantial numbers in Afghanistan, Iraq and other hot spots fighting insurgents and other unconventional foes.

"Our forces are overstretched because of the current operational tempo, and it's not a budget issue. It's a strategy issue," Harrison said. "That's something the [Defense] department hasn't really grappled with."

Missile-defense batteries at Ft. Greely, Alaska, and at Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County would gain up to 44 more interceptor missiles, a move that comes in response to North Korea's development of ballistic missiles with the range to strike the continental United States.

The Pentagon would spend $48.9 billion in Afghanistan, nearly $2 billion more than last year, while the fight against Islamic State in Iraq and Syrian would receive $15.3 billion, an increase of $2.3 billion over last year.

The proposal also includes $6.5 billion to place more tanks, armored vehicles and other combat equipment in Europe, part of a Pentagon plan to reassure allies nervous about Russian military aggressiveness in central Europe.

Trump has asked the Pentagon to develop options for a major military parade in Washington this year, similar to one he watched last year in Paris that included French tanks, missiles and troops. The administration budget proposal does not clearly set aside money for moving those forces to the capital.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-trump-defense-20180212-story.html

On the other:

Quote
Can Big Bird survive Trump?
By MATTHEW NUSSBAUM

President Donald Trump overcame more than a dozen Republican opponents, Hillary Clinton, an array of scandals and daunting electoral math to land in the Oval Office. But now, he may have finally met an opponent he cannot slay: Big Bird.

The Trump administration on Thursday unveiled a budget proposal that would entirely eliminate federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the publicly funded radio and television entity that includes NPR, PBS and about 1,500 affiliated stations. The move would save about $485 million — about 0.0137 percent of total federal spending.

“When you start looking at places that we reduce spending, one of the questions we asked was can we really continue to ask a coal miner in West Virginia or a single mom in Detroit to pay for these programs? The answer was no,” Trump’s Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Thursday morning. “We can ask them to pay for defense, and we will, but we can’t ask them to continue to pay for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.”

(“Actually coal miners pay little in federal taxes,” Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler pointed out on Twitter.)

For rest of article see here:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-budget-corporation-for-public-broadcasting-236125

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #343 on: February 12, 2018, 23:13:15 »
And its only going to cost...

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2018/02/12/us/politics/white-house-budget-congress.amp.html

Quote
The White House budget request would add $984 billion to the federal deficit next year, despite proposed cuts to programs like Medicare and food stamps and despite leaner budgets across federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Trump’s budget statement calls deficits the harbingers of a “desolate” future, but the White House plan would add $7 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years.



I remember campaign trail trump saying he was going to slash 19 trillion off the debt over 8 years.  About that.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 151,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,747
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #344 on: February 12, 2018, 23:31:34 »
Just for perspective:

Quote
2016 Defence Expenditures by country (US$ in Billions) and (% of GDP)
1   United States   611.2   3.3
2   China           215.7   1.9
3   Russia           69.2      5.3
4   Saudi Arabia   63.7      10
5   India                   55.9      2.5
6   France France   55.7      2.3
7   United Kingdom   48.3      1.9
8   Japan Japan   46.1      1.0
9   Germany           41.1      1.2
15   Israel           17.8      5.8
16   Canada           15.5      1.0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

 :cheers:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 151,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,747
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #345 on: February 13, 2018, 00:57:24 »
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,789
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,010
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #346 on: February 13, 2018, 03:39:19 »
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/12/budget-congress-deficit-hawks-406863?lo=ap_c1

Quote
I would say there’s probably never been a more discouraging time for those concerned about the debt and the deficit because even our allies have taken a powder,” said Bradford Cook, a New Hampshire lawyer and longtime donor to the Concord Coalition, which advocates for fiscal responsibility in Washington.

“I used to be optimistic that we might be able to have some influence,” Cook added. Now, “we’re kind of that voice crying in the wilderness.”

After deficits ballooned during the last recession, President Barack Obama established a bipartisan commission charged with figuring out how to rein things in, known as Simpson-Bowles after its co-chairmen, former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) and Erskine Bowles.

While Obama and Republicans in Congress failed to strike a “grand bargain” based on the commission’s recommendations, annual deficits shrunk anyway due to spending cuts, the expiration of some of President George W. Bush’s tax cuts and an improving economy.

President Donald Trump vowed during the 2016 campaign that he’d go further, telling The Washington Post he’d get rid of the full national debt — which at the time stood at more than $19 trillion — within eight years if he won. (The Post’s fact-checker ruled that impossible and chided him for “insulting the intelligence of Americans” by suggesting it could be done.)
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 151,090
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,747
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • WordPress Page
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #347 on: February 14, 2018, 00:13:25 »
New outrage of the day: "Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement." -- "Dog whistle"  ;D

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sessions-draws-fire-anglo-american-heritage-remark-sheriffs/story?id=53038847

You just can't make this stuff up.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" book series at:
https://wolfriedel.wordpress.com

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 212,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,329
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: U.S. Politics 2018
« Reply #348 on: February 14, 2018, 00:42:05 »
New outrage of the day: "Anglo-American heritage of law enforcement." -- "Dog whistle"  ;D

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sessions-draws-fire-anglo-american-heritage-remark-sheriffs/story?id=53038847

You just can't make this stuff up.

 [cheers]

I am outraged, and blame the Norman Invasion of 1066 for this travesty of Justice  :sarcasm:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline kkwd

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 67,577
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 464
Low quality
Low effort
High drag
Low speed