Conservative Politics & Daily Events Discussion

    There are a whole bunch of ignorant U.S. taught people who are the way they are because of a agenda. What agenda? Look at the media and leftists and take a guess. It sure gets my blood pressure up seeing the violence on all corners of the streets no matter who is standing on those corners.
    I just go back to if you mean me no harm or anyone I know I'm happy to say your my brother or sister. If anything other, your my enemy! People just can't seem to get along since the beginning of man.
    That pitched fork MF is always on the move..

    Ok I've got two things that could work.
    Everyone listen to some John Denver and chill the fuck out!
    This one could work if I had enough coin. I'd buy everyone a Slingshot. Then maybe there wouldn't be time to get into mischief because everyone would be working to purchase mods! :thumbsup:

    On Friday, the Trump administration released their annual reportto Congress on White House Office Personnel. It includes the name, status,salary and position title of all 377 White House employees. The report alsosaid that Trump decided not to take a dime of his salary, instead, he donatedit to an amazing cause! (see below)
    The report also showed that President Trump is far better atsaving money than Obama was. The total annual White House salaries under trumpare $35.8 million vs. $40.9 under Obama, a savings of $5.1 million.


    Here are some other key findings:


    There are 110 fewer employees on White House staff under Trump than under Obamaat this point in their respective presidencies.
    Nineteen fewer staffers are dedicated to The First Lady of the UnitedStates (FLOTUS). Currently, there are five staffers dedicated to Melania Trumpvs. 24 staffers who served Michelle Obama (FY2009).
    ...
    However, it’s what the report said Trump did with this salary that has everyonetalking!


    Instead of taking his salary, Trump donated all $400,000 to the Departmentof the Interior where it will be used for construction and repair needs atmilitary cemeteries! AMAZING! It’s so great to have a President who loves ourbrave military men and women so much!


    Oh, and where’s the media coverage of this? Oh, that’s right, they don’t coveranything good that the President does.

    @EjFord too many people believe the "fake news" never reports on the good the President does. Most of those people don't watch or read those outlets considered "fake news" by the President. They are then left believing FAKE reports about "fake news" not reporting on good things Trump does. ?(


    Here are some screen shots of a simple Google search. All "fake news" outlets have articles about his donated salaries. I have also seen them report it on the T.V. and even heard about it on the radio (I tend to listen to The Patriot more than NPR or CBS News Radio, but they all spoke about it each time)



    EDIT: I read some of those articles. Most of the "fake news" sites added accurate info in an attempt to take away from Trumps generosity. They reported that as he donated that first $78k(post tax) check to Dept. of Parks, he was trying to pass a $350m cut to the Dept. of Parks budget. I understand why they bring it up, as it's very relative to the topic. However, it was his money he gave away and with our national debt, cuts need to be made wherever possible.

    Kessler claims it's false.



    Then again...that is exactly what an undercover Liberal would say. Crap, that gets us nowhere. :D An Alt-right rally leader would be visibly upset to be called an Obama supporter. An Obama supporter, masquerading as an Alt-right rally leader would be equally upset to have his cover blown in public...Crap, that gets us nowhere. :S

    I normally try to avoid these threads with a passion, but here goes. The so-called "Fake News" did indeed report that Trump was donating his salary to the Depts of the Interior and Education, so far this year. Unfortunately, the White House budget proposal also has far larger cuts to those agencies budgets.


    Having an Opposition Media has long been credited as a strength of any Democracy as it tends to force the government to respond to the people. At the same time, an Opposition Media tends to draw those who do not feel they are benefiting from the status quo, so journalists are often seen as "them" by those who enjoy the current system. FOX News was created with the explicit intention of promoting a conservative, predominantly Republican Party-supporting media outlet, making it the Opposition Media at the time of its creation during the Clinton Administration.


    Now on to the Founding Fathers. I heard a discussion on this topic on NPR today that pointed out that most of the Founding Fathers did indeed own slaves (even Benjamin Franklin owned 2 slaves until Pennsylvania outlawed slavery). The justification for not deleting/removing/minimizing their positions in history is that despite their faults, they did lay the foundation in the Constitution that eventually resulted in the true implementation of "all men are created equal" , freedoms that were eventually extended to include women, something I doubt the Founding fathers even considered at the time. Had slavery been outlawed under the Constitution, the United States of America would never have come into existence in any form remotely close to what we have today and probably would not have survived.


    As far as Civil War figures are concerned, there were many good military leaders who deserve recognition for that leadership, in history books or museums, but their attempts to preserve a system that was built on the backs of slaves shouldn't necessarily receive public glorification. General Lee turned his back on the US when he supported the South, but was nonetheless a great General who won many battles despite the adverse conditions he had to operate under being far less supported in men and materiel by the Confederacy than the Union Generals were. I don' remember the exact quote, but Grant was reported to have praised Lee's superb military leadership, but also criticized Lee for his efforts that would have preserved the institution of slavery had Lee prevailed. I think it was in Ken Burns ' Civil War documentary that Lee was reported to have resolutely marched out of step once he left military service. An interesting article about Lee's feelings about monuments to the Confederacy (according to his writings, he wasn't in favor of them) can be found here - Actually, Robert E. Lee was against erecting Confederate memorials - CNN. Lee, a slave owner, was critical of the institution years befoer the Civil War (see the CNN article).
    As far as the monuments all over the South, while some may see them as honoring historical figures, those monuments are also symbols of a system of oppression that is no longer tolerated. Many of those monuments were created as direct reminders of the system of slavery and the conditions in effect at that time, often reflecting racist attitudes in their dedications. I have heard some folks say that the monuments to Civil War leaders also belong in museums, but there are far more monuments than there are available museums.


    Many people claim the Civil War was about State's Rights, but in this case, State's Rights really meant the continuation of slavery. The Confederate States Vice President, Alexander Stephens, said in his Cornerstone Speech/Address on March 21, 1861, that the perpetuation of slavery was the principal goal and purpose of the secession and the Confederacy. I heard someone comment today that while the Civil War resulted in the emancipation of the slaves, the under-culture that slaves were not the equal of whites and the failure of our society to address that idea has resulted in the racial problems we face today. The racial stereotypes on which slavery was founded were on display in the comments from the Neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, VA over the weekend.


    On another topic, while many conservatives, especially those in the South and East seem to classify NPR as a liberal mouthpiece, many Americans in rural communities find NPR as a reliable source of news and items of local relevance. Personally, I feel NPR is probably the most balanced of all broadcast operations.

    Quote from Thomas Sleight

    1943 US War Department released to tell Americans not to fall for fascist rhetoric.



    Interesting piece of history .... it is also interesting how the ultimate point made from 2:00 on can be attributed to the modern push of identity politics ... same premise...different names .....


    ......

    :REDSS: The ghost of SLingshot past ......

    You know what kills me on all of this? People have the right to be stupid -- it's a Constitutionally protected right (within some boundaries). So, if a group of people want to get together to be stupid, and file the appropriate paperwork, and be peaceful, they have that right. Hell, I signed up to fight for their right to be stupid.


    Now, I've started to think about stupid people like 2 year olds. If the toddler/stupid person is not crying/whining/etc, then you can usually correct them in their behavior. Say a friend says something stupid/ignorant/etc, and you say "not in front of me", or "here's the data that shows you're wrong" or "(smack upside the head) stop being an idiot". You corrected the problem, and have begun encouraging change in the child's behavior. When the toddler is having a tantrum, you ignore it (or smack their butts, depending on your personal parenting style). So how does that affect a stupid person? When you have a group of stupid people whining, crying, and otherwise throwing a temper tantrum, and you remove the attention from them, then you remove their power. Remove their power, remove their ability to affect you, and remove their motivation to throw the tantrum. Stop the tantrum, and you can attempt to change the child's behavior. Is it a fast process? No. Is it effective? Yes.


    So what's my point? Take the recent "Alt-Right" rally. If no news source had covered it, if no one had counter-protested, if no on had cared that a group of stupid people were getting together to have a stupidity tantrum, you take the power away from the movement. Instead, by acknowledging their stupidity, you give them power, you give them a box to stand on, and you give them the visibility to spread their stupidity. Had the stupidity tantrum gone unacknowledged, the coverage could have been limited to "stupid people have stupid tantrum in VA", and that would have been the end of it. A good answer, no, but one that could be used to work towards a peaceful behavioral change. Instead, we have 24/7 coverage, and now 9 other stupidity tantrum rallies are scheduled.


    People are/can be smart. Large groups of people are inherently stupid.


    **Disclaimer: For those who do not know me, and if it is not apparent in this writing, I am by no means a supporter of the Alt-Right. In fact, I generally do not support any form of stupidity, but as long as it's legal, it's you're right. I do not condone racism/sexism/genderism/culturalism/whatevertheeffthenew-ismistoday, nor do I condone inciting riots/damaging property/doing anything illegal other than speeding and the occasional parking issue.

    Well said my girl - I'll always back ya - after all you paid me the best compliment EVER while sippin cocktails - I quote "you make Rush Limbaugh look like a liberal" - kiss the kids for me .... throw in one for @KayTwo - I know he needs one :love::love::love::love::00008359:

    I might not be right but I can sure sound like it