perhaps not Old, but what difference does that make at this point?

Would it have saved the Afghans, Yazidi, Christians, and Iraqis?

Would it have saved the Americans from atoning for the sins of their past, when they allowed the Demoncrats to live and obtain more power?

What difference at this point, does it make Old.

I think the general gist is interesting even if the specific appellation of brat is not accurate. Because even the 2.0 Slaves of the Democrat South had house slaves who were living in relative comfort. People tend to be content with their lot in life, if they have someone worse off to look at and spit on. Which would be the field slaves and the slaves used to breed more stock and wealth out there in the shacks.

That bit about desert life toughening up a generation is also true. The Islamic Jihad back in Mohammed’s day used to send their children off to be raised by nannies in the desert.

I’m not a full fledged trump supporter but I do like the idea that he is giving the Establishment Republicans the fits.

My preference would be
Cruz because he seems to have intelligence and a backbone and conservative principles. But I don’t know if the General Population would follow.

Walker and Carson are maybes. Why?
I give Walker points on his actions in WI but he seems wishy washy on immigration and taking a hard line on other topics.

Carson is a very “nice” person but I think the establishment republicans would roll him in a NY minute,

Carley is a maybe and we will see what she has to say.

So since it is 15 months till the election, I’ll see what each candidate says and form my opinion then.

If it is Bushy, I’ll be sitting it out but otherwise I will give Trump credit for stirring the pot and at least voicing some ideas that I embrace. I may be wrong in my views but at this point in time at least Trump gives the idea that he is a Pit bull rather than a lap dog 🙂

Wingers is a British term. It may be spelled Whingers. Pronounced Win-Jerz

Secondly, in referring to the apocalypse seekers just examine the proposition that electing an establishment Republican is measurably better than electing a Democrat or Socialist. The establishment Republicans may voice some level of support for important issues and outline differences between themselves and the opposition, but they have failed miserably at half-hearted attempts to influence policy. The current cadre of leaders aren’t.

They blame their failures on a lack of a super majority, or that it simply cannot be done. In any important disagreement of policy with the Administration they immediately surrender they’re most power weapon; the power of the purse. They have no idea on how to conduct asymmetrical political warfare, the refuse to stand on principles (as if they had any), and they believe that the nation cannot go on without their unique talent in the Senate or House. They attack other Republicans far more viciously than any Democrat, and go after their supporters as well.

If the US had briefly defaulted on its debt in 2011, I believe that most of the President’s agenda would have failed to be implemented. I am certain that we would have about 1.6 trillion dollars less debt. Yes, there would have been more short term economic hardship, but not the long term stagnation that we seem to be stuck in.

So for me the argument to “stay the course” with the leadership or party that we have doesn’t have any merit. I myself am not for an economic apocalypse, but without some drastic corrective action there is no way out.

Politically we are trapped like a marble oscillating in a bowl; first up one side, then down through the center and the up the other. This is cruel dynamic stability.

We need, at least for a brief time, to turn the bowl upside down and let the marble roll off into some other unknown and unknowable state.

A drop in the bucket for the various marks of the con artists.

But you’ve got plenty of non-moderate presidential candidates to vote for besides Trump. Plenty.

Your argument would make some sense if it was just Trump vs. Bush, let’s say. It’s not even remotely that.

The “doing the same thing” would be voting for Trump, who of all the candidates most resembles Obama in temperament and experience at governing.

You’ve got plenty of alternatives that are not business as usual. You’re not taking them, because you’re pissed at Boehner and McConnell and people like them in Congress. But guess what? Boehner and McConnell are not running for president.

“Brat” is about the most inappropriate word I can think of.

“Hardened by desert life”? How about “hardened by slavery”? “Brats” means “a badly behaved spoiled child”—one who has been indulged, given too much, coddled.

The Hebrews in Egypt were always described as slaves, and whether they were farmers or workers or whatever their actual labor, it was hard labor with few or no privileges: hardship and suffering. “This is the bread of affliction…” Read the entire Passover service and it is about this, not about brats with privilege!

I’m sorry, but I don’t care who said that about “brats,” it’s actually one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard, whether it come from Jews or Prager or whoever it comes from.

Having a slave mentality, not thinking for yourselves, not being independent and self-reliant, that was their problem, not brat-dom. And yes, they complained, and some worshipped the Golden Calf, but it was not because they were brats, it was because they clung to their old safe ways and did not know how to be independent either in mind or action.