snafu

Kasich is not conservative.

Ask Pearl. He will tell you over and over again.

.......think like me ?.

Davis trashing Trump can easily be seen as Cohen trashing Trump. Whether anything comes from the innuendo that Davis spews or not, it isn't a good look for Cohen or Trump.

I'm having a hard time (a) seeing how hush money is a campaign contribution, and (b) blaming Trump for following the advice of his counsel.

Past Presidents actually do matter because you're comparing Trump to the way past presidents have acted. When Obama got elected, I'm sure you remember that he was considered to be from outside the beltway (today's swamp). He had a hard time working with Congress and that's why he used his pen and phone instead. To a lot of people, there's little to no integrity or honesty in circumventing regular Constitutional process because the President can't negotiate deals with the opposition in another branch of government. Now, because Trump is loud and obnoxious and dishonest, is that worse than Obama who was reserved and self-possessed and dishonest? We got to this point because the 2016 election left us with a choice between two candidates that have zero integrity. Once Trump isn't running anymore (probably the 2024 election) it will be interesting to see who comes out of the primaries.

I don't think right and wrong should be dispensed with. I see that they are, however, and have been for decades. I agree with you that we deserve more than what we get. ...And I don't need to look all the way into my heart of hearts to see Trump for what he is. He knows what's right, he chooses too often to ignore it and it is frustrating. You've also got to admit somewhat that the way he's been treated is like bear baiting. It exacerbates his dooshiness.

It isn't total BS. I'm saying that normal rules of morality and honesty and pure motives get corrupted at the highest levels of politics. That's when and where too many who haven't been taught the right way to act (or who have been taught and forgot) latch on for power or greed or selfish profit. Of course there are good people in politics, but obviously not enough. My kids know right and wrong, and so far so good I've taught them. Mrs. Snafu has taught them.

Yep. Good reading.

Then don't let your kids run as candidates in a Presidential campaign. Every one can be investigated and found to be indiscreet at best, and criminal at worst. They all walk around like that Pigpen character in Peanuts, in their own cloud of filth and lies. Every candidate lies and every President does, too. The Cohen plea deal is the direct result of and investigation of a person (Trump), not an event. Muellers task was to find Russian collusion by Trump. That's so nebulous that the only way to proceed is to pick at everyone who was around him. When you investigate a person -- especially someone like Trump -- you will find crap to throw on him. Find me a candidate that this isn't true for. This is why no normal-minded person would want to run. While you're telling your kids the right way to act, add that they should stay out of politics. Character and values didn't exist in the 2016 election on either side, and it's been a downward swirl ever since.

I disagree, nothing like a showy public example to keep the masses cowed.

Is that a quote from the preface to "What Happened"?

Or, you can keep them alive to harvest their spare organs -- like they do in China. https://www.newsweek.com/china-forces-its-political-prisoners-sell-body-parts-421799

I remember. Ecuador didn't create the Venezuelan mess, but they certainly were cheerleaders of Chavez every time he tried to put a stick into America's eye. Yeah, the plan now it to tie their currency to their own cryptocurrency which is backed by their oil exports. These two articles explain how badly that's going to turn out. https://www.businessinsider.com/venezuelas-oil-criss-cant-be-stopped-2018-3 https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/05/07/how-venezuela-ruined-its-oil-industry/#b15a88f7399d

Ecuador already tightened up their border. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-45237368

Again, I never called anything genocide. Why do you have a hard time comprehending that? And, yes, killing someone is a crime. Good start. You're about three steps away from getting my point. You come across as very frustrated, but keep going and you might comprehend what I'm trying to say.

Jimmy's down!!!!!

Sunday is going to feel similar to when I taught my kids how to drive. Buckle up, brace for impact, hope for the best. Shout a lot of instructions.

Maduro: "It's not 'puke', it's 'vomit'."

"I wax my moustache with my own bellybutton gunk"!

Those tarps look like invitations for limitless mischief.

I actually didn't initially bring up Yugoslavia. It is sad that you can't understand what I wrote -- yet you get so worked up. Re-read it. I've been really consistent. All I need to do is find one example. Here is one of many. It took me ten seconds to find it. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-31/south-african-farm-murders/10013298

I never used the word genocide, fool. You keep throwing that word around. You keep mentioning mass graves. I'm just trying to point out to you that it is irrelevant how many people are turned out of their homes and land with the pretext being their ethnicity. It is wrong by any number and it is wrong in any location.

I'm not making an argument. I asked you a question, twice. You said that what's going on in South Africa isn't the same as what happened in Yugoslavia. Why is better that fewer people are killed for the same reason? If you don't want to answer that, then maybe you'll answer this: why don't Black South Africans also attack Black South African farmers and take their land, too?

Yeah, that's how the Serbs justified it, too. https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/10/11/how-a-war-criminal-justifies-ethnic-cleansing/ So what's the difference?