The "flag" looks very real to me. What is your problem with securing the border one week before the election when it is a response to a serious problem which is occurring one week before an election. Should Trump have, without warning, waited till after the election to act?

Strongest country huge military. Beacon to the free world is afraid of 3000 brown mostly women and children it’s realy Pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do you have any idea what deployment means how it works what’s involved. I would say no... nor does. Trump he just knows how it sounds and the optics even if false looks .. the military has no teleportation ability’s I am aware of
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

fine. let them all live on your street. skin color
has nothing to do with it, but not suprising that you immediately went there, the last card of the desperate.

very easy for people who never have to see the effects of mass illegal immigration, to claim to be all for it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

wdmso, we can’t take everybody, which means we can only take some. is it fair to make it a land rush, to only let in those who shove their way to the front of the line? what about people in africa who patiently wait yearsbfor a chance to comenlegally.

set up a set of fair rules, and abide by those rules. Why is that unfair or racist? Please explain...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

US mid-terms latest: Trump vows to end birthright citizenship Another stunt
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where do you get the idea that the caravan is mostly women and children? That alone should disqualify any idea you have about it or what we should be "afraid" of.

You selectively, purposefully, couch the issue in terms of fear and race, and that is what is "rally pathetic."

Just saying sending the military is a stunt .. I never suggested let them all in nor would I ... just another attempt to sow misinformation and more conspiracy theorists will some how chime in on how Soros or terrorist Or disease need to be stopped.. you can’t govern by fear alone but he is trying hard
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What does my idea of what deployment means have to do with this. The military is handling the deployment, not me nor Trump. The military representative in the video was confident about the deployment. If you have a problem with it, argue with the military command, not with me.

So cloaking it national security or invasion which it is not .., is more legitimate than calling it what it is brown people with no weapons mostly women and children . Trying to improve their lives ... is Causing the POTUS to deploy the military to defend our boarders your right it’s pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Where do you get the idea that the caravan is mostly women and children?"

because if he frames it that way, it makes Republicans look as ugly as possible. Who cares i fit's remotely true? Why not say that they're all UNICEF orphans?

"You selectively, purposefully, couch the issue in terms of fear and race"

Of course he does. That's liberalism.

The military do as they are told the illusion Trump want to show he is fixing it... it will take weeks to plan move and become operational.. after nov 6th he won’t care until the next election
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He's not governing by fear alone. We still have courts and the constitution to protect us from him.

It's the resistance to Trump, that I see using fear. He's Hitler! All the women will die if Kavanaugh is on the court! Trump wants to kill everybody! Who will save us???!!

Meanwhile, very quietly, back unemployment and black poverty are at the lowest levels ever recorded. Very quietly, GDP grew by 4.3% in the 2Q and by 3.5% (I think) in 3Q. And almost all of us have a little more take-home pay. As hard as you try to deny it, that's good for you.

What are you afraid would happen, if you admitted that he has been good for the economy?

How The military is handling the "stunt." The military has a history of creating successful "stunts." Even war is loaded with "stunts." If they achieve a victory, "stunts" may be less costly than actual battle.

Nice that you gratuitously throw in "misinformation . . . conspiracy theorists . . . Soros . . . terrorist Or disease" and then throw in "can't govern by fear alone but he is trying hard." Yet it is you and others on this forum who constantly stoke up fear against Trump by warning us about how dangerous he is. The mirror on the wall awaits you.

And, just for the record, Trump has done many things (good things in the eyes of "conservatives") in governing without resorting to fear. But your conspiracy laden, fear and racist inspired opinions have no room for anything other than that he is a dangerous, destructive monster.

That's liberalism. The other side can never be right on any issue, can never have a good idea. They can only be demonized.

Wait, I thought liberals are the tolerant ones?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sure they are the tolerant ones, just ask them, they'll tell ya.

I think RFK put it well and he would likely be considered a centrist today.

Robert F. Kennedy put his finger on the inadequacy of gross domestic product in his March 1968 speech in Lawrence, Kan.: GDP “counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage,” he said.

And yet, Kennedy continued, GDP “does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”

As far as Trump and Trumplicans are concerned, the only things that have any value are those things that can fetch a price.

amazing, then, that no data suggests that liberals are more generous or charitable than conservatives. but you won’t let silly things like facts get in the way of ranting against those who disagree with you, will you?

so now that you hate the POTUS, we aren’t supposed to talk about the economy because that’s materialistic.

Sick in the head with hate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Try a little recreational sex, it's good for you.

“Tomorrow the migrants, according to Fox News reporting, are more than two months away — if any of them actually come here,” Smith said on the air Monday. “But tomorrow is one week before the midterm election, which is what all of this is about.”
Why Surprise, Surprise, Surprise

No, it's a heavily armed infantry division of MS-13 and ISIS commandos all dripping with HIV, typhus and small pox who plan to hide in a very large wooden rabbit for the border crossing where they'll sneak out at night and capture Washington DC, burn the Constitution and enslave rural Americans.

I know you're asking, but how would the rabbit get across the border?

Pelosi.

Great example of rule no. 5 in Alinsky's Rules For Radicals. Another example of extremism disguised as discussion. Brillliant contribution. Typical of you.

Actually it's just called sarcasm as witness to a political train wreck.

Uhhhh . . . the "caravans" are one of the main news stories of TODAY not just what stories about them that may exist two months from now. And the reportage is crying for Trump's response. Which puts him on the defensive JUST BEFORE THE ELECTION.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise--your gibberish is almost intelligent sounding.

Same thing as Alinsky rule no. 5. You did it again. You got anything else . . . like something that intelligently moves the conversation along?

You use the RFK quote as a straw-mannish idiotic tautology. You set up GDP as lacking something it does not purport to measure. Then you seem to accuse it, by implication, of only doing that which it purports to do--speak of those things that involve a price. And from that you loosely slide that into meaning that Trump and Trumplicans only value things that fetch a price.

As usual, there is a vast unexplored space between your argument and your conclusion. One doesn't necessarily follow the other. Just because a Trumplican puts value in GDP, does not mean that he values nothing else.

i'm sure that Jim values other things than GDP which make "life worthwhile."

every time you predict a political train wreck for trump and the republicans it ends up turning out really well for them...keep those predictions coming :claps:

Right, because if I think rising GDP is a good thing, I can't simultaneously care about kids being happy and seniors being comfortable. Nope, hoping for a robust GDP, according to him, necessarily means I can't care about anything else.

Think about how stupid this is. You and I have argued multiple times about my liberal position of free healthcare for congenital conditions. And yet I also root for robust GDP, and I also foster rescue dogs. How can that be? I am excited about tax cuts, yet I also want small class sizes for schoolchildren. How is that possible?

That was a really, really dumb argument.

You claimed that people who root for a healthy economy, cannot also care about the emotional well being of others. But I'm the one who needs to unwind? Pretty sure that's not the case.