Had enough yet

[mark blazejewski]

Hey Jeff:

I don’t ever remember in any of my 16 years of scholastic studies (and since then) ever hearing or reading anything on the ‘Founders trying to setup a system to prevent them (political parties) from forming, and even warning against them.’ The Constitution does not mention political parties.

As far as amendment banning political parties, that sounds like Stalin or Hitler fascism.

There is a lot of fake news out there and outrageous/speculative regarding illegal immigration rights and refugee acceptance. Those not walking the left’s line on open borders, illegal immigration rights and the right of refugees entering our country without proper vetting, identify those as racist, xenophobic and non compassionate. People of my age whose grandparents came here legally were taught and lived under the following precept of President Teddy Roosevelt:

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American ... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Perhaps that helps to explain why so many older people believe “Identity Politics” is anti- American.

That summation is directly on target. As T.R. would say "BULLY!!!"

[abc123]

Disagree. On the teleprompter and with his slick ‘Joe Cool’ style Obama could sell ice cubes to Eskimos. Off the teleprompter, another matter – but still beyond Trump (and I said that).

As to intellect, the media has placed Trump’s life under a microscope where we know the good, bad and ugly about this man. Unfortunately we have heard so much about Obama’s intellect and educational accomplishments and yet know so little of his early life regarding his academic accomplishments, personal relationships and how his family structure came to be.

as a comparison, here is the first full answer of obama's last press conference and trump's full answer for his last full press conference

OBAMA: Well, first of all, let’s be clear. Chelsea Manning has served a tough prison sentence, so the notion that the average person who was thinking about disclosing vital classified information would think that it goes unpunished I don’t think would get that impression from the sentence that Chelsea Manning has served.
It has been my view that given she went to trial; that due process was carried out; that she took responsibility for her crime; that the sentence that she received was very disproportional — disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received; and that she had served a significant amount of time, that it made sense to commute and not pardon her sentence.
And, you know, I feel very comfortable that justice has been served and that a message has still been sent that when it comes to our national security, that wherever possible we need folks who may have legitimate concerns about the actions of government or their superiors or the agencies in which they work, that they try to work through the established channels and avail themselves of the whistleblower protections that have been put in place.
I recognize that there’s some folks who think they’re not enough. And, you know, I think all of us when we’re working in big institutions may find ourselves at times at odds with policies that are set. But when it comes to national security, we’re often dealing with people in the field whose lives may be put at risk or, you know, the safety and security and the ability of our military or our intelligence teams or our embassies to function effectively.
And that has to be kept in mind. So, with respect to WikiLeaks, I don’t see a contradiction. First of all, I haven’t commented on WikiLeaks generally. The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC e-mails that were leaked. I don’t pay a lot of attention to Mr. Assange’s tweets, so that wasn’t a consideration in this instance. And I’d refer you to the Justice Department for any criminal investigations, indictments, extradition issues that may come up with him.
You know, I — what I can say broadly is that in this new cyber age, we’re going to have to make sure that we continually work to find the right balance of accountability and openness and transparency that is the hallmark of our democracy. But also recognize that there are adversaries and bad actors out there who want to use that same openness in ways that hurt us, whether that’s in trying to commit financial crimes or trying to commit acts of terrorism or folks who want to interfere with our elections.
And we’re going to have to continually build the kind of architecture to make sure our — the best of our democracy is preserved; that our national security and intelligence agencies have the ability to carry out policy without advertising to our adversaries what it is that we’re doing, but do so in a way that still keeps citizens up to speed on what their government is doing on their behalf.
But with respect to Chelsea Manning, I looked at the particulars of this case the same way I have the other commutations and pardons that I’ve done. And I felt that in light of all the circumstances, that commuting her sentence was entirely appropriate.

compare that to:


TRUMP: OK, first of all, these readings as you know are confidential, classified. So, I’m not allowed to talk about what went on in a meeting.
And — but we had many witnesses in that meeting, many of them with us. And I will say, again, I think it’s a disgrace that information would be let out.
I saw the information; I read the information outside of that meeting. It’s all fake news. It’s phony stuff. It didn’t happen. And it was gotten by opponents of ours, as you know, because you reported it and so did many of the other people. It was a group of opponents that got together — sick people — and they put that crap together.
So, I will tell you that not within the meeting, but outside of the meeting, somebody released it. It should have never been — number one, shouldn’t have even entered paper. But it should have never have been released. But I read what was released and I think it’s a disgrace. I think it’s an absolute disgrace.
As far as hacking, I think it was Russia. But I think we also get hacked by other countries and other people. And I — I can say that you know when — when we lost 22 million names and everything else that was hacked recently, they didn’t make a big deal out of that. That was something that was extraordinary. That was probably China.
We had — we had much hacking going on. And one of the things we’re gonna do, we have some of the greatest computer minds anywhere in the world that we’ve assembled. You saw just a sample of it two weeks ago up here where we had the six top people in the world — they were never in the same room together as a group. And we’re gonna put those minds together and we’re going to form a defense.
TRUMP: And I have to say this also, the Democratic National Committee was totally open to be hacked. They did a very poor job. They could’ve had hacking defense, which we had.
And I will give Reince Priebus credit, because when Reince saw what was happening in the world and with this country, he went out and went to various firms and ordered a very, very strong hacking defense.
And they tried to hack the Republican National Committee and they were unable to break through.
We have to do that for our country. It’s very important.



lol. yeah, pretty close.


Lee: what do you know about Trump's educational background that you do not know about Obama's?

[mark blazejewski]

as a comparison, here is the first full answer of obama's last press conference and trump's full answer for his last full press conference

OBAMA: Well, first of all, let’s be clear. Chelsea Manning has served a tough prison sentence, so the notion that the average person who was thinking about disclosing vital classified information would think that it goes unpunished I don’t think would get that impression from the sentence that Chelsea Manning has served.
It has been my view that given she went to trial; that due process was carried out; that she took responsibility for her crime; that the sentence that she received was very disproportional — disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received; and that she had served a significant amount of time, that it made sense to commute and not pardon her sentence.
And, you know, I feel very comfortable that justice has been served and that a message has still been sent that when it comes to our national security, that wherever possible we need folks who may have legitimate concerns about the actions of government or their superiors or the agencies in which they work, that they try to work through the established channels and avail themselves of the whistleblower protections that have been put in place.
I recognize that there’s some folks who think they’re not enough. And, you know, I think all of us when we’re working in big institutions may find ourselves at times at odds with policies that are set. But when it comes to national security, we’re often dealing with people in the field whose lives may be put at risk or, you know, the safety and security and the ability of our military or our intelligence teams or our embassies to function effectively.
And that has to be kept in mind. So, with respect to WikiLeaks, I don’t see a contradiction. First of all, I haven’t commented on WikiLeaks generally. The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC e-mails that were leaked. I don’t pay a lot of attention to Mr. Assange’s tweets, so that wasn’t a consideration in this instance. And I’d refer you to the Justice Department for any criminal investigations, indictments, extradition issues that may come up with him.
You know, I — what I can say broadly is that in this new cyber age, we’re going to have to make sure that we continually work to find the right balance of accountability and openness and transparency that is the hallmark of our democracy. But also recognize that there are adversaries and bad actors out there who want to use that same openness in ways that hurt us, whether that’s in trying to commit financial crimes or trying to commit acts of terrorism or folks who want to interfere with our elections.
And we’re going to have to continually build the kind of architecture to make sure our — the best of our democracy is preserved; that our national security and intelligence agencies have the ability to carry out policy without advertising to our adversaries what it is that we’re doing, but do so in a way that still keeps citizens up to speed on what their government is doing on their behalf.
But with respect to Chelsea Manning, I looked at the particulars of this case the same way I have the other commutations and pardons that I’ve done. And I felt that in light of all the circumstances, that commuting her sentence was entirely appropriate.

compare that to:


TRUMP: OK, first of all, these readings as you know are confidential, classified. So, I’m not allowed to talk about what went on in a meeting.
And — but we had many witnesses in that meeting, many of them with us. And I will say, again, I think it’s a disgrace that information would be let out.
I saw the information; I read the information outside of that meeting. It’s all fake news. It’s phony stuff. It didn’t happen. And it was gotten by opponents of ours, as you know, because you reported it and so did many of the other people. It was a group of opponents that got together — sick people — and they put that crap together.
So, I will tell you that not within the meeting, but outside of the meeting, somebody released it. It should have never been — number one, shouldn’t have even entered paper. But it should have never have been released. But I read what was released and I think it’s a disgrace. I think it’s an absolute disgrace.
As far as hacking, I think it was Russia. But I think we also get hacked by other countries and other people. And I — I can say that you know when — when we lost 22 million names and everything else that was hacked recently, they didn’t make a big deal out of that. That was something that was extraordinary. That was probably China.
We had — we had much hacking going on. And one of the things we’re gonna do, we have some of the greatest computer minds anywhere in the world that we’ve assembled. You saw just a sample of it two weeks ago up here where we had the six top people in the world — they were never in the same room together as a group. And we’re gonna put those minds together and we’re going to form a defense.
TRUMP: And I have to say this also, the Democratic National Committee was totally open to be hacked. They did a very poor job. They could’ve had hacking defense, which we had.
And I will give Reince Priebus credit, because when Reince saw what was happening in the world and with this country, he went out and went to various firms and ordered a very, very strong hacking defense.
And they tried to hack the Republican National Committee and they were unable to break through.
We have to do that for our country. It’s very important.



lol. yeah, pretty close.


Lee: what do you know about Trump's educational background that you do not know about Obama's?

Yep, Obama is a very articulate man. The smartest man in the nation; a nation, which according to President Obama, which has "fifty-seven states." Brilliant man.

Also, if attended educational institutions are a measure, I understand that George W. Bush went to both Harvard and Yale. Why did the left habitually call him"stupid?"

Give me a break.

[Jeff]

Hey Jeff:

I don’t ever remember in any of my 16 years of scholastic studies (and since then) ever hearing or reading anything on the ‘Founders trying to setup a system to prevent them (political parties) from forming, and even warning against them.’ The Constitution does not mention political parties.

You have not done a lot of reading then.

As far as amendment banning political parties, that sounds like Stalin or Hitler fascism.

I don't think those mean what you think they do.

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

I do not disagree with Teddy. We seem today to have an issue today defining what being "American" actually means.... That goes for both sides of the isle.

[Lee Chowaniec]

as a comparison, here is the first full answer of obama's last press conference and trump's full answer for his last full press conference

OBAMA: Well, first of all, let’s be clear. Chelsea Manning has served a tough prison sentence, so the notion that the average person who was thinking about disclosing vital classified information would think that it goes unpunished I don’t think would get that impression from the sentence that Chelsea Manning has served.
It has been my view that given she went to trial; that due process was carried out; that she took responsibility for her crime; that the sentence that she received was very disproportional — disproportionate relative to what other leakers had received; and that she had served a significant amount of time, that it made sense to commute and not pardon her sentence.
And, you know, I feel very comfortable that justice has been served and that a message has still been sent that when it comes to our national security, that wherever possible we need folks who may have legitimate concerns about the actions of government or their superiors or the agencies in which they work, that they try to work through the established channels and avail themselves of the whistleblower protections that have been put in place.
I recognize that there’s some folks who think they’re not enough. And, you know, I think all of us when we’re working in big institutions may find ourselves at times at odds with policies that are set. But when it comes to national security, we’re often dealing with people in the field whose lives may be put at risk or, you know, the safety and security and the ability of our military or our intelligence teams or our embassies to function effectively.
And that has to be kept in mind. So, with respect to WikiLeaks, I don’t see a contradiction. First of all, I haven’t commented on WikiLeaks generally. The conclusions of the intelligence community with respect to the Russian hacking were not conclusive as to whether WikiLeaks was witting or not in being the conduit through which we heard about the DNC e-mails that were leaked. I don’t pay a lot of attention to Mr. Assange’s tweets, so that wasn’t a consideration in this instance. And I’d refer you to the Justice Department for any criminal investigations, indictments, extradition issues that may come up with him.
You know, I — what I can say broadly is that in this new cyber age, we’re going to have to make sure that we continually work to find the right balance of accountability and openness and transparency that is the hallmark of our democracy. But also recognize that there are adversaries and bad actors out there who want to use that same openness in ways that hurt us, whether that’s in trying to commit financial crimes or trying to commit acts of terrorism or folks who want to interfere with our elections.
And we’re going to have to continually build the kind of architecture to make sure our — the best of our democracy is preserved; that our national security and intelligence agencies have the ability to carry out policy without advertising to our adversaries what it is that we’re doing, but do so in a way that still keeps citizens up to speed on what their government is doing on their behalf.
But with respect to Chelsea Manning, I looked at the particulars of this case the same way I have the other commutations and pardons that I’ve done. And I felt that in light of all the circumstances, that commuting her sentence was entirely appropriate.

compare that to:


TRUMP: OK, first of all, these readings as you know are confidential, classified. So, I’m not allowed to talk about what went on in a meeting.
And — but we had many witnesses in that meeting, many of them with us. And I will say, again, I think it’s a disgrace that information would be let out.
I saw the information; I read the information outside of that meeting. It’s all fake news. It’s phony stuff. It didn’t happen. And it was gotten by opponents of ours, as you know, because you reported it and so did many of the other people. It was a group of opponents that got together — sick people — and they put that crap together.
So, I will tell you that not within the meeting, but outside of the meeting, somebody released it. It should have never been — number one, shouldn’t have even entered paper. But it should have never have been released. But I read what was released and I think it’s a disgrace. I think it’s an absolute disgrace.
As far as hacking, I think it was Russia. But I think we also get hacked by other countries and other people. And I — I can say that you know when — when we lost 22 million names and everything else that was hacked recently, they didn’t make a big deal out of that. That was something that was extraordinary. That was probably China.
We had — we had much hacking going on. And one of the things we’re gonna do, we have some of the greatest computer minds anywhere in the world that we’ve assembled. You saw just a sample of it two weeks ago up here where we had the six top people in the world — they were never in the same room together as a group. And we’re gonna put those minds together and we’re going to form a defense.
TRUMP: And I have to say this also, the Democratic National Committee was totally open to be hacked. They did a very poor job. They could’ve had hacking defense, which we had.
And I will give Reince Priebus credit, because when Reince saw what was happening in the world and with this country, he went out and went to various firms and ordered a very, very strong hacking defense.
And they tried to hack the Republican National Committee and they were unable to break through.
We have to do that for our country. It’s very important.



lol. yeah, pretty close.


Lee: what do you know about Trump's educational background that you do not know about Obama's?

Actually, very little. But I m not the one declaring Obama is of superior intellect.

It is true that Obama’s educational records are not sealed by a court order. However, it would be illegal under federal law (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) for Occidental, Columbia or Harvard Law School to give any former student’s records to reporters or members of the public without that person’s specific, written permission. Obama hasn’t released them, but neither have other presidential candidates released their college records. George W. Bush’s grades at Yale eventually became public, but only because somebody leaked them to the New Yorker magazine. Bush himself refused to release them, according to a 1999 profile in the Washington Post.

So what do I know about Obama’s educational background is "very little". So if you have any avenue of pursuit to reveal transcripts as proof of Obama’s superior intellect, please share. And if you have any recourse to information on how the man financed his education, please share.

I have already acknowledged Obama’s superiority over Trump in oratorical skills. But we have all experienced situations where superior academic minds did not result in successful real-life accomplishments. Achievement is based on many attributes.

[abc123]

why is it, do you think that obama's academic achievement was such a concern, but trump's is not?

[Save Us]

Actually, very little. But I m not the one declaring Obama is of superior intellect.

It is true that Obama’s educational records are not sealed by a court order. However, it would be illegal under federal law (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) for Occidental, Columbia or Harvard Law School to give any former student’s records to reporters or members of the public without that person’s specific, written permission. Obama hasn’t released them, but neither have other presidential candidates released their college records. George W. Bush’s grades at Yale eventually became public, but only because somebody leaked them to the New Yorker magazine. Bush himself refused to release them, according to a 1999 profile in the Washington Post.

So what do I know about Obama’s educational background is "very little". So if you have any avenue of pursuit to reveal transcripts as proof of Obama’s superior intellect, please share. And if you have any recourse to information on how the man financed his education, please share.

I have already acknowledged Obama’s superiority over Trump in oratorical skills. But we have all experienced situations where superior academic minds did not result in successful real-life accomplishments. Achievement is based on many attributes.

Finally we have somebody that built something and assembled a cabinet of successful people before they got into public office. We need people that actually have a real life handling skill set leading the way. American's are so frustrated with lack of leadership in all levels of government. The inefficiency and disconnect is joke.

Then again Obama was famous for saying "you didn't build that." You can't get more stupid than that. America was /is a country that founded by people that built things. This how everything gets paid for. This is what these young anti capitalists really don't understand.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Hey Jeff:

Are you referring to Federalist 10 as your basis for your comment on political parties?

Are you using Madison's "factions," which were based on class, and interpreting that as "parties." Wasn’t he speaking on the "excesses" of the "factions," not the prohibitions of prties?

Quite a stretch, Jeff

[Lee Chowaniec]

why is it, do you think that obama's academic achievement was such a concern, but trump's is not?

I am not the one recognizing Obama as brilliant and Trump as the stupid one; you are. My interest in his academic achievement rests with the proof of such brilliance and accomplishment and I can't find any.

And, it seems you can't provide any evidence. And as usual you deflect from answering any question I put to you with another question. Please tell me how Obama financed his illustrious education.

[abc123]

I am not the one recognizing Obama as brilliant and Trump as the stupid one; you are. My interest in his academic achievement rests with the proof of such brilliance and accomplishment and I can't find any.

And, it seems you can't provide any evidence. And as usual you deflect from answering any question I put to you with another question. Please tell me how Obama financed his illustrious education.

you made an equivalency between trump and obama's skills without a teleprompter, and that is pretty laughable, lee. obama speaks eloquently off the cuff. trump does not, to say the least. that doesn't make obama brilliant and trump stupid. it is just the obvious truth. there is a not a small gap between them in that regard. there is a wide chasm.

i don't know how obama financed his education. why is obama's education important to you? why is trump's less important, in comparison?

[mark blazejewski]

Hey Jeff:

Are you referring to Federalist 10 as your basis for your comment on political parties?

Are you using Madison's "factions," which were based on class, and interpreting that as "parties." Wasn’t he speaking on the "excesses" of the "factions," not the prohibitions of prties?

Quite a stretch, Jeff

The Founders were concerned with a number of issues.

Actually, their earliest concern was a strong v weak central or federal government. The initial inclination was a very weak central government, with only a federal Congress, acting as a type of facilitator between thirteen independent nations, to provide for interstate commerce, common defense, ect.

When the Articles of Confederation were deemed inadequate, the present Constitution was then adopted with the three branches of government. I understand that during those deliberations, the idea of monarchy was even raised, but quickly disposed of.

My understandings of the Founders' views of political parties pretty much reflect Lee's. There were concerns, particularly by Madison, about the strength of allegiances to the inevitable "faction" or "party," necessarily arising out of a democratic republic.

If there was some ambiguity regarding "excesses" of political parties versus the "existence" of political parties, the First Amendment seemingly addressed that issue in 1791.

[Lee Chowaniec]

you made an equivalency between trump and obama's skills without a teleprompter, and that is pretty laughable, lee. obama speaks eloquently off the cuff. trump does not, to say the least. that doesn't make obama brilliant and trump stupid. it is just the obvious truth. there is a not a small gap between them in that regard. there is a wide chasm.

i don't know how obama financed his education. why is obama's education important to you? why is trump's less important, in comparison?

I agree with you on the first paragraph and stated so in several posts.

It is the charge that Obama owns his superior intelligence to his outstanding education background, the fact that he was an attorney/law professor and much better qualified for the presidency than the unqualified, impeachable Trump.

I do know that Trump attended the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, ranked No. 1 in the world according to both Business Insider and QS, while Wharton's undergraduate program is also ranked No. 1 in the United States by U.S. News & World Report and Forbes.[4][5][6].

I do know how his education was financed. I do not know how Obama was able to finance his education in graduate school. That is important to me because if he was the recipient of outside funding it could very well have quid pro quo repercussions.

For once answer a question without going on fishing trips.

[abc123]

so, on one hand you have a guy who came from humble beginnings, ended up getting a law degree from harvard. he becomes president 20 years later and you would like to know how he financed his education to vet any quid pro quo repercussions

on the other hand, you have a president with actual current undisclosed business entanglements all over the world that you have not expressed any concern over.

why is that, lee?

[Lee Chowaniec]

so, on one hand you have a guy who came from humble beginnings, ended up getting a law degree from harvard. he becomes president 20 years later and you would like to know how he financed his education to vet any quid pro quo repercussions

on the other hand, you have a president with actual current undisclosed business entanglements all over the world that you have not expressed any concern over.

why is that, lee?

Knowing many children coming from middle class and “humble beginning” families who have the skill set to attend Ivy League and/or prestigious schools often cannot attend such schools without earning full scholarships, receiving grants or outside personal largess that eliminate having huge debt loans to pay off. So why do you find it out of the ordinary to have someone question how Obama managed to finance his extraordinary education?

Now I know that Obama did not, as his right, give the schools permission to release the records, but it seems strange that there are no classmates that came forward attesting to his scholastic achievements.


Secondly, there is concern on Trump's "business entanglements" and seeing all the ethical/conflict of interest scrutiny directed his way sits well with me. In fact, I would love to see the same scrutiny directed at the Trump administration and the entire Congress as well. I would love to see the outcome on an across the board conflict of interest investigation – starting especially with Feinstein, Pelosi and Kerry. Corruption and ethical breach is not one sided in federal, state and local governments.

Skip the partisan political crap. Don't you ever question why the great majority of politicos in federal and state governments are lawyers, making less as career politicians than they would have in the private sector (if they were good lawyers) but still wind after a political career as millionaires? Why term limits have never been established? Why they don't enroll in Obamacare? Why they set themselves up with outrageous pension plans?

[Lee Chowaniec]

In whose best interest

Being someone who follows the news on several TV networks and reading several of the recent national news outlets, and especially the Buffalo News, I was not surprised to find an overriding anti Trump spin by the biased liberal media regarding:

Health Care

Being someone who follows the news on several TV networks and reading several of the recent national news outlets, and especially the Buffalo News, I was not surprised to find an overriding anti Trump spin by the biased liberal media regarding:

Health Care

'GOP revolt sinks bid to void health law' “Opposition from conservative group was major reason for the bills demise.” – actually, a good thing as the proposed ACA plan sucked. But doesn’t the Obama plan suck as well? Where even Democrats admit as much but didn’t com
e to the table (as they were not encouraged to) and pledged to vote 100% against its consideration. Now it’s being reported that: Obamacare's Not In A 'Death Spiral'

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factch...cid=spartandhp

'President has levers to stabilize or undermine ACA' The ball is in Trump’s court they maintain. He has openly stated he will work with the democrats and in the hope a better plan emerges. Will the Republicans come to the table in the future?

Whose best interest is really being served here?

Immigration

'Two reports debunk image of immigrants as dangerous' No stats provided to validate claim and no reports in the liberal mainstream media this week on the rape in Maryland and the several other rapes that took place in recent days by illegal immigrants.

'We need immigrants to fill our declining population and for the revenue they contribute to our country' Legal immigrants, indeed. The term ‘illegal’ was replaced by ‘undocumented’ and recently immigrant has become the referral term.

Border Wall

'U.S. may not need wall at all' The report says the influx of low-skilled immigrants is already dropping. The number of young, low-skilled workers coming into the United State from Latin America will continue to slow as the population there ages. So, not to worry; less illegal immigration is better and what we have in place will keep the illegals out.

Supreme Court Justice

'Democrats take issue with some past rulings' Not uncommon, but when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer recommends all House and Senate members vote against Gorsuch’s approval to the Supreme Court based on his findings and opinion, that is appalling.

Shadow Government

There is a well organized, well funded organization in place to delegitimize Trump and/or his cabinet members with an unveiled attempt to obstruct/disrupt his administration’s policies and plans at every turn; which in every way weakens the U, S, and further polarizes the electorate. The Democrats have been successful in many ways. But, what goes around comes around. The democrats are paying back the Republicans for their obstructionism during the Obama administration. Please tell me how all this partisan conflict is in our country’s best interest?

It is being reported that people are already building bunker-like facilities and purchasing foodstuffs in the event of a civil war. How sad!

'Flush With Victory, Democrats Are in No Hurry to Reconcile

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...cid=spartandhp

The DEMS and GOP not working together is pathetic; so much for country unification and where partisan politics trumps country best interests. Whose best interest is really being served here?