ChrisWeigant.com

White House Rips Out A Real Stinker Of A Proposal

[ Posted Monday, July 2nd, 2018 – 16:31 PDT ]

In the midst of the opening salvos in Trump's worldwide trade war, Axios just uncovered a very interesting story. Apparently, President Trump is now considering backing out of the World Trade Organization, one way or another. He feels constrained by its restrictions, he (of course) feels it is unfair to America, and he would much prefer realigning all of America's trade into bilateral agreements that he will personally negotiate with each country on the planet. But what was most amusing was one of the ways the White House is considering achieving this. They've drafted a piece of legislation that would give Trump full control over tariffs (removing Congress completely from the equation) and also allow Trump to essentially ignore the W.T.O. and all their pesky rules. Pretty much par for the "I alone can fix this country" course, really. But whichever Trump policy flunky put this legislation together needs a quick refresher course on creative acronyms, because the proposed bill is currently named the "United States Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act." Yep, that's right, the "U.S. FART Act" (or, if you want to be pedantic, the "U.S. FaRT Act"). Either way, it's a ripe and fetid stinker of a proposal.

The Trump White House is certainly already known for its noxious emissions of gaseous offensiveness. So it was perhaps inevitable that sooner or later they would just start bragging about it. Even so, it's notable that almost a year and a half into Trump's presidency, they are still so clueless about the basics of political branding. The rule of thumb is to start with an acronym you like, and then work backwards to torture a phrase into fitting your chosen acronym (see: the USA PATRIOT Act, for example, or perhaps the DREAM Act). Working it the other way around means occasionally falling flat on your face (as when George W. Bush announced the military campaign to invade Iraq would be called "Operation Iraqi Liberation," which then had to be quickly renamed). But no White House has, to the best of my knowledge, ever come up with anything quite as laughable as the U.S. FART Act. Indeed, if the bill had any chance of passing Congress, Democrats might be tempted to have some fun by introducing competing legislation called something along the lines of the "HE WHO SMELT IT DEALT IT Act."

The White House is already walking back the proposal, and that's before anyone has pointed out the obvious acronym problem to them. Their position is that "no legislation has been introduced" and what was leaked to Axios was merely a "draft" of an idea they are considering, nothing more. One would hope that if they got to the stage of actually asking Congress to pass it, someone will have hastily edited the title of the proposal.

All kidding aside, though, the idea itself is pretty much as big a stinkeroo as its sulfurous title. Trump wants free reign over all tariffs and trade agreements, because he is still convinced that negotiating with the world's countries is no harder then closing a real estate deal in Manhattan. So far, this hasn't noticeably led to any new bipartisan trade deals; what it has instead led to is the quite predictable escalation of tit-for-tat tariffs with China, Mexico, Europe, and Canada. Canada unveiled its new tariffs on American goods this past weekend, and China is likely to do the same by the end of the week.

Trump is supremely confident in his own dealmaking abilities, so his response is to ratchet things up even further. According to his point of view, the world's tariffs against the United States are so patently unfair that he has had to levy new tariffs everywhere just to catch up, and these other countries should really realize this and just accept the new Trump tariffs without retaliating. That's what his economic advisors promised would happen, even though it is the sheerest fantasy. Now that the pie-in-the-sky predictions are proving to be so wrong, as other countries retaliate left and right, Trump's impulse is to double down and hike the American tariffs even higher. As any entry-level economics student could tell you, what will follow is the other countries matching Trump's trade war dollar-for-dollar.

This is already making some Republicans in Congress very nervous. Virtually all the retaliatory tariffs other countries have announced have been pretty obviously targeted to do Trump and the Republicans the most domestic political harm possible, from targeting farm products to industries in Mitch McConnell's and Paul Ryan's home states (Kentucky bourbon and Harley-Davidson motorcycles). Soybean prices are already down, and they'll likely sink even further when China formally announces their agricultural tariffs later in the week. There are a lot of soybean farmers in Trump country, to state the obvious. So far, they appear to be sticking with their faith in Trump's dealmaking abilities, confident that everything will work out for the best in the end; but while one harvest season's losses might be (painfully) absorbed by farmers, two in a row might put them out of business. So the longer this goes on without any resolution, the more it is going to hurt the GOP politically. It's one thing to love Trump when other people's ox is being gored, but it's quite another when your own livelihood is being destroyed by Trump's trade war.

Some congressional Republicans are already beginning to push back. A handful of GOP senators are trying to pass legislation that would remove the ability of Trump to use "national security" as a flimsy excuse for levying tariffs on friendly nations like Canada. Such a bill would have to get a veto-proof majority in both houses to become law (it's hard to imagine Trump signing such a bill, in other words), but the bill's mere existence shows that Trump's trade war is already becoming unpopular within his own party. And now Trump wants plenipotentiary power to slap tariffs on any country he chooses, without having to clear anything with either Congress or the W.T.O. So it's clear he envisions future tariffs to come, and doesn't want anyone jostling his elbow while he is striking "the best trade deals ever," with everyone.

Democrats should be jumping all over this one, because it is an issue which makes congressional Republicans so queasy. It's an election year, so they are forced to face their own constituents and make the attempt at explaining what Trump's grand plan is, and why it hasn't magically happened yet. Trump just announced that he won't be unveiling his proposal to replace NAFTA until after the midterm elections, so whatever it contains, it obviously isn't going to help vulnerable Republicans out politically (if it did, Trump would unveil it in October instead, for maximum political effect).

The case against the U.S. FART Act is pretty easy to make, politically. How about: "Trump's trade war is already like a fart in an elevator -- it stinks so bad it makes your eyes water." Or maybe: "It's impossible for Trump to blame the U.S. FART Act on the dog, because he doesn't have one." Snarky-but-deadly slogans aside, though, the case is even easier to make on the merits: "Trump is already trying to say that using Canadian steel and aluminum is somehow a national security crisis, so why on Earth would anyone vote to give him unlimited power to slap more tariffs on America's best friends?"

Donald Trump is already painting himself into a corner with his trade war. Things are not working out as planned, as country after country imposes retaliatory tariffs designed to put as many Americans out of work in Republican states and districts as possible. This is going to have a cumulative effect, which will continue to build as long the trade war lasts. Currently, there is no end in sight. Some steelworkers are happy, but when auto manufacturers start announcing layoffs, or (even worse) follow Harley-Davidson in building new factories overseas, then far more Trump voters are going to be negatively affected. Such is the nature of trade wars. And in the midst of all this, giving Trump unlimited power to levy tariff after tariff on whatever country he chooses is a seriously malodorous idea -- even if they do change that acronym.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

48 Comments on “White House Rips Out A Real Stinker Of A Proposal”

  1. [1] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Some days, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

    This is one of those days.

    :-)

    -CW

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Now that is a headline that really makes you want to put everything else aside and read the column. I just have to say that before I put everything else aside and read the column. Let the stew burn.

  3. [3] 
    TheStig wrote:

    OMG! It's hysterically funny because it's true. Light a match....then use the mstch to burn the bill.

    I'm happy to report the stew did not burn - but it was near run thing.

  4. [4] 
    TheStig wrote:

    What does the bill have to say for itself? " I stink, therefore I am."

  5. [5] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    The whole subject of international trade suffers from a massive case of archaic, simplistic and yes, STUPID reasoning, full of misconceptions and rampant ignorance.

    The very concept of a "balance of trade" being "favorable" if you export more than you import, or "unfavorable" if you import more than you export, has its origins in long-ago times when the world operated on what you could call the 'gold standard', meaning if your exports exceeded the value of your imports, you were entitled to collect the difference in gold from the debtor country, or if you imported more than you exported, you had to send some of your gold abroad to make up the difference.

    For some unfathomable reason, it never occurred to anybody that if you exported more than you imported, you wound up with less goods to consume, meaning a LOWER STANDARD OF LIVING! What the hell is "favorable" about a lower standard of living???

    As Milton Friedman pointed out, you cannot eat gold, but still everybody thought it was better to have less food to eat, less clothes to wear, etc. provided you had more gold in your vaults!

    But for many years now, virtually nobody settles international accaounts with gold. That job has been taken over by and large by the U.S. dollar. Therefor, it should be obvious that the more we import AND export, with, hopefully, some degree of reasonable balance, the better off ALL nations are.

    Nowadays however, the economically simple-minded worry about the displacement of workers (loss of jobs) that can arise from importing more than you export, but that is nonsensical. Erecting trade barriers to protect domestic jobs is insane. The whole nation would be better off putting a couple hundred displaced steelworkers on permanent unemploymnet rather than having all the rest of the 225 million of us paying more for everything we buy that contains steel.

    Trump is WAY to dumb to grasp any of that. We have to hope that congress is not equally dumb.

  6. [6] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Oops, make that last thing read "way TOO' DUMB . ."

  7. [7] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    For some unfathomable reason, it never occurred to anybody that if you exported more than you imported, you wound up with less goods to consume, meaning a LOWER STANDARD OF LIVING!

    Standard of living being determined by import/export ratio? OK, I’ll play along:

    Doesn’t this depend on what it is that you import and export? If a country has all the basic resources needed to live comfortably in excess, it can export what it doesn’t need and doesn’t have to rely on imports.

  8. [8] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Listen

    Go back and re-read my first paragraph. Your response epitomizes my appraisal of the situation to the proverbial "T"!

    Hell no, standard of living is not "determined by import/export ratio", it's determined by how much you consume!

    Who defines "basic", and "comfortable"? Actually, every country in the world can "exist" without international trade, but when was anybody content with "exist"?

  9. [9] 
    neilm wrote:

    As many people have stated, it is near impossible to win a trade war - and this is especially true when you have no idea what you are doing and don't have a realistic view of how other participants are going to act.

    I used to have Harley-Davidson as a customer and I worked in the basement of the original factory where their IT department was based back in the day (you have to duck your head to avoid the pipes down there when you are my height). Great people and I loved working with them. I'm really sorry that they will suffer from this idiotic trade war and I hope they pull through intact.

    Trump, and I suppose his supporters, think that might is right, and that our economy is the largest so we can push other economies around. This is so facile that it is absurd somebody who was voted in as President needs to learn this the hard way. There are plenty of actions we can take to level the playing field with China, and all of them involve isolating them by building partnerships.

    1. Short term: Build partnerships with other large economies - the E.U., South America, and India to stop China from picking other economies and our companies off one-by-one

    2. Mid-Term: Build a trade pact with emerging economies that can compete with China in their areas of strength (excellent internal supply chains and cheap labor) - the TPP was an excellent treaty, and also built in intellectual property protection to help the U.S.

    3. Long-term: Invest in the poorest economies to bring them into the U.S. economic sphere - a little investment plus some preferential treatment for key local industries on generous terms today will pay us back 10x-100x in the future.

    This is a very basic strategy that should be simple for Washington to develop.

  10. [10] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    I fear that the damage has already been done to the AG sector that no one really cares to talk about....

    Mexico and the EU have been turning to South America to fulfill their needs. China is also following suit and coincidentally expanding the invites to play in RCEP.

    As these contracts kick in and South America keeps prices low it is certain these commodities will not recover for quite sometime. I guess we can expect even further consolidation and even more subsidies for the big factory farmer.

    In the meantime I guess we will end up paying for it in increased food prices, less selection, and the farmers will make even less as they condense into the factory system.

  11. [11] 
    neilm wrote:

    Hey, one for you CRS - this chap seems on the same page as you:

    https://internationalman.com/articles/inflation-your-role-as-a-milk-cow/

    Personally, I disagree with this analysis, because it isn't just the total number of "currency units" but the velocity of those units and other factors (i.e. the value of assets and the creation of new assets that also are measured in "currency units" which also affect the total number of "currency units" beyond just the total count of physical currency, etc.).

    I also think that as human beings we have an internal mental ratchet that allows us to accept increasing prices, but are unnerved by decreasing prices. I believe this comes from our aversion to loss - the experiments of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman uncovered that it takes $2 of upside to compensate for $1 downside. If you are unfamiliar with the work of Tversky and Kahneman I recommend Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" as well as “The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds,” by Michael Lewis (of "The Big Short" fame).

    I believe we are programmed to be comfortable with gently rising prices, and so are comfortable with inflation (i.e. price increases in today's terms) but recoil from deflation - as the article I linked to above shows, if prices rise, but our income also rises, even if by the same or less, we feel richer, but if we have a pay cut, even if prices drop more and we are effectively better off, we don't feel it.

    I analyze my spending, net worth, etc in spreadsheets that span 20 years into the past (to the dismay of my wife I know how just about every dollar has been spent) and I also run a mirror version of the spreadsheet adjusted for constant current dollars to remind myself of the real value of money. Few people are as detailed (my wife uses a very different word) as I am.

    Confusing the picture even more is that people tend to anchor prices of key goods at particular points in their life, e.g. the price of a candy bar when they are 10, the cost of a gallon of gas when they are 18, the cost of a new car when they are 25 or a house when they are 35, etc.

    Humans completely mess up the logical theories of great systems of ideas, and this is the core of my discomfort with both Communism and Libertarianism.

  12. [12] 
    neilm wrote:

    Is it just that I don't watch cable TV and have missed him, or has Rudi Giuliani been quiet recently?

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Win The Future
    -Obama Administration

    'nuff said.. :D

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mexico and the EU have been turning to South America to fulfill their needs.

    Yea.. They can have Venezuela help them!!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again..

    I have ask....

    If Trump... excuse me.. PRESIDENT Trump is so god-awful and totally and utterly incompetent...

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/89ab4d4c1677e2515dd6f6c5b3d32772ed56f3ffe6202fd5c6f65e4188ce10a4.jpg

    Why are his poll numbers comparable, and oft times BETTER than Obama's???

    And I KNOW ya'all won't dispute the polls because ya'all LIVE (and apparently die :D ) by the polls..

    Heh

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    The WTO relationship has been increasingly negative for the USA over time. Withdrawing from an organization that can readily establish rules to our disadvantage (and in fact does, giving trade priority to "less developed" nations and building their infrastructure with money required of wealthy countries) is just common sense. As the world's wealthiest country, we have nothing to gain and everything to lose by binding ourselves to an organization that has the explicit goal of balancing global wealth and economic opportunity.

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats can kiss swing voters goodbye with progressive ballot
    http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/394855-democrats-can-kiss-swing-voters-bye-with-progressive-candidates

    But it's OK... Democrats don't need swing voters.. They'll get by and win with just Democrats voting.. :D

    I honestly and truly hope Democrats believe that.. :D

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump is Winning Over Blacks, Hispanics, Millennials, and Even Gays

    Democrat hate speech targeting deplorables has always worked -- on their own voters. Libeling Republicans as racist, homophobic morons has kept Democrat voters in line. President Trump laughs at their insults, and just gets stronger. Suddenly, one more Trump success. The Democrat line is breaking. Our minorities are breaking free.

    President Trump’s off the charts achievements on jobs and security are improving the lives of every single Democrat identity voting bloc. A small, but increasingly significant number are noticing. With his MAGA gains on the economy and foreign affairs, President Trump is slowly chipping away at the Democrat Party’s foundations. The white working class already belongs to Trump. Fed up blacks, Hispanics, millennials and gays are starting to follow.

    Ordinary people, including our minorities, are focused on the reality of their lives. Most Americans actually care about exactly the two big issues Trump cares about: jobs and personal safety. They notice more money in their paychecks. They notice when they get off food stamps and the unemployment line. They notice when they move from flipping hamburgers to a high-paying construction or assembly-line jobs. Securing our border, supporting cops, defeating ISIS in Syria, pressuring North Korea to “denuke” -- ordinary people get that we are safer than we were under Obama. Democrats can scream as loud as they want, but they cannot drown out reality.

    On top of it, the screaming is turning people off. In the words of a gay woman, member of the #WalkAway movement,

    Lea Anna Bright, in a mohawk, looks into the camera and says in a slow, simmering voice: “This is a Vice article I am reading right now. It says, ‘The activist left doesn’t give a shit about your calls for civility. Get ready for a summer of rage.’” She looks up. “This is where the party is going, and this is why I chose to walk away. Peace. Not for me. Bye.”
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/07/trump_is_winning_over_blacks_hispanics_millennials_and_even_gays.html#ixzz5KBIqLGGv

    And, as is becoming extremely evident, Democrats can't even hold on to core Democrat voters!! They are all becoming part of the #walkaway campaign..

    So, yea, Democrats.. Continue to attack and vilify and demonize swing voters and Trump supporters..

    But don't come crying to me in November when Democrats are handed their asses.. AGAIN... :D

    "Go and cry in your coffee, but don't come bitchin' to me.."
    -Billy Joel, BIG SHOT

    :D

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Unbelievably, thanks to an honest gay man’s viral video, #WalkAway, we are hearing from the ultimate Democrat stronghold, the LGBQT community. It turns out white gay men are not appreciating the blatant anti-white and anti-gender hate speech of the new Democrat left. “They’ll come for me, and then they’ll come for you,” Straka tells his listeners.

    He shows a handout about the “privilege hierarchy’: white gay men are near the top of the privileged bad guys list. They get less victim points than white women, black women, trans and non-genders. Most gay men are quite successful financially. Democrat’s ginning up rage against successful white men is a turn-off. But it is more than that.

    One gay man declares that before being gay, he’s a patriotic American. He appreciated President Trump’s Muslim travel ban, as a rational security measure. The two parties’ reaction to the Orlando massacre changed everything for him.

    “Trump said he was going to protect gay men, and he did, [with] the travel ban. Hillary was telling Americans not to ‘pick on all Muslims because of this,’” and that did not feel like protection, Roberts says. “I swear to God, wanted to throw my shoe through the TV. “At that point I was like, I can’t do it anymore. I really can’t. (snip)

    His assessment of the Democrats: “From immigration to everything, they are just a disaster. “They’re anti-American, anti-common sense, rational -- anything good, they’re against it.”
    http://www.theepochtimes.com/viral-walk-away-videos-highlight-growing-movement-of-democrats-leaving-the-party_2578446.html

    Every where Democrats turn, they are losing, losing and losing some more...

    Democrats having a rosy outlook for November and still believing that a Blue Wave is in the works??? Well, that's just delusional...

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mexico City (AFP) - Mexican president-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said Monday he had spoken with President Donald Trump on the phone and offered to reduce US-bound migration in exchange for American assistance.

    "I received a phone call from Donald Trump and we spoke for half an hour," the fiery leftist wrote on Twitter, in one of his first messages after winning a landslide victory Sunday.

    "I proposed exploring a universal deal (involving) development projects that would create jobs in Mexico and, by doing so, reduce migration and improve security," he added.
    https://www.yahoo.com/news/mexicos-amlo-offers-migration-cuts-trump-call-192528451.html

    So... Sooo... SO... much winning.. :D

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rep. Pocan: We must abolish ICE

    With the President grossly misusing ICE and the agency broken beyond repair, I'm proposing legislation to abolish the agency.
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/02/opinions/we-must-abolish-ice-pocan/index.html

    TONS of Democrats are calling to abolish ICE...

    I get it.. I completely understand why ya'all would want to disavow that Democrats en masse are calling for ICE to be abolished...

    It's a deal breaker that will cause Democrats to lose and lose BIG in November...

    But make no mistake. The call to abolish ICE is mainstream Democrat Party...

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Never Trumpers Suffer Yet Another Utter Humiliation

    Last week was especially glorious not just because we rejected the latest GOPe amnesty scheme, not just because we defunded the left’s union cash extortion machine with the Janus decision, and not just because Justice Kennedy is leaving to be the swing vote on his retirement community HOA. It was especially glorious because these enormous victories – these latest enormous victories – were the direct result of normal Americans giving the gimps, grifters, and geebos of Never Trump the George Costanza treatment by doing precisely the opposite of our alleged betters’ political instincts.

    Everything they told us was wrong. If we had done what they demanded, we would not be revelling in the joy of conserva-victory. We would be resigned to yet another defeat. “But Gorsuch” indeed, you never-been-kissed band of losers.

    If we had listened to Never Trump, we’d have voted for Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit and we would not only have Merrick Garland (or worse) on the SCOTUS but now she’d be picking another pinko who agrees with the lib bloc that the First Amendment has hitherto unknown asterisks that prevent conservatives from using it, that a bunch of other rights that aren’t in the Constitution actually are, and that the Second Amendment stuff about not infringing on our right to keep and bear arms really means libs can totally infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. Let’s leave aside our booming economy and crushing ISIS and pulling out of the climate scam and maybe peace with North Korea. Just these two Supreme Court picks makes Trump the most important and successful conservative president since The Big R. And we wouldn’t have any of it if that nattering pack of insufferable sissies had had their way.
    https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/07/02/draft-n2496373

    Ya just gotta love Kurt Schlichter.... :D

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:
  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:
  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz061718dBP20180615074515.jpg

    "Now, I don't care WHO you are, that right thar is funny as hell, I tell yooo waaat!!"
    -Larry The Cable Guy

    heh

  26. [26] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    neilm

    Re your link to the "Your Roll as a Milk Cow" thing.

    The author gets it all correct except the villain - He claims it's the doing of the evil banks/bankers. Not true at all. Currency inflation (resulting in price inflation) is wholly the doings of the federal government (by means of the central bank (what we in the U.S. call the "Federal Reserve" bank).

    See Milton Friedman's analysis of all money-related stuff in his "Free to Choose" series, by far the most wisdom ever assembled in one place on the subject.

  27. [27] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    Thank you so much for the articles on the #WalkAway movement! I had a bet going with some friends on who could find the best bullshit propaganda claiming that the gay community was moving towards supporting Trump, and you found it! The few remaining Log Cabin Republicans that I know don’t even support Trump, and he has done absolutely nothing to win anyone else in the gay community over. BTW, the whole “blame foreign Muslims for the Orlando shootings” is a riot! I’m sure it was a well planned strike by terrorists even though Disney World was only 20 minutes away!

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Thank you so much for the articles on the #WalkAway movement! I had a bet going with some friends on who could find the best bullshit propaganda claiming that the gay community was moving towards supporting Trump, and you found it! The few remaining Log Cabin Republicans that I know don’t even support Trump, and he has done absolutely nothing to win anyone else in the gay community over.

    Yea... That's your claim..

    But the FACTS say otherwise..

    I’m sure it was a well planned strike by terrorists even though Disney World was only 20 minutes away!

    Yea.. And security at Disney World is identical to the security at the Pulse nightclub...

    Jeeessuss... Do you give your brain when you become a Democrat???

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya gotta had it to President Trump.. He puts out something moronic and irrelevant (like the acronym, like coffeve, like transgenders in the military) knowing that the Left Wing will get all hysterical and fall all over themselves to concentrate on THAT useless and irrelevant shiny... Meantime Trump is putting thru serious policy and judges and a whole plethora of objectives all the while laughing his ass off at how utterly stoopid and ridiculous the Left Wingery is.. :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    ‘ABOLISH ICE’: VANDALS THROW BRICK THROUGH WINDOW OF GOP OFFICE, LEAVE GRAFFITI MESSAGE
    http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/03/abolish-ice-vandals-nebraska/

    Ahhh yes.. The peaceful and tolerant Demcorat Party...

    Looks like desperation is seeping in to their equation..

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Protests Turn Violent As Demonstrators Arrested In Front Of Philadelphia ICE Building
    https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2018/07/03/protests-turn-violent-as-demonstrators-arrested-in-front-of-philadelphia-ice-building/

    What was it that Mad Maxine Waters said??

    Oh yea.. Get an angry mob together and push back against Trump supporters...

    Well, looks like hysterical Democrats are doing just that...

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:
  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again..

    Man Assaulted Secret Service Officer Outside White House After Immigration Rally: Feds
    https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/Man-Assaulted-Secret-Service-Officer-Outside-White-House-After-Immigration-Rally-Feds-487224761.html

    Another hysterical Left Winger took Mad Maxine's advice to heart... :^/

  34. [34] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    But the FACTS say otherwise..

    What FACTS? As usual, your facts aren’t factual.

    He puts out something moronic and irrelevant (like the acronym, like coffeve, like transgenders in the military)

    Transgender servicemen and servicewomen are moronic and irrelevant ??? Not even trying to hide how big of a bigot you truly are, are you?

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Transgender servicemen and servicewomen are moronic and irrelevant ??? Not even trying to hide how big of a bigot you truly are, are you?

    WOW!! You must REALLY be tired from kicking the shit of the strawman you just created..

    Hope you didn't strain something...

  36. [36] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M[22}:

    1. Complete misuse of the word 'pinko' in the first sentence, which term originally refers to communist sympathizers. Or he's oblivious to the fact that most of the Russians Trump loves so much are former Communist apparatchiks. I think he thinks it means 'gay', since he also refers to 'sissies' later.

    2. the First Amendment has hitherto unknown asterisks - As usual, Schlichter has it backwards: it's conservatives who have bent the first amendment to suddenly include corporate entities and Christian wedding cake bakers in its penumbra of protection.

    3.that a bunch of other rights that aren’t in the Constitution actually are - I can't think of any actual examples, and apparently neither can he.

    4. that the Second Amendment stuff about not infringing on our right to keep and bear arms really means libs can totally infringe on our right to keep and bear arms - again, no examples because there aren't any. Unless he has a fear of background checks, wants a bump stock for his AR15, or has a history of mental illness, he has nothing to fear from liberals who have totally caved, for the most part, on the gun issue. We still have a mass murder and/or unarmed black kid shot every week. Winning!

    5. Let’s leave aside our booming economy and crushing ISIS - good idea, since conservatives had little or nothing to do with either.

    6. pulling out of the climate scam and maybe peace with North Korea... Quick: name two things Trump has done that have had absolutely no consequences in the real world. Oh, you just did.

    7. Just these two Supreme Court picks makes Trump the most important and successful conservative president since The Big R. Reagan only seated one justice, Sandra Day O'Connor, and she turned out to be a moderate. Good comparison, though, because it looks like Gorsuch could become a moderate if he keeps drinking coffee with Roberts. Just sayin..

    8. And we wouldn’t have any of it if that nattering pack of insufferable sissies had had their way. Thought that conservatives hate name-calling? Joking, of course - they love it when it isn't directed at them. I'd love to seem him call John Tester a sissy to his face, though.

    And consider: even when Republicants control all of the U.S. government from the state level to the federal, they still blame their failure to launch legislation on the 'nattering sissies' they despise so much.

    Maybe he should try a different derisive term.

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:
  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    And consider: even when Republicants control all of the U.S. government from the state level to the federal, they still blame their failure to launch legislation on the 'nattering sissies' they despise so much.

    Just like when Odumbo had a complete LOCK on the government, including a Filibuster proof Senate, Democrats STILL blamed all their failings on Republicans..

    What's yer point??

  39. [39] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Just like when Odumbo had a complete LOCK on the government, including a Filibuster proof Senate, Democrats STILL blamed all their failings on Republicans..

    And yet managed to still pass all of Obama's Great Recession recovery bills, including TARP, the Auto bailout, the Ledbetter Act and then top it with the American Care Act, just to name a little of the better-known legislation that passed during those days. They accomplished alot.

    You must be talking about the post-2010 Obama years, after the Republicants took the Senate, and progress was reduced to naming Post Offices, all thanks to "Senator No", and I don't even have to name him because it's that obviously true.

    Sen. No apparently thinks that nothing has to happen during this administration either, although I've heard that the WH isn't exactly helping, pushing congress to focus on the backlog of confirmations, rather than waste their time legislating, which will hence be done from Trump's Laz-y-boy in the morning.

    Democrats aren't blaming Republicans for democratic failures. We're blaming Republicants for their own failures, both to themselves and to the rest of their countrymen, who have been seriously misled and endangered by this administration.

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats aren't blaming Republicans for democratic failures.

    Oh what a complete load of bullshit..

    That is all ya'all DID during the Odumbo years is blame Republicans for YOUR Democrat Party failures...

    Yer not even TRYING to hide yer bullshit anymore.. :D

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Face reality, Balthy...

    Your Democrat Party is on the ropes and are so desperate the ONLY action they can take is to encourage Democrat drones to organize angry mobs and attack government workers whose SOLE crime is doing their jobs..

    How utterly pathetic has your Demcorat Party become..

    Live with that...

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    How many Obama officials were harassed when they tried to go out for meals??

    None..

    How many times did Republicans tell their supporters to organize an angry mob and find Obama officials where ever they are and harass them...

    ZERO...

    Face reality.. Your Democrats are out of control and are exercising the HODGKISON option..

    And you frakin' support that!

    Shame...

  43. [43] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Another successful hijack of the discussion...

    Awesome job...CW had picked a boring subject anyway, so why not change it.

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh quit yer whining..

    You don't care when DumboBots change the subject..

  45. [45] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Glad to see someone has had a steaming full mug smart ass today...

    Now if they could just enjoy an icy cold pint of shut the fuck up and stay on subject... things would be peachy.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Glad to see someone has had a steaming full mug smart ass today...

    With extra froth!!! :D

    Now if they could just enjoy an icy cold pint of shut the fuck up and stay on subject... things would be peachy.

    yea.. if only.. :D

    But I addressed your on topic question and you ignored it..

    So, I axe you?? Why bother???

  47. [47] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Straw man? WTF? You said that Trump puts out something “moronic and irrelevant” - which are Don Jr.’s and Eric’s Secret Service codenames, BTW - to distract Liberals from the other damaging policies he is pushing. You listed Trump’s move to ban transgendered members of the military from serving as examples of the “moronic and irrelevant” distractions. Trump tweeting out coffeve, which there is no evidence that he did that intentionally, served as a distraction — but one that was just people laughing at the ignorant moron showing his intelligence to all the world. But thinking that his attempts to bar good people from continuing to serve in our armed forces for bullshit reasons is “irrelevant” just shows what a Republican zombie you’ve become!

    So again, how are my comments a straw man response?

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    You listed Trump’s move to ban transgendered members of the military from serving as examples of the “moronic and irrelevant” distractions.

    Yes, Trump's MOVE was moronic and irrelevant..

    Not the Transgendered themselves..

    You tried to make it looking like I was calling the TGs moronic and irrelevant and you failed miserably...

    which are Don Jr.’s and Eric’s Secret Service codenames, BTW

    Facts to support??

    Of course you don't.. Just more bullshit from you..

    , which there is no evidence that he did that intentionally, served as a distraction

    The evidence is ya'all's reaction... Ya'all were HYSTERICAL about it and talked about it for WEEKS!!!

    It was the subject of SEVERAL commentaries..

Comments for this article are closed.