ChrisWeigant.com

From The Archives -- The Biggest Conspiracy Of All

[ Posted Thursday, December 26th, 2019 – 17:50 UTC ]

Program Note: Here's hoping everyone had a happy Christmas and found what they wanted under the tree (or otherwise celebrated the winter solstice in their own chosen fashion). I'm busily working on tomorrow's column, the second installment of our year-end awards. So while I dig through innumerable 2019 stories and articles, I would invite everyone to sit back and enjoy a column I wrote ten years ago. In it, I uncover a worldwide conspiracy that each and every one of you has participated in at one point or another in your lives. Yes, you! You're a co-conspirator just like all the others....

 

The Biggest Conspiracy Of All
[Originally published December 23, 2009]

Speaking as someone who generally enjoys a good conspiracy theory just for the "creative writing" aspect alone, in all good conscience I simply must report this shocking news: I have uncovered a big, fat conspiracy that is no mere theory. We're either being lied to, or we're joining in the propagation of the lie ourselves, with merriment. In actual fact, it would not be hyperbole to call this the father of all conspiracies.

And almost every single one of us has participated in this gigantic hoax, in one form or another, at least once in our lives. For many, it happens like clockwork on a regular basis. And it seems to prove Hitler's point about the "Big Lie" -- if you repeat it often enough, sooner or later a certain segment of the populace will accept it as being true.

This vast conspiracy is not limited to even America, although it certainly has a red, white, and true-blue-American following. While not exactly world-wide, the conspiracy reaches about as far as any such enormous falsehood has ever reached on our globe, so that even peoples who don't buy into the conspiracy's underlying storyline still participate in the conspiracy with jolly abandon.

The conspiracy itself is insidious and highly discriminatory, since the targets of the falsehood are a tiny segment of the population who are vulnerable and impressionable. That's right -- an enormous majority of society has banded together to repeat this lie to a minority, and the deciding factor for who is "in" the conspiracy and who is lied to is based purely on physical characteristics -- a throwback to a darker era when society deemed it permissible for such blatant and overt discrimination. The rules of the conspiracy are plain and simple, and are so prevalent that when one who has not been let into the conspiracy meets a complete and utter stranger -- virtually anywhere in this country -- without any prompting or other instigation, they will almost without exception be lied to by this complete stranger (who would rather die of shame than admit the truth).

This conspiracy, looked at from a certain light, is no better than fratboy "hazing" rituals, since the members of the conspiracy -- every man and woman of them -- were themselves lied to for a period of time before being allowed to join in the ritual of misleading others who have not been so initiated. It's as if the entire country had an unspoken agreement to join in this monstrous prank on a small group of fellow citizens.

Those being lied to have a rational and logical choice in what to believe -- either almost everyone they know and even complete strangers that they meet and an agency of the federal government to boot are lying shamelessly and absolutely consistently to them; or, conversely, what everyone is telling them must be true. The scope and size of the conspiracy mean that applying Occam's Razor in the usual fashion will lead them to believe the lie, instead of uncovering the truth of the matter. In other words, the lesson taught is that almost nobody they've ever met in their entire lives can be fully trusted any more. This is why the conspiracy is such a negative one -- because it results in finally accepting the paranoid notion that everyone really has banded together to make a fool out of you. Which leads to disillusionment and loss of innocence. Stumbling out of the dark, in this particular instance, leads almost immediately to doubting all the stories told by the perpetrators of this myth.

This may, in the end, do some good. Because a healthy skepticism is almost a required trait to deal with the modern world. No facts or stories should be taken on faith in the person speaking such, as it is obvious that informed people should view people saying "It's true! Really!" with a seriously jaundiced eye from that point on. Which, as I said, is actually a good thing, in the end.

This conspiracy has a name. And it is no coincidence that this lie is alphabetically correspondent with Satan, since as I said the evil of divisively selecting one segment of the public -- on physical characteristics alone -- and then repeatedly lying to them is a horrendous practice which should, quite obviously, be denounced by all upstanding folks who wish to allow American society to grow out of this juvenile behavior and mature as a society.

Because that's really the key to the whole conspiracy -- a juvenile falsehood told by those who have no excuse for such childish behavior. No excuse whatsoever, since (almost by definition) none of the members of the conspiracy can defend their actions as childlike, rather than childish.

I realize I am fighting a headwind by exposing this insidious lie, and that merry members of the conspiracy are simply never going to change their behavior, since they are all convinced that lying to a physically-challenged minority is somehow for their own good.

Sigh.

Maybe they're right after all. It's so much easier just to believe the lie, and (by doing so) avoid tilting at this particular windmill. Screaming the truth in a crowd would not make me friends -- in fact it would likely put me in fear of turning such into a mob screaming for my blood.

It's so much easier to avoid all of that. And, after all, this conspiracy has been ongoing for hundreds of years, so I guess it does no real harm. So, count me in, and allow me to say without any hint of dishonesty or smirking irony:

"Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus."

Santa

Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night!

 

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

63 Comments on “From The Archives -- The Biggest Conspiracy Of All”

  1. [1] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And to put a recent "conspiracy" to rest:

    From the CBC (Canadian Broadcast Network) re: cuts to Home Alone removing Trump scene:

    'These edits were done in 2014 when we first acquired the film and before Mr. Trump was elected president.'

    There you go, snowflakes. You can sleep again.

  2. [2] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Balthasar -

    What? I must have missed something... I've been diving into 2019 all day...

    Gimme a link to the main storyline!

    :-)

    -CW

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    'These edits were done in 2014 when we first acquired the film and before Mr. Trump was elected president.'

    Facts to support??

    None...

    It's just CBC doing damage control..

    The fact that they feel the need to control the damage proves they know they frak'ed up..

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    What? I must have missed something... I've been diving into 2019 all day...

    Gimme a link to the main storyline!

    "That's what you get for missing staff meetings."
    -Admiral James T. Kirk, STAR TREK III, The Search For Spock

    :D I have been binge-watching all the Star Trek movies in my convalescence..

    ==============================
    The petty hate and vindictiveness of Trump/America haters..

    CBC removes Donald Trump's scene from 'Home Alone 2' broadcast: report
    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/cbc-removes-donald-trumps-scene-from-home-alone-2-broadcast

    This is exactly what I am talking about...

    It's sad...
    =====================================

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthasar,

    Actually, the theory is that Justin BlackFace Trudeau was pissed at President Trump for making Canada up their paltry contribution to NATO and pulling Trump out of HOME ALONE 2 was done in revenge..

    That makes much more sense then your fact-less claim.. :D

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Well, of course. But, suppose you tell me what you think IS real.

    I can tell you what's real..

    Hatred.. Visceral, soul-rendering, insane hatred..

    Of President Donald Trump..

    That's pretty much the only real thing around here..

    All else flows from that dark black hate...

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    GRRRRRR

    Liz,

    Well, of course. But, suppose you tell me what you think IS real.

    I can tell you what's real..

    Hatred.. Visceral, soul-rendering, insane hatred..

    Of President Donald Trump..

    That's pretty much the only real thing around here..

    All else flows from that dark black hate...

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean, ya'all made the same claim about Republicans and their hatred towards Obama..

    And yet ya'all deny the hatred that exists for Democrats for President Trump??

    Seriously???

    Hell, with all the "hate" that Republicans had for Obama, they never tried to impeach him. They never tried to nullify a free, fair, legal, democratic and Constitutional election...

    Ya'all are the Republicans on steroids of 2016-2025...

    The facts are conclusive and undeniable....

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Adriana Cohen: Trump deserves credit for strong economy – ‘expert’ predictions of disaster were all wrong
    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/adriana-cohen-ignore-experts-keep-getting-it-wrong

    ALL the experts were WRONG..

    Including all but a few "experts" here in Weigantia..

    The fact that they (and ya'all) can be SOOOO wrong about SOOOO many things and STILL be offering predictions as if they carry ANY validity whatsoever??

    Mind-boggling.

    I mean, I can understand it if they (and ya'all) would first CONCEDE that they (and ya'all) were wrong..

    Show SOME semblance of maturity and own up to being wrong...

    But the "experts" can't even do that.. They spin some bullshit yarn about how Odumbo really deserves the credit..

    Even if that WASN'T laughable bullshit, it wouldn't change the fact that the "experts" both in and out of Weigantia were STILL WRONG...

    So, my advice for so-called "experts"??

    Own up to past mistakes first.. Concede how wrong... how utterly and COMPLETELY and UNEQUIVOCALLY wrong ya'all have been in the past..

    Then.. and ONLY then.. Will your current predictions have even the SLIGHTEST bit of credibility..

    I ain't holding my breath, though... :eyeroll:

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rut Roh Weigantians.. :D

    Looks like RCP (the only acceptable poll here in Weigantia) has restarted polling on impeachment.

    And the new numbers look even WORSE for Democrats..

    From .8 to 1.1 points against Impeachment..

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/public_approval_of_the_impeachment_and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html

    As I said, this is the Democrat's Kobyashi Maru....

    There simply is NO PATH for Democrats that will make this ANYTHING but a huge debacle.. An albatross that will remain around the Democrat Party neck until election day...

    Democrats not only CAN'T WIN, they won't even be able to pull out anything that can be SPIN'ed as anything remotely looking like a win..

    Democrats' best chance is to drop the whole thing now and hope SOME of the population forgets about impeachment by election day..

    Will Democrats do the smart thing??

    Sheeya right.. When Monkees fly outta my butt...

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now THIS is one of the best ideas I have heard in a LONG time..

    An Impeachment Role for the Supreme Court?

    Do the charges against Trump pass constitutional muster? The justices should decide before the Senate does.
    In the present overheated state of official Washington, there may be no alternative to charging into an impeachment trial whose outcome is a foregone conclusion. There is no allegation of treason, bribery, a high crime, or a misdemeanor, the four categories of offense the Constitution identifies as justifying the removal of a president, and no evidence of any such offense. The Democrats tried bribery for a couple of weeks after their focus groups were stirred by it, but gave it up as too implausible. The only bribe that has been unearthed was of the Biden family, and not even this rabid ragtag of bloodless assassins has tried treason, though that wicked act was much bandied about in the piping days of the previous Democratic putsch attempt over collusion between Trump and Russia in the 2016 election. The preferable next step would be for the Senate to ask the Supreme Court to determine whether the four grounds cited by the Constitution for removal of a president are exclusive, and accordingly this impeachment bill need not be tried, or those categories are merely illustrative, and Gerald Ford was correct when he said impeachment can be for any reason the majority in the House of Representatives determines.

    https://tinyurl.com/wma4nk7

    Let the SCOTUS decide the Constitutionality of the House Democrats actions both during this faux impeachment coup and it's immediate aftermath..

    I am MORE than willing to abide by the SCOTUS's decision..

    Ya'all???

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Democrats claim Trump exceeded his powers, without much specificity, and they accuse him of contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with a proceeding that gave him none of the relevant rights accorded to defendants by the Bill of Rights. Their battle is not to remove the president, which they know to be impossible, but to be able to claim that half the Congress soberly thought his conduct in office was so dishonest that they “conscientiously” (Pelosi) believe he committed a crime that prevented him from having the moral and legal right to finish his term, and the Republican rejection already is billed as partisan cowardice by Republicans. When this clunker limps out of the House, after Pelosi has adequately whipped her congressional delegation to get it through the doubtless exacting filter of “their consciences,” the Senate should consider voting to send it to the Supreme Court, to determine whether what is afoot is just a naked attempt to embarrass a partisan opponent by attempting to incite public belief that President Trump may be guilty of a very serious offense, without actually alleging one or citing any evidence of one.

    This is not just the attempted criminalization of policy differences but the defamatory rendering in legalese of the hatred, frustrations, snobbery, and psychiatric shortcomings and dysfunctions of the Democratic leadership. It is a mockery of the Constitution that should only have the legitimization of a hearing by the United States Senate if the one unimpeachable authority left in the American state, the Supreme Court, deems it necessary for this meritless case to be heard.

    Let the SCOTUS decide if this is a legitimate impeachment by House Democrats.. Or if it's nothing but a vile and illegitimate expression of Trump/America hatred by those same House Democrats..

    I will stand by the SCOTUS decision when or if it ever comes to pass...

    I am betting that, if McConnell even makes one small iota of intent to put the matter before the SCOTUS??

    I am betting that Pelosi will drop the whole faux impeachment coup in a stone-cold second... :D

    What a pleasant thought that is.. :D

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    If you honestly believe that Trump committed no crime, then why are you not demanding that he allow those who had first hand knowledge into the accusations testify to his innocence?

    If you honestly believe that those Trump aides have information that proves your claim, why didn't Democrats go thru the courts to have the subpoenas enforced??

    You can't win, Russ.. ALL the facts and ALL the reality is against you...

    Democrats have no case.. Democrats KNOW they would have lost their court claims..

    THAT is why they have these 2 bullshit claims that aren't even crimes..

    And THAT is why they are afraid to send it to the Senate..

    Because even House Democrats know they have no case..

  14. [14] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    CW, Mike [4]: HOME ALONE - GATE

    This is the article:

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-cbc-home-alone-2-cameo-cut_n_5e04e804e4b0843d3604133f

    It says within that the film was obtained and cut in 2014. I'm guessing Fox was slow today.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    First off, HuffPoop?? :D

    Secondly, we only have the Anti-Trump studio's word that it was trimmed in 2014...

    No facts to support the claim..

    As I said.. It IS telling that the CBC felt they had to move to damage control... :D

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:
  17. [17] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    First off, HuffPoop??

    Had to. Your source lied.

    Secondly, we only have the Anti-Trump studio's word that it was trimmed in 2014...

    Oh, who are we gonna believe? The Canadian Broadcasters or Fox News on a holiday weekend?

    Well, not Fox.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Had to. Your source lied.

    Thank you for proving once again that your definition of "lie" is whatever suits your partisan agenda...

    Oh, who are we gonna believe? The Canadian Broadcasters or Fox News on a holiday weekend?

    Well, not Fox.

    And yet, you quote FOX when it suits your partisan agenda..

    Funny how that is, eh? :D

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again... The question has to be asked..


    Stock markets gained $17 trillion in value in 2019...
    EVEN MORE RECORDS... DEVELOPING...
    NASDAQ TOPS 9,000...
    AMAZON STOCK UP 24.4%...
    APPLE ON A HIGH...
    Trump rally far outpacing past presidents...
    Top 10 Home Sales Totaled $1.1 Billion...
    World's Richest Earn $1.2 Trillion!
    Recession, robots, rockets: Another roaring 20s?

    http://www.drudgereport.com

    How do ya'all reconcile all of ya'all's doomsday predictions with the FACTS and REALITY of the here and now???

    Were ya'all LYING when ya'all made those end of the world as we know it predictions??

  20. [20] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale-
    Didn't the roaring twenties roar us right off a cliff?

    I doubt the 17 trillion in value was obtained by providing anything of value that would benefit society and our country. It was most likely obtained with stock buybacks and other things that do not benefit society and our country instead of investing in productive mutually beneficial things.

    You see your claims as proving things are wonderful. I see it as we are either heading full speed in the wrong direction toward a big fall or like Wile E. Coyote we have already gone over the cliff and are just waiting for gravity to catch up to the momentum that took us off the cliff.

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Didn't the roaring twenties roar us right off a cliff?

    I dunno.. It was a tad bit before my time.. :D

    You see your claims as proving things are wonderful. I see it as we are either heading full speed in the wrong direction toward a big fall or like Wile E. Coyote we have already gone over the cliff and are just waiting for gravity to catch up to the momentum that took us off the cliff.

    Such doom-saying has been common-place the last few years..

    And yet, we're not only still here, we're thriving..

    So.. APPARENTLY, something is wrong with the prediction algorithm..

  22. [22] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    As for CW's conspiracy, as the youngest child by the time I was old enough to understand the concept of Santa I already knew it wasn't real.

    My big moment of childhood disillusionment was when I found out there are no babies in a Baby Ruth.

  23. [23] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    No.
    Your "evidence" clearly shows only some of us are thriving.

    Many if not most are not.

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    As for CW's conspiracy, as the youngest child by the time I was old enough to understand the concept of Santa I already knew it wasn't real.

    *****WHAT!!!!!!???????********

    Your "evidence" clearly shows only some of us are thriving.

    Many if not most are not.

    There will always be malcontents who refuse to thrive even when afforded every opportunity..

    There will also be those who continiously make really stoopid decisions and then throw up their hands with a whiny and petulant "WHY ME!!???"

    But, by and large, we all have the same opportunities...

    Speaking as someone who has taken some pretty hard knocks this year.....

    http://sjfm.us/pics/hospital1.jpg

    ...I can attest to my mood and my station in life are pretty damn good.. :D

  25. [25] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    In truth the Tuesday-Thursday model doesn't really work for Donald either. On Tuesday he's already changed his mind seventeen times before lunch, and by Thursday he's forgotten all his Tuesday opinions entirely.

  26. [26] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    But, by and large, we all have the same opportunities...

    That's just bunk. Most folks don't have any stock.
    And, pointedly, most of those are on your side of the aisle... and to think, it only cost us Trillions on the deficit.

    Hey, maybe there are government programs that will spread that wealth around, like say, an infrastructure program? No? Nope.

    So this is Bush-enomics all over again. So you've got to time the hand-over to the Democrats just BEFORE it crashes, rather than after, as you did the last time this happened.

    Gotta admit, Republicants have big shiny ones, and Liz Warren is looking more reasonable every day.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    In truth the Tuesday-Thursday model doesn't really work for Donald either. On Tuesday he's already changed his mind seventeen times before lunch, and by Thursday he's forgotten all his Tuesday opinions entirely.

    Perhaps.. But that's not impeachable.. :D

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's just bunk. Most folks don't have any stock.
    And, pointedly, most of those are on your side of the aisle... and to think, it only cost us Trillions on the deficit.

    Those who whine that things aren't fair are part of the problem.. Not part of the solution..

    Hey, maybe there are government programs that will spread that wealth around,

    Uh... WELFARE...

    The problem is you want to give wealth to those who are too lazy to earn it themselves..

    America would not be the sole remaining SuperPower it is today if that attitude was prevalent...

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michael Moore Predicts 2020 Trump Victory: Trump's Level Of Support "Has Not Gone Down One Inch"
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/12/26/michael_moore_predicts_2020_trump_victory_trumps_level_of_support_has_not_gone_down_one_inch.html

    As prescient as he was in 2016... :D

    Is there anyone here who honestly believes that President Trump is NOT going to be re-elected??

    Anyone???

  30. [30] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Those who whine that things aren't fair are part of the problem.. Not part of the solution..

    Lousy ingrates! Why don't they take their money..

    Waitaminute. They don't have any money.

    Uh... WELFARE...

    You mean like the soybean farmers? Their bail-out cost the same as the auto-bailout, except that we won't get any of that back. THAT'S DIFFERENT! ...right.

    The problem is you want to give wealth to those who are too lazy to earn it themselves..

    Like Apple and Amazon, who can take this money and add it to their pile. You've got a funny definition of the word "lazy".

    Another roaring 20s?

    Sure, cause that worked out so well.

  31. [31] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Is there anyone here who honestly believes that President Trump is NOT going to be re-elected?

    Me, but I'm keeping mum. Better to let YOU be surprised next time.

  32. [32] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    reposted fron prior column with minor mea culpa that i didn't include a democratic example for fairness' sake.

    The trouble deciding if Clinton changed his mind between Tuesday and Thursday is that it depends on the definition of "is."

    If there were an Obama example i would have used it, but he's the infallible savior of the human race and second coming of plato.

    ;P
    JL

  33. [33] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The problem is you want to give wealth to those who are too lazy to earn it themselves..

    like paris hilton?

  34. [34] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    he's the infallible savior of the human race and second coming of plato

    No, but he is better than many who have held that office, including Trump.

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lousy ingrates! Why don't they take their money..

    Waitaminute. They don't have any money.

    You may characterize it however you wish..

    But the simple fact is, when life hands you lemons, you have two choices..

    Whine and bitch and moan how life ain't FAIR!!

    Or pick yerself up and make a better life..

    The Democrats invariably picks the first option. :^/

    You mean like the soybean farmers? Their bail-out cost the same as the auto-bailout, except that we won't get any of that back. THAT'S DIFFERENT! ...right.

    Now yer BITCHING about bailing people out?? Just a few comments ago, you were DEMANDING to spread the wealth around.

    Ahhh That's right. You only want to spread the wealth to people who are ideologically & politically appropriate...

    Like Apple and Amazon, who can take this money and add it to their pile. You've got a funny definition of the word "lazy".

    Apple and Amazon fill a need.. Democrats have no problem taking Apple's and Amazon's money for their own partisan agenda..

    WHen they had a lock on government, what did Odumbo and the Dumbocrats do to force the Apples and Amazons to cough up any money??

    Not a damn thing..

    So, please.. Yer whining is very unbecoming seeing as how you never whine about Democrats..

    Sure, cause that worked out so well.

    Yup.. We're still here ain't we?? We're the only remaining SuperPower on the planet..

    I'de say it worked out pretty damn well, eh? :D

    D

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Me, but I'm keeping mum. Better to let YOU be surprised next time.

    Yea, because I sure wasn't surprised the 1st time... I called President Trump's election dead on, even down to the exact EC count.. :D

    That's why you should listen when I say that President Trump's win is going to be even BIGGER this time around..

    Will likely even win the Vanity Vote.. Not that THAT means anything other than bragging rights.. :D

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    he's the infallible savior of the human race and second coming of plato

    No, but he is better than many who have held that office, including Trump.

    Apparently, you haven't been listening to your Democrat Party in the here and now.. :D

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    The problem is you want to give wealth to those who are too lazy to earn it themselves..

    like paris hilton?

    And who make Paris Hilton who she is?? Who is Hilton's biggest base??

    Whiny social justice identity conscious Democrats...

    Take responsibility for her..

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    McConnell hit for impeachment coordination with Trump – but Dems did the same with Clinton
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-hit-for-impeachment-coordination-with-trump-but-dems-did-the-same-with-clinton

    Apparently, the problem of the Senate coordinating with the White House during impeachment is *ONLY* a problem when it's a GOP Senate and a GOP White House...

    Apparently... :eyeroll:

  40. [40] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    You may characterize it however you wish..

    I'm not characterizing them, you are. You say they should do more, I say, what? There's full employment. Some of these folks have TWO jobs to make ends meet. Would THREE jobs make you happy? You're really just exercising your penchant for making the rich richer.

    You only want to spread the wealth to people who are ideologically & politically appropriate..

    And you only want to spread the wealth to people who are ideologically & politically IN-appropriate.

    You seem to keep forgetting that we're talking about PUBLIC money. Poor people pay taxes too. You think that their money is best kept in rich folk's bank accounts. That is, of course, backward.

    The middle class has been dwindling since the Reagan Revolution, mostly through this swindle. Keep it up and you have a country with a few rich folks surrounded by poor folks: feudalism.

    you never whine about Democrats

    Duh. No reason to. They don't have cruel policies.

    I'd say it worked out pretty damn well, eh?

    If you don't count twenty years of depression. Finally got out of it with a war followed by ten years of high taxes. Yep, sounds Republican to me.

  41. [41] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    the problem of the Senate coordinating with the White House during impeachment is *ONLY* a problem when it's a GOP Senate and a GOP White House..

    Of course it is. It's collusion.

    You want a Clinton-style impeachment? Sure. Bring it on. But that's not what McConnell is suggesting at all.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm not characterizing them, you are. You say they should do more, I say, what? There's full employment. Some of these folks have TWO jobs to make ends meet. Would THREE jobs make you happy? You're really just exercising your penchant for making the rich richer.

    It's not about making ME happy, it's about making them happy..

    It's easy to blame someone else.. That gives you an excuse NOT to take a good look at yerself in the mirror..

    And you only want to spread the wealth to people who are ideologically & politically IN-appropriate.

    I don't want to spread the wealth at ALL..

    YOU want wealth!?? EARN IT!!

    Duh. No reason to. They don't have cruel policies.

    And the bigotry stands exposed.. I bet you think all black people are criminals too.. :eyeroll:

    If you don't count twenty years of depression.

    In our lifetime?? Hasn't happened..

    Yer only depressed because the American people chose President Trump over President Hillary Clinton..

  43. [43] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    McConnell hit for impeachment coordination with Trump – but Dems did the same with Clinton

    how does that even make sense? democrats in the 105th congress were in the minority. they weren't ABLE to coordinate the procedures of the senate trial with the white house even if they had wanted to.

    JL

  44. [44] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    correction, 105th AND 106th. the house sent the articles over during the 105th and the trial was held during the 106th. both had a republican senate majority of 55-45.

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    how does that even make sense? democrats in the 105th congress were in the minority. they weren't ABLE to coordinate the procedures of the senate trial with the white house even if they had wanted to.

    Does it matter who was the majority and minority??

    Senate Democrats coordinated with the White House...

    You people claim Senators should not coordinate with the White House at all..

    But it's OK if Dems do it..

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    You people claim Senators should not coordinate with the White House at all..

    Of course, no one here said BOO when House Democrats co-ordinated with Trump/America haters, eh??

    Funny how Democrats are ALWAYS pure as the driven snow.. :^/

  47. [47] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Does it matter who was the majority and minority??

    are you frakkin' kidding me? of course it matters. it's one thing for a minority to prevent the majority from skewing the trial one way or the other, and a completely different animal for the majority to actively tip the scales. if the democrats were in the majority and were trying to prevent donald from calling witnesses in his defense, i'd say the same.

  48. [48] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    in any trial, be it presidential impeachment or traffic court, the goal should be for both sides to be fairly represented.

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    are you frakkin' kidding me? of course it matters. it's one thing for a minority to prevent the majority from skewing the trial one way or the other, and a completely different animal for the majority to actively tip the scales. if the democrats were in the majority and were trying to prevent donald from calling witnesses in his defense, i'd say the same.

    Except you DIDN'T say the same when House Democrats were doing their witch trials in secret..

    in any trial, be it presidential impeachment or traffic court, the goal should be for both sides to be fairly represented.

    Where was this refreshing attitude during the House procedures???

  50. [50] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And Mike resorts to nonsense.

    You're absolutely right, nypoet22, in every aspect.

  51. [51] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Where was this refreshing attitude during the House procedures???

    ok, i had to explain the difference between majority and minority, now i suppose i must explain the difference between senate and house. the framers designed the house to run hot, elections every 2 years, representatives who live and work near their constituents. in impeachment, that means the house are the prosecutors. it's their job to oversee, investigate, and if they think something is a crime, impeach. that's why the impeachment of clinton was probably justified, even though the not guilty verdict was also probably the right way to go. the senate is supposed to be more cool and deliberative, set a higher standard for fairness and thoughtfulness. that's why there's never been a president convicted.

    JL

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    And Mike resorts to nonsense.

    Facts to support??

    None??

    Same ol' Balthy.. :D

    But 's OK.. I still love ya, man.. :D

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    ok, i had to explain the difference between majority and minority, now i suppose i must explain the difference between senate and house. the framers designed the house to run hot, elections every 2 years, representatives who live and work near their constituents. in impeachment, that means the house are the prosecutors. it's their job to oversee, investigate, and if they think something is a crime, impeach. that's why the impeachment of clinton was probably justified, even though the not guilty verdict was also probably the right way to go. the senate is supposed to be more cool and deliberative, set a higher standard for fairness and thoughtfulness. that's why there's never been a president convicted.

    I was told one time by my Captain in Iraq that I tapdance better than any elltee he has ever seen.. :D

    I bow to the master here...

    It's OK for the House to be biased as long as it's DEMOCRATS in the House..

  54. [54] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    It's OK for the House to be biased as long as it's DEMOCRATS in the House..

    it's okay for the House to be biased, period. that's part of the job description. i believe i mentioned something about bill clinton in there...

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya ever notice how, in all ya'all's stories, Democrats are ALWAYS the heroes and ALWAYS morally right and Republicans are ALWAYS the villains and ALWAYS Mark Pellegrino-incarnate??

    It's uncanny that it always works out that way...

    MIND BOGGLING... :D

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    But that's not what McConnell is suggesting at all.

    It doesn't matter *WHAT* McConnell is suggesting..

    You nor Pelosi has ***ANY*** say in the matter..

    The GOP controls the Senate Impeachment proceedings.

    PERIOD... FULL STOP....

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    That's just bunk. Most folks don't have any stock.

    But everyone has the OPPORTUNITY to get stock, if they work towards it and make good decisions to achieve that goal..

    The promise of America is not that everyone gets the same result..

    The promise of America is that everyone gets the same OPPORTUNITY...

    Those who choose, who make the right decisions?? They succeed..

    Those who whine and complain and feel the world owes them a living?? Who belly-ache "LIFE ISN'T FAIR!!!"... THOSE are the ones who end up in welfare lines and become Democrats...

  58. [58] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    everyone has the OPPORTUNITY to get stock, if they work towards it and make good decisions to achieve that goal

    You don't believe that. How about an elderly person on a fixed income?

    And how much stock do you own? Could you live on the residuals? What if the market tanks?

    You make it sound so easy, it's not. My dad, a military officer, couldn't make stocks work for him.

    And, by the way, if it were that important, we'd each start with stocks by law. There is no such law, and as I've said, there's no guarantee that they wouldn't tank at the worst possible time.

    "Life isn't fair" is a good motto, because it isn't. But life doesn't have to be harsh, either. Not in this country. No one signs up for that.

    "I've got mine, screw everyone else!" might sound like a good philosophy from your position of white privilege, but it's wrong. America takes care of women, children, the elderly, the ill, the diseased, the downtrodden.

    That's what makes us great.

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    You don't believe that. How about an elderly person on a fixed income?

    I do believe that..

    Where there is the will, there is a way..

    And how much stock do you own? Could you live on the residuals? What if the market tanks?

    I own none.. Because I CHOOSE to own none.. But I have the opportunity to own stock if I wanted to..

    You make it sound so easy, it's not. My dad, a military officer, couldn't make stocks work for him.

    And that is the fault of America exactly why???

    America doesn't guarantee that everyone will succeed.. America guarantees that everyone will have the OPPORTUNITY to succeed..

    And, by the way, if it were that important, we'd each start with stocks by law.

    No one but you is SAYING it's important.. That's what's so great about America.. We have the CHOICE to make it important or make it not important..

    "Life isn't fair" is a good motto, because it isn't. But life doesn't have to be harsh, either. Not in this country. No one signs up for that.

    Spoken like a true entitled person.. :D

    Life IS harsh.. Speaking from experience not only of my last few weeks but of my entire life.. Joined the Air Force when I was 17 and have been fighting every since..

    Everything I have, I have EARNED..

    That's what's missing from Americans today..

    The Left side expects that things will be HANDED to them..

    No willingness to WORK for what they want..

    "I've got mine, screw everyone else!" might sound like a good philosophy from your position of white privilege, but it's wrong.

    That's because you are looking at it from the perspective of an entitled person..

    What you say is "I've Got Mine, Screw Everyone Else!!" is nothing more than "I've earned mine!! You can earn yours too if you just want to put in the work.."

    America takes care of women, children, the elderly, the ill, the diseased, the downtrodden.

    America takes care of those who CAN'T take care of themselves..

    America says to those who WON'T take care of themselves, "Get a life... Or become a Democrat"

    It's really that simple...

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Show me someone who is not making it in America and I'll show you someone who, at some point or another, made some bad decisions...

    I don't care WHO you are..

  61. [61] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I own none.. Because I CHOOSE to own none.. But I have the opportunity to own stock if I wanted to..

    So Trump's great success with the markets doesn't even affect you. Or me. Or my mom. Or anyone without the income to buy stocks.

    But the OPPORTUNITY has you all giddy. Is that it?

    I've got news for you. Few people actually own stock, fewer yet own enough to live on it, and most of them inherited it. That's what you're giddy about. They've got you completely snowed.

    Because 1-5% are comfortable. The rest of us have too many bills to pay, too many mouths to feed, different priorities, or no luck at all. No one is saying that the government should fork over enough to make us comfortable, but no one is saying, either, that we should content ourselves with just applauding every time stocks rise for others.

    And you've got a fixation on those that WON'T work, regardless of how few that is, and no regard at all for those that CAN'T work enough, regardless of how many folks that is. Typical of your class, I suppose, to blame those closest to you economically for their ills.

    I have no such illusions. The game is rigged for the rich, and the only way that we get what we want is to fight for every scrap. If you think that you can get rich by working, I wish you the best of luck and much success. But for most folks, face it, they've got better odds playing the lottery.

    The 1% own, what, like 90% of the wealth in this country. Meanwhile, people hurt, have diseases, become crippled, become cold. America has a social safety net, but it's underfunded and cruelly kept away from some. It's like when commercials say "ask your doctor". I don't think that I've seen the same doctor twice in my life.

    So if you're happy to applaud from the sidelines, good luck with that. As for me, I'm gonna keep fighting for me and all of those like me. 'Cause I'm not the slightest bit conned.

  62. [62] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    And who make Paris Hilton who she is?? Who is Hilton's biggest base??

    You'd prefer i choose a Republican example of someone who got where they are through inheritance and never worked a day in their life? EdSec DeVos is about as lazy, entitled, vain and useless as jeff lebowski.

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    So Trump's great success with the markets doesn't even affect you. Or me. Or my mom. Or anyone without the income to buy stocks.

    Irrelevant..

    The point is, **YA'ALL** predicted that President Trump would destroy the economy and Wall Street would tank..

    Ya'all were completely and 1000% wrong and ya'all can't admit it.

    So if you're happy to applaud from the sidelines, good luck with that. As for me, I'm gonna keep fighting for me and all of those like me. 'Cause I'm not the slightest bit conned.

    No. Yer just pissy because your candidate lost.

    Democrats haven't done any better in taking care of the "little guy"...

    Why do you think we **HAVE** President Trump??

    Think about it..

Comments for this article are closed.