Evidence for God from Science

Better to be a jack--- than a dumb---, eh? And no, it wasn't directed at you. Wouldn't be worth the effort.

Ok, Phil, I will dial it back.

edwardmurphy wrote:

Well, record debt and deficit.
Horrific perception of the US abroad.
The propensity to repeat the same mistakes over and over.
Number 1 target for terrorism.

Sure this has been the case for what seems like ages BUT that kind of is the point.

And no, it isn't just the USA of course.

I agree that all of those things are problems, but blaming them all on politicians makes no sense to me.

The deficit, for example, really exploded when Reagan massively increased military spending while lowering taxes, yet a lot of conservatives worship him. And in his defense, the huge increase in military spending did bankrupt the Soviets and end the Cold War. So I guess the question is whether or not it was worth it. That's a complex question.

The perception issue is unfortunate. The Bush Administration really hurt our national prestige. That neocon obsession with nation-building worked out poorly for all involved. Obama's failure to hold Syria to his Red Line threat made it worse. Still, I don't think it's fair to ignore all of the good decisions made by politicians. And since we're talking about how a neophyte might do things better, let's take a second remember that hawkish Bush-era neo-con and Putin enemy John Bolton is on the short list for SecState. Think that would help our national prestige?

The propensity for repeating mistakes is another way of saying that our way of doing things is not a good way. That may be true. I guess it depends on how you look at it. For example, our troubled relationship with Iran goes back to our decision to overthrow an elected government for nationalizing the foreign oil companies that had taken over their oil fields. Should we have sat on our hands and let them do that?

So yeah, you've identified legitimate concerns, but I think it's important to remember that every decision is made for a reason, and sometimes blowback is something that we just have to expect and deal with.

I know liberals don't know about tax cuts and how they stimulate the economy,not only when Reagan cut taxes but JFK also.Tax cuts work and they do stimulate the economy,they even increase tax revenue that goes to the federal government but what has given tax cuts a bad name is politicians like wasteful government spending which really covers up the benefits of tax cuts. Being a conservative is about having less government spending also except for the most important things like a strong military,but we have too many RINO'S who run as conservatives but have not reduced wasteful government spending,plus liberals who love to have wasteful government spending and refuse to try to balance the budget.Reagan knew the Soviet Union could not keep up with America and would go broke trying to counter Reagan's Star Wars missile defense system,of course liberals deny it worked eventhough the Soviet Union went broke and collapsed not long after Reagan left office,they refuse to give Reagan's strategy the credit it deserves because it ended the cold war. But what is good about Trump's tax cuts is that they will allow America to compete with China and other countries once our corporate tax rate is lowered to 15% like China's,then businesses can be convinced to stayt in America and it will attract businesses to come to America to build and produce things,this will increase jobs in America which will boost America's economy. But Trump's tax cuts also simplify taxes into just three brackets instead of seven and just as always tax cuts will stimulate America's economy.tariffs are just extra leveredge if need be but are not the main strength of Trump's tax cut plan that was thought up by Larry Kudlow. I know liberals don't understand how tax cuts help the economy and they look at it like tax cuts benefit the rich,but they fail to realize the rich produce jobs for people to produce products,services,etc which is good for the economy. Liberals think that high taxes punish the rich but its just a liberal myth because it hurts the economy and produces less jobs for people which slows down the economy.

edwardmurphy wrote:My other concern with Trump is his tendency to be kind of clannish and revenge-minded. We're just coming out of the nastiest campaign in modern history. If Trump wants to be effective then he needs to mend fences with key members of both parties. So far it looks like he's more focused on rewarding supporters.

His pick for SecState - Guiliani or Bolton - are both controversial. Bolton is really hawkish and has ties to the Bush-era foreign policy didasters. Guiliani is a polarizing figure with a lot of skeletons. Neither is a sensible choice.

Ted Cruz for AG is another controversial pick, and is likely to pis off both sides of the aisle.

I've also read that Sarah Palin is being considered to run the EPA. That would enrage a lot of people, and frankly anyone who quits their job as Governor to become a pundit/reality TV star doesn't deserve to run anything.

Finally, his sudden decision to dump Christie seems to have resulted in a lot of chaos in his transition team. There seems to be a major powet struggle going on within his team. That bodes poorly for the future.

Long story short, I think he's in over his head.

Revenge minded Trump? You were propagandized by the lib media and the NeverTrumpers because there is no reason to think this way about Trump. You think he is a jerk because of the way the media twisted what he said and took him out of context. The reason why it did not work for Trump supporters is that we could actually go online and actually listen to Trump give his speeches at rallies and so we knew the media was intentionally trying to make him look bad. If you had actually listened to Trump in context you would not think Trump is revenge minded or a jerk,but you didn't instead you read and listened to how the media made him look bad and you saw somebody who does not represent the real Trump.

I tried to tell you many of times Trump is not a jerk for hitting back after he was attacked first,but you and others ignored it and only saw or heard about Trump's responses,you never knew what was said or done about him first by people and so its no wonder that you think Trump is revenge-minded and a jerk,but you're wrong. I think people like you hate Trump so much that you do not care what people said about Trump first,you ignore it and only focus on how Trump responded to being attacked,it is dishonesty.

Glenn Beck is a nevertrumper but he attacked Trump first and has never got over how Trump attacked him back,he wants to talk God and spirituality but he attacks and just expects Trump to just take it,but Trump didn't and Glenn Beck deserved it,he should apologize to Trump first,but he won't. He acted just like liberals he knows all about who lie and slander political foes and he has his own radio show to push his agenda and he has been totally unfair to Trump in his blindness of the flaws of Ted Cruz compared to Trump.I might could see if you took in consideration what was said about or done to Trump first,but you hate Trump so much that you think he should've just took it and not said anything back to the people who attacked him first.

You must like to get pushed around by people and do not stand up for yourself to think like you do about Trump.Trump just stands up for himself after he is attacked first,he doesn't just shut-up and take it,he hits back so if you liberals don't like it? Don't hit him first and expect to not get hit back,because you and they will. If you're nice then Trump is nice,you don't have to try to slander Trump just because you disagree with him,there are ways to not make it personal in disagreement.If liberals get personal he can get personal back.

Ok, Phil, I will dial it back.

Thanks, Ed.

Philip wrote:Ed/Jac - hey, I know you guys aren't ever going to be best buds, but how about dialing it back a bit - or I'm gonna have to start deleting certain aspects of your posts. You can be critical of each others assertions or beliefs without insulting each other with direct PERSONAL attacks! It's getting rather juvenile! You've BOTH been warned!

Sure thing, boss.

Thanks, Jaco!

I must say that so far Trump is doing a good job,he has already saved jobs from going to Mexico and has convinced a businessman to invest in America which will produce 50,000 jobs. He is already negotiating and is'nt even in office yet,plus he is on his "thank you tour" to thank the people who voted for him and he is reititerating the agenda he ran on and so no need to be pessimistic. If Trump doesn't get everything he ran on it will be because of politicians and not him but America will still be better off,and if he is able to get all of his agenda America will be booming with economic strength again.So far,so good.

Don't let me say I told you so: https://www.rt.com/news/370478-dnc-emai ... er-russia/

Well, the false narrative about the Russians supposedly "stealing" the election - what a heap of cow dung! Did various leaks expose emails and secretive goings on? Yep. Did the LEAKS help Trump, or was it the CONTENT of what was leaked - BIG difference. Like Hillary's narrative that the FBI director cost her the election due to informing congress over another discovered cache of emails with official documents and correspondence on Huma's laptop. But it had nothing at all to do that bonehead Hillary was stupid enough to email as she did, and to have such sloppy protocols for her and her staff. SHE helped torpedo herself with those emails. So, that's one thing.

Back to the Russians and hacking. Should they be a concern? Of course! Putin and his henchmen are very bad guys, never to be trusted, always up to no good. If they exposed any info that impacted the election - again, was it the INFO, or was it the those that leaked it, that MIGHT have had an impact. Now Assange of Wikileaks claims his source was NOT the Russians. The Left just can't come to admit that Trump was elected as a rejection of vast millions to the Clintons, progressive policies, and the last 8 years. THAT is why Clinton lost. Not the Russians, not the leaks, and the massive email debacle and the lies Hillary tried to excuse them with were just more of the kind of stuff that drove the mistrust and rejection that cost her the election.

As for cyber security - we should most definitely be concerned. Some of these hacked releases have been a godsend. However, these leakers are themselves not good guys. Even the most sincere of them have hidden agendas. So, the nuances of all of these things and issues - beware ANY entity, person or organization that tries to spin them into a neat, simple narrative - ESPECIALLY, as with the Clintons and the Left, they are trying to spin lies about why the Democrats and Clintons were sent packing. Let's not also forget that millions did not vote because they not only couldn't stand Hillary and the progressive agenda, but they also had serious and understandable concerns about things Trump has said, and his past actions. A more polite, humble, sober-sounding conservative would likely have made the election for the Republicans a landslide. Millions more had serious concerns and dislike of Clinton and the progressives that voted for Trump because they hated the former far worse. Yet, the left would have us believe that vast millions are all homophobes, haters, racists, etc., etc. Again, you can only spin cow crap so far - and the stink always gives it away, anyway!

Philip wrote:Well, the false narrative about the Russians supposedly "stealing" the election - what a heap of cow dung! Did various leaks expose emails and secretive goings on? Yep. Did the LEAKS help Trump, or was it the CONTENT of what was leaked - BIG difference. Like Hillary's narrative that the FBI director cost her the election due to informing congress over another discovered cache of emails with official documents and correspondence on Huma's laptop. But it had nothing at all to do that bonehead Hillary was stupid enough to email as she did, and to have such sloppy protocols for her and her staff. SHE helped torpedo herself with those emails. So, that's one thing.

Back to the Russians and hacking. Should they be a concern? Of course! Putin and his henchmen are very bad guys, never to be trusted, always up to no good. If they exposed any info that impacted the election - again, was it the INFO, or was it the those that leaked it, that MIGHT have had an impact. Now Assange of Wikileaks claims his source was NOT the Russians. The Left just can't come to admit that Trump was elected as a rejection of vast millions to the Clintons, progressive policies, and the last 8 years. THAT is why Clinton lost. Not the Russians, not the leaks, and the massive email debacle and the lies Hillary tried to excuse them with were just more of the kind of stuff that drove the mistrust and rejection that cost her the election.

As for cyber security - we should most definitely be concerned. Some of these hacked releases have been a godsend. However, these leakers are themselves not good guys. Even the most sincere of them have hidden agendas. So, the nuances of all of these things and issues - beware ANY entity, person or organization that tries to spin them into a neat, simple narrative - ESPECIALLY, as with the Clintons and the Left, they are trying to spin lies about why the Democrats and Clintons were sent packing. Let's not also forget that millions did not vote because they not only couldn't stand Hillary and the progressive agenda, but they also had serious and understandable concerns about things Trump has said, and his past actions. A more polite, humble, sober-sounding conservative would likely have made the election for the Republicans a landslide. Millions more had serious concerns and dislike of Clinton and the progressives that voted for Trump because they hated the former far worse. Yet, the left would have us believe that vast millions are all homophobes, haters, racists, etc., etc. Again, you can only spin cow crap so far - and the stink always gives it away, anyway!

What is disconcerting is how Obama and the Lib's are insulting a superpower with Nuke's.

Russia to Obama: Put up or shut up

With Obama threatening retaliation against Russia after that administration is selling our US uranium to both Russia and China. China opening up old mines in SD and NE - the radiation levels there are bad SEE:

http://www.dakotarural.org/powertech-ne ... ownership/

http://www.chinamining.org/News/2011-03 ... 43789.html

Now look this report over in October 2016...

Wed Oct 5, 2016, Russia suspends nuclear agreement, ends uranium research pact with United States

That is a lot of money lost. Therefore logic says that Obama is using the Hacking thing to retaliate against Russia for breaking the deal. He can't come out and say it due to the pollution happening in the USA because of the deals with China and Russia.

So the hacking incident can turn out into W.W. 3 with Nukes all because of Obama and the Lib's feel it safe to insult Russia whom they gave a reset button too and made uranium deals which failed profiting their donors...

Amazing...

Does anyone get this?

Obama risk's war by insulting Russia to get at Trump to cover the loss to donors over uranium mining which is poisoning millions of Americans including the First Nation people on Pine Ridge and Rosebud!

Pray folks - Pray!
-
-
-

I think Russia and the US has gotten past the worse, now Russia have helped Syria liberate themselves (i.e., liberation of Aleppo) without the US thwarting such. If the US/Coalition flew a bomber in, after the last episode of bombing Syrian Army, then it would have been shot down, leading to a possible world war. That wasn't done, thankfully, and the US seems to be letting go of supplanting Assad with whatever it was (likely oil) that was previously motivating them. I think Trump's election has a lot to do with that, since to have "carry through" would require Hillary's election.

Look, Russia and Putin know that Obama is no longer relevant (really, was he EVER?). Putin likely realizes cooperation is better for everyone. He's not to be trusted, but as long as he doesn't do certain things, we can work with him. Plus, he knows Trump will push back HARD on anything or tactic the Russians attempt. With Trump, Putin knows the consequences will be real and harsh. Plus he simultaneously knows that Trump would like to do business that is good for both countries - so, we work with the carrot and a (BIG) stick - and one the Russians and others well know Trump will use, if necessary.

As for toppling Syria's dictator - how foolish! There would just be more bad guys replacing him, which would only be opposed by other bad-boy factions - and endless cycle that will keep them in Civil War. How are the most people safe and kept from harm - when there is PEACE. Even peace at the end of a gun is better than what the alternative is. A destabilized region of civil war only hurts everyone, and threatens spilling over into adjacent areas. Is this recognizing a brutal dictator - absolutely. Really, is there a better alternative? In such areas, if you go into to remove someone, then who will keep the peace in the vacuum? US? The UN (LOL)? How long are we willing to stay? How many lives and at what financial costs are we willing to pay. Point is, there is a brutal world out there which forces imperfect choices. Working with Russian, dealing with dictators - they all are realities that are sometimes our best options.