Glenn Nall

really? everybody? as in, 100%? 90%? how about 50%...? what about something that doesn't make you sound "melodramatic," like, "many in the FBI, CIA, etc etc..."... Paul, you seem to know so much more than everybody else on the planet. Wish the rest of us had your sources...

yes, Happy Birthday, Dawn! even today...! right - while everything else is slowing down, the years seem to want to speed up, don't they...

I've been meaning to compliment the new look and efficiency of the forum. very, very nice. of course, as human nature often dictates, i only got around to it when I noticed something amiss. what happened to our signatures???!!! AAAHHHHHH!!!!!

yep. how interesting... "interrelationships..."

"There can be little doubt that JURE had secret members inside Cuba, who were working for Castro's downfall. This was true of all of the anti-Castro groups -- they had moles everywhere -- in Miami, in the training camps, and inside Cuba." and it's safe to say that they didn't enter through the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City. Which is what the original argument was: "as an ANTI-CASTRO group, at the Mexico City embassy of Castro's Cuban government."

NOT so fast, Captain Kaos - You're basing this on the assumption that whoever O. allegedly "saw" in either consulate was also willing to see this - what's the word - "dialectically." With nuance. On an impromptu "walk in." Nuance is pretty much the last thing i can imagine in any of the "diplomats" manning the borders of all worlds communist. "Who are you?" "My name's Hidell." "What can we do for you?" "I'd like to go to your great country, Cuba. I've already been to Russia and am looking for something with a view." "What are your credentials?" "I have these papers here which say I'd kill Fidel Castro for a quarter." "Next??!!!"

well, at least you guys got to keep Pelosi. yummy.

ah, dots, schmotz, Mark. what's a few details like 'stick out like a sore thumb' among excessively skilled international spies...?

details, Mr Knight. mere details...

also, did you write all that in your own words...? just curious...

"What was their business at her door? Sylvia told the Warren Commission -- and in December 1963 had told James Hosty -- that their purpose seemed to be based on a mistaken information that she, Sylvia, had the ability to recommend that JURE (the anti-Castro group of which she was a member) accept new members. So they tried for a long time to persuade her that "Leon Oswald" would be perfect to help JURE with their goals to overthrow Fidel Castro." Thanks for this, Paul. To think how much time and how many lives would have been saved had they all known that Fidel Castro would be in 53 years dead anyway. Damn. (seriously - good stuff from Harry Dean.)

i fully agree. as i said: warts and all. to love your country does not mean to love the CIA, or the way we treated the Native Americans who were here first, or Common Core or NAFTA. or even the President. it's to love your country warts and all. and to be aware that it is still, warts and all, an exceptional nation.

You mean like Hillary Clinton?

Ah. That word... Michael, hate to break it to you, but you didn't burst this bubble. I am a very proud American patriot who knows the real definition of patriotism. I wasn't speaking of humans being better or worse (not worst) than others, I was speaking of our country. There's a difference. Human beings are equally valuable; Nations are not. The United States is the greatest country on the planet - warts and all. We are an exceptional country. So please lower yourself from such unattractive sanctimony when preaching to me. The 1st Amendment The 2nd Amendment The 4th Amendment The 18th Amendment Employment Economy Technology Baseball... ... Freedom... is there a country you'd prefer to live in, Michael...?

I know this. I meant it no longer is the reason it's relevant. (and i am working on Hillary's 'list.' haven't forgotten. busy as hell right now.)

Sandy, there's a difference between the general welfare, which is the phrase that has been the cause of the debate for 200 years, and the welfare of the individual, as opposed to the rights of the individual. The history of SCOTUS doing its best to rip the Constitution to pieces is well documented. So to put credential on SCOTUS' history of decision making doesn't carry a lot of water. I feel like i'm the only conservative in this whole damn forum. Now I remember why i lost interest in it last year. It's threads like this and the Hillary one. i'm done with it.

I was about to respond until I saw you compare my principles and opinions to those of Jim Crow's. so i have nothing further to discuss with you. that's very insulting, especially when it's so far from the truth. that kind of crap doesn't do your party much good. go insult someone else, Pat. K? I'm not the one.

I'm not sure you read my point correctly, Pat. I don't know nuthin' about taxes and the country's economy. I spoke nothing about that. I stated very simply that the Fed Gov's job is not to help the less fortunate or tell you what kind of light bulbs to buy or what kind of shower heads to buy or what kind of insurance to buy or who can use which public bathrooms - that's the very xxxx we rebelled against. If Georgia (my home state, and where I still live) owes CA or NY any money, I don't know. Don't quite see how that's relevant to my point. Also, it seems to me that CA's teats have fairly well dried up lately. Not sure anyone's sucking off of them, or even looking at them.

Pat, whether cutting taxes on the wealthy proves to be beneficial to the country or not, this has nothing to do with the question of whether the Federal Government's job is to help "those less fortunate." The issue is a US Constitutional matter, not a nationally fiscal matter. The Federal Government's responsibilities were designed and clearly laid out by those great men who experienced and rejected England's Big Government, um, overreach and thereby designed a Union of States in which each State is to be responsible for itself to the extent that it is able to and in which the Big Government was assigned minimal power. That's the way our country was designed, that's the way the Constitution says it's supposed to work, and that's the answer to the question of what its role is supposed to be (and not how it currently is).

I have no idea what word you're talking about, Michael. I wasn't thinking of a single word when i said that. I simply meant that, since the US does, and is the leader in, many things, the fact that the US is the only country to use the Electoral College does not exactly support his point. Why try to read more into that. It's a clear response to his point. That's all. Surely you don't disagree that the US is unique in many ways...?

damn, Ron, I said it DOESN'T imply anything. you've never before seemed to me the type to just look for something to bitch about. All I did was explain what I meant, at your request. see what I mean?

I didn't say or imply that you are. The sentence reads, "Your comment is unfair," (it is), "and is typical of the Democratic establishment..." - which it is. So the only real inference you can make here is that I've claimed you've made a comment that is typically one heard from the Democratic Establishment. I would neither want to be guilty of even saying things - of even sounding like things - that are typical of the Establishment Government, left or right, if i'm not part of it. My goal, like many of those this election, is to seek a solution, not be part of the problem. Contrary to what many of you think, there are already Democrats in Congress who will want to, and be able to, work together with the administration-to-be. I hope ya'll don't hate that too much. Eldridge Cleaver (famous Democrat) said, simply, and i can't quote it, but - If I'm not part of the solution, I'm part of the problem. I've seen nary even a suggestion of a solution in this thread of gripes and whining; just plain, good old-fashioned blaming - and of the Republicans, as if the Democrats are the party of angels or something. So. your comment was unnecessary, wrong, and typical.

And it was just reported (NOT by CNN) that Trump met with Tulsi Gabbard over the weekend during his transition team meetings. ya'll were saying...?

I am a veteran of the United States Navy. We're the only country that does many things, Kirk.This is what most consider a good thing. We became the United States for this very reason. To compare us to other countries is to not even get why we're Americans. And there are NOT many people from the Right who think the US Constitution might be "wrong." That is a very irresponsible claim. The only people who think it might be "wrong," (whatever that means, as if there are correct and incorrect answers), are those who do not know much about it, why it was written, and in what spirit, and for what purposes. It's by far the Left who think this. Paul this is exactly the reason for the Electoral College. Without it, we'd have 7 or 8 areas of the US that decided the Presidency every election. Nominees wouldn't even campaign in Wyoming and New Hampshire, etc, ignoring their issues and molding their platforms to only what fits California and New York and Texas and Florida. The ONLY way Wyoming and New Hampshire's votes count is with the Electoral College. (Has nothing to do with slavery, Sandy.) For what it's worth, Ron, many Republicans like Gabbard, too. She's one of the few Democrats who present themselves as reasonably willing to - well, use reason - to cross the aisle and kill gridlock. She's a very bright woman. Republicans are not the bible- and gun-toting hillbillies you still seem to think we are. And we're not the ones in bed with Wall Street. As you've just seen the Republican party get shaken up, rightfully so and delightedly by all except the establishment, so you are seeing the Democrat party being necessarily rebuilt. We can thank both HFC and DJT for this. The time was right. This had to happen, and it is. Your comment is unfair and typical of the Democrat establishment making sweeping assertions with no basis in fact and with malice. As HFC lost, this shows that so many are out of touch with the real American population. People, there is a VERY REAL possibility that Donald Trump will surprise you and do good things. Perhaps you have become immuned to hope in the past eight years (since it was the platform that fell flat on its face so very quickly). Trump is not a Republican in spirit. Trump already kicked out all of the lobbyists from his team. Will you complain about that?

"We need someone who will stick it to them?" Stick it to whom, Kirk? The Republicans? really? if that's what you meant, is that how you see your politics?