Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $70,807
80%  
Woo hoo!! And after accruing the balance of the monthlies we're now over 80%!! Less than $18k to go!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by Norseman

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Democrats Have Nothing to Fear but Losing Black Votes

    08/27/2016 10:38:11 AM PDT · 26 of 36
    Norseman to Dilbert San Diego

    >>If Trump can peel off even 20% of the black vote...<<

    Trump has the better approach by saying 95% of blacks will vote for him when they hear what he has to say. You’re right that 20% would be great, but why not ask for all the votes. The rationale for blacks dumping the Dems wholesale is certainly there.

    As for the line of pessimistic thinking about blacks being for “free stuff”, lazy people are for free stuff and laziness knows no color. There are plenty of white people in the “gettin’ my free stuff” line too.

    The real issue is personal responsibility and getting ahead on your own, with help provided by others only when needed. Dem policies provide “help” to keep people locked in unproductive lives; GOP policies provide help when people are truly in need. Big difference.

    This is a winning issue but people need to dump some preconceptions on both sides of it for it to take a serious hold. Once it does it could mark the end of Dem power, which is why they view Trump’s move as an existential threat. It is.

    And Americans of other heritages, Hispanics, Asians, are listening and watching too.

  • WHO is Psychologist Robert Cialdini, and Why is he working for Clinton's Campaign??

    08/26/2016 9:32:11 AM PDT · 53 of 58
    Norseman to Rapscallion

    >>Fifty percent of all democrats have IQs under 100.<<

    Given the definition of IQ, there’s an excellent chance that you’re very close, just as you would be if you had written “Fifty percent of all democrats have IQs over 100.”

  • WHO is Psychologist Robert Cialdini, and Why is he working for Clinton's Campaign??

    08/26/2016 9:18:13 AM PDT · 52 of 58
    Norseman to HombreSecreto

    >>Scott Adams (Dilbert) had this person identified weeks ago.<<

    Yes, in an interview with the WSJ’s Taranto he identified the person that he’s been referring to in his blog as “Godzilla” (as in the Godzilla of persuaders.)

    Interestingly, Adams’ most recent blog post argues that HIllary’s ad with the KKK in it effectively accuses ALL Trump supporters, i.e., nearly half the voters, of being racist. He thinks that to be a huge mistake.

    His blog is well worth reading as Adams is an expert on persuading as well.

  • Fla Chamber Poll: Donald Trump 44%, Hillary Clinton 41%, Gary Johnson 9% (Shock Details)

    08/25/2016 8:42:09 AM PDT · 21 of 27
    Norseman to wita

    >>Then there are the Never Trumpers? Where are they headed?<<

    The Supreme Court issue will eventually drive Never Trumpers into the Trump column, even though many won’t ever admit it and will be voting for him while holding their noses.

    Regardless what one thinks of their political philosophy, they all know that a Hillary-appointed Supreme Court would be a disaster.

    And Johnson appears to be making a play for Hillary’s voters now, which will turn off a lot of Never Trumpers as well.

  • It’s Official: Gary Johnson Is A Left-Wing Candidate

    08/25/2016 8:32:44 AM PDT · 46 of 57
    Norseman to detective

    >>The only reason they are running is to help Clinton win the election.<<

    I don’t think so. The carbon tax comment is a clear play for Hillary’s votes, and turns off conservative voters at the same time. He probably senses that Hillary is the most vulnerable right now due to her Foundation problems and is trying to give Hillary’s voters a place to go when they finally throw in the towel on her over ethical issues.

    Granted, most of her voters wouldn’t desert her if she shot someone in cold blood on 5th Avenue, but some will.

  • Donald Trump's African-American Supporters Are Unapologetic

    08/21/2016 9:20:00 AM PDT · 15 of 38
    Norseman to refermech

    If blacks support him in “surprising numbers” it will be because he convinces them of two things:

    1. That he will support expansion of charter schools, and

    2. That he will quit belittling the police and restore order in the inner-cities.

    It will have nothing to do with keeping Mexicans out, especially now that Trump looks like he’s not really going to deport every illegal.

  • Donald Trump's African-American Supporters Are Unapologetic

    08/21/2016 9:14:18 AM PDT · 14 of 38
    Norseman to 11th_VA

    >>rticle from the MSM - somebody pinch me ...<<

    It’s an online article by ABC tv. When it shows up on the nightly newscast, then somebody can pinch you...and me.

  • Trump now says he plans to legalize some undocumented immigrants

    08/20/2016 6:09:34 PM PDT · 26 of 304
    Norseman to timlot

    Well, this should get interesting...

  • Donald Trump's New Focus: Wooing African-Americans

    08/20/2016 1:55:24 PM PDT · 74 of 76
    Norseman to quesney

    >>Focus on empowerment: school choice, fewer illegals taking jobs.<<

    School choice is a big one because the Dems have made it clear that they’ll fight it at every opportunity even though black parents in the center cities are desperate for better schooling for their children.

    But Trump is also targeting the “law and order” message to blacks and that could be an even bigger issue given the way Obama’s anti-police statements have roiled the inner cities.

    School choice is nice, but first your kids have to survive to school age, and then they’ve got to be able to get to school safely.

    I think most black parents will find Trump’s law and order message not only appealing, but right now absolutely a priority. I think they want the police back patrolling their streets. And if he can get his message out to them, he’ll garner a lot of black votes, justifiably.

    Furthermore, if he wins and actually makes the streets safer and makes charter schools easier to get into, he could turn the black vote around for the foreseeable future. That, of course, will be tough to do, but I think it can be done. Giuliani proved that in NY City.

  • Pentagon can’t account for $6.5 trillion of taxpayer money – IG report

    08/20/2016 1:29:06 PM PDT · 56 of 57
    Norseman to Krosan

    I still call b.s.

    To hit $2.5 TRILLION in a quarter they’d have to mishandle ALL of the budget for the quarter several times over. ALL of it. That’s so unlikely as to be unbelievable, so I just don’t believe it. I’d consider $2.5 billion in the realm of the possible, but not trillions.

  • Pentagon can’t account for $6.5 trillion of taxpayer money – IG report

    08/20/2016 10:04:59 AM PDT · 52 of 57
    Norseman to Enlightened1

    >>”How do you lose over 6 Trillion dollars? Sounds to me either there is A LOT of looting going or the money is being sent somewhere illegally.”<<

    Or it’s total b.s. (most likely)

    Or an intrepid reporter doesn’t know trillions from billions, or millions. (possible)

    I’ll go with total b.s. for starters.

  • Teen Trump fan, ejected from Charlotte rally, says he was profiled

    08/20/2016 9:44:46 AM PDT · 120 of 125
    Norseman to Rammer

    Interesting. Maybe he just got caught up in the ejection of Rose, but it’s curious that he’s now out spreading the word that he was kicked out.

    Maybe a young man upset at being treated unjustly, or maybe a young man who has different political beliefs than his parents.

    Hard to tell on the info presented so far.

  • #NeverTump vs. #NeverHillary: A Time For Hugging

    08/15/2016 8:33:37 AM PDT · 26 of 27
    Norseman to Paradox

    >>As a presidential candidate, I really don’t care for Trump. I don’t care for his antics, I don’t think he is intellectually the person I would choose for the job. Sometimes, he flat out makes me embarrassed. There are some people to whom I would never admit that I was going to vote for him.<<

    I wonder if your closing comment is having an impact on the polling? I realize that’s a bit of a “reaching for straws” thought, but I do think a lot of people will, like you, vote for Trump even with multiple serious reservations, simply because they know that if Hillary gets the chance to appoint several Supreme Court justices, the country as we know it will essentially be lost.

    I know a few people who claim they will absolutely not vote for Trump, but who typically vote Republican. I’ve no doubt they tell a pollster they’re not voting for Trump, but when push comes to shove, at least some of them will, if only to cast an anti-Hillary vote.

  • Hillary Was Not Being Propped Up, She Was Being Supported Standing on a Pedestal

    08/10/2016 5:16:19 PM PDT · 40 of 85
    Norseman to Drago

    This photo: http://epp-agweb.newscyclecloud.com/storyimage/AG/20160416/AIK0106/160419587/AR/0/AR-160419587.jpg&maxw=800&q=90

    makes it pretty clear that Charles O’Connell, who started this thread, is correct. She was helped up on the platform and the picture that is being used to question her balance was clearly taken just as she got to the top with the person to her right still helping her attain a position. You can tell that by the progress the guy on her left has made between this pic and the one purporting to show her with a balance problem. He’s made about a step of progress between them

    I second Mr. O’Connell’s point. There’s enough material to question Hillary’s competence for office without having to make stuff up.

  • Dem senator (Murphy - Idiot, Connecticut): Trump made 'assassination threat'

    08/10/2016 9:40:42 AM PDT · 72 of 103
    Norseman to Mr Ramsbotham

    >>What he said, if you put it into cogent words, was that maybe “second amendment people” could do something about Hillary’s Supreme Court appointments, and that it would be a horrible thing if they did.<<

    I like the way you added “and that it would be a horrible thing if they did,” something you might have heard in your head somewhere but that Trump certainly didn’t say.

    I think this is a continuation of Trump’s strategy of making preposterous, although slightly ambiguous, statements that he knows will get all the press he wants for the day. This gets all his supporters out explaining what he “really” meant (like you just did) and gets all of the MSM and the Dems focused on telling everyone what a terrible President he’d be given yet one more example of his instability.

    The problem is that there are a lot of people on the fence who are completely turned off by comments like this, especially since they get most of their news and interpretation of that news from the same sources that the MSM and Dems supply.

    Gary Johnson is starting to look better and better, and he doesn’t have to say a thing. Just sit there and let Trump drive more and more Independents his way. And the more this crap keeps coming, the more traditional GOP voters are going to head Johnson’s way as well.

    But hey, Trump rationalizers, keep telling yourself that you don’t need the GOP anymore...that really worked for Nehlen against Ryan, right?

  • Our Lying Media and The Polls

    08/06/2016 9:08:09 AM PDT · 55 of 59
    Norseman to Ransomed

    Until that breakdown you suggest actually is provided, I’d call BS on the poll itself.

    If you’re going to go to that amount of work, and calling 50,000 people (actually a lot more to get 50k responses) is a hell of a lot of work. Thirteen people making calls...about 4,000 successful calls each...five minutes to reach a responding voter...twelve responses per hour...that’s over 300 hours per person...or seven weeks of full-time work...per person. Seven weeks. Double the calls per hour and it’s still almost a month of full-time work for all 13 people.

    Anyone doing that much work would provide more information than the raw totals, especially with such stunning results. I call hoax.

  • Our Lying Media and The Polls

    08/06/2016 8:54:54 AM PDT · 54 of 59
    Norseman to wally-balls

    If you’re subjecting your customers to your politics while cutting their hair, it’s very likely that you’ve accumulated a passel of like-minded customers over the years. The libs are going elsewhere.

  • Shocking Slap In The Face: Hillary Clinton JUST HIRED Wasserman Schultz As Campaign Chair!

    07/27/2016 4:10:14 PM PDT · 25 of 34
    Norseman to HomerBohn

    Hey, that’s how Dems make their money. When they’re between government jobs, someone is always paying them 10 times what they’re worth to keep them comfortable until they can be brought back online.

  • Hillary Clinton's choice of Tim Kaine shows she's the grown-up in this contest (Barf, Barf, Barf)

    07/23/2016 4:32:49 PM PDT · 32 of 47
    Norseman to HomerBohn

    Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has an interesting take on the Kaine pick:
    http://blog.dilbert.com/

    In a nutshell, he thinks the pick will hurt with male voters generally.

  • What really happened at Comey's press conference?

    07/16/2016 8:14:51 AM PDT · 65 of 65
    Norseman to JohnnyP

    Didn’t give the GOP anything? He’d already served Hillary up on a silver platter, and did it in a way that put Democrats in an uncomfortable box. If he’d have recommended an indictment, they’d be attacking that decision, but how can they attack what any reasonable person has to agree were the facts of the investigation? They can’t. All they can do is squirm in the box he put them in while putting out articles (and telling themselves) that, see, it was all just a witch hunt by the GOP.

    A witch hunt that found the witch up to her elbows in lies and deceit, not to mention obviously putting her privacy compulsion above national security concerns.

    Remember, the Left is furious with Comey right now. That should tell you he accomplished something. And maybe he accomplished a great deal. We’ll see what Trump does with it after she’s nominated, a nomination that might never have happened had Comey recommended an indictment.

  • What really happened at Comey's press conference?

    07/15/2016 3:43:22 PM PDT · 50 of 65
    Norseman to onyx

    People seem to overlook the fact that it wasn’t Comey’s job to bring an indictment. It was his job to gather the facts, which he did. Granted, he could have gone further and stated an opinion that she should be indicted based on those facts, but that decision was really Lynch’s decision to make.

    He laid them out for all to see, making Hillary an outright liar in the process. Although he then offered his opinion that the facts didn’t justify an indictment, that was only an opinion. He isn’t the one to do the charging.

    In other words, Lynch could have indicted her anyway, despite Comey’s opinion. And if it was a Republican in the dock, she almost certainly would have, given that same set of facts.

    Everyone knows that there was no way Lynch was going to indict Clinton. If Comey had recommended it, the press would have expected Lynch to deny it, and it would have become just another partisan squabble in DC.

    But the way he handled it convinced nearly everyone that Hillary endangered national security and should be culpable for it. Lynch, by going along with Comey’s opinion, instead of overruling him on the basis of the facts, ends up looking just as clueless as Hillary.

    Meanwhile, Hillary, now much damaged, remains on the ticket instead of either being forced off of it by an indictment or having the entire Left including the MSM defending her every step of the way. You don’t hear those defenses now though, do you? So Comey’s approach worked, and quite well at that.

    All in all, if Comey was looking for the best way to serve Trump a plate of damaged goods just in time for the election, he seems to have found it. I think he took one for the team, and perhaps his teammates should consider that possibility before calling him every name in the book.

    We can send her to jail later, perhaps related to her foundation. For now, Comey has made her much more vulnerable to Trump by leaving her in place but making it clear to nearly all that she endangered national security and lied about it at every turn.

  • Voters to Supreme Court Justices: Shut Up About Politics

    07/15/2016 8:55:47 AM PDT · 11 of 17
    Norseman to Reddy

    I agree. There’s no way she’d recuse herself, and all those “friends” who have taken her to the woodshed over her comments would be arguing strenuously that she should not do so.

    The reason they’re pissed at her now is that they know they’ll look like the self-serving jerks they are if they’re ever forced to rationalize those positions, but rationalize them they will. Every single one of them.

  • Voters to Supreme Court Justices: Shut Up About Politics

    07/15/2016 8:51:48 AM PDT · 10 of 17
    Norseman to CIB-173RDABN

    Interesting observations you have there.

    I was listening to radio relatively frequently when Rush first hit national radio, and you’re right, it was refreshing to hear someone voice what I’d been thinking all along on many issues, and especially to hear him take the PC crowd on. His “Amazon Battalion” was my all time favorite.

    And Trump will do the same to the PC nonsense, just by calling it out over and over. He might also be the person who brings a halt to all this false racist nonsense, especially since that seems to be Hillary’s main line of attack, i.e., that Trump is racist. It will be interesting to see how he takes her on with that issue. If he does so successfully, he might pull the curtain back on the whole issue, revealing it as the trumped up nonsense that it’s become. (I like the sounds of that: “trumped up nonsense”.)

    I’ve got several reservations about Trump, mainly on policy grounds, but if Hillary wants to fight him on the grounds he’s a racist, I have a feeling she’s going to find herself on the ropes more than she’s anticipated.

  • Voters to Supreme Court Justices: Shut Up About Politics

    07/15/2016 8:40:16 AM PDT · 6 of 17
    Norseman to yoe

    Of course her “friends” took her to the woodshed. She gave away the game. Everyone knows that the liberals don’t give a rip about the Constitution and care only about whether the outcome is liberal, but you’re not supposed to stand up and shout it out, especially if you’re a member of the cabal.

    It might be a good move for the next Congress to seek to amend the militia business out of the 2nd Amendment. Make it perfectly clear that it applies to each of us, and let’s see who votes against it.

  • UPDATE 2-Germany becomes second G7 nation to issue 10-year bond with negative yield

    07/15/2016 8:30:31 AM PDT · 8 of 9
    Norseman to Captain Rhino

    Yes, to the extent that the government doesn’t guarantee deposits you’re right. A deposit would have less security than a government bond, presumably. Although I could envision a scenario in which a private bank made good on its deposits while a profligate government was at the same time giving every bondholder a “haircut” when the bonds matured.

    Actually, though, a good part of the reason for the negative yield might be due to a market mania of sorts. Just as people pay astounding prices for stocks that turn out to be worthless shortly thereafter by chasing a stock (or even a house) all the way to the top, sure that they’ll be able to sell to a higher bidder, some buyers no doubt expect to sell the bonds to others at an even higher price (and an even greater negative yield) at some time in the near future.

    For example, a large portion of government bonds sold at auction in the U.S. are usually purchased by dealers intending to resell the bonds. That could be the case in Germany as well. I don’t know though.

    I continue to think that this is just another tulip mania that will end very badly for those who end up holding the bonds when the mania ends.

  • UPDATE 2-Germany becomes second G7 nation to issue 10-year bond with negative yield

    07/14/2016 8:07:12 AM PDT · 6 of 9
    Norseman to Captain Rhino

    >>What expected economic situation 10 years from now would make it acceptable to have 5% LESS than the initial investment - especially for institutional investors?<<

    It was sold at a negative yield of .05%, not 5%, so the lender is getting back about fifty cents per year less than he lent per $1,000 bond. That’s about $5 in total, so the lender paid around $1,005 to get back $1,000 in ten years. That’s 5/10 of a percent, not 5%.

    As for why an institution would do it, really only an institution would, or someone with so much wealth that they couldn’t just safely hold the cash instead. Think of the $5 as a safe deposit box rental, because that’s essentially what it is, although on, say, an “investment” of $100 million, that rental fee becomes a pretty stiff $500,000.

    This whole affair is more than likely just another modern tulip mania. It will end very badly, especially in the U.S. where the deficit is out of control and the Fed doesn’t dare raise interest rates due to the damage it would do to the federal budget.

  • Germany Is About To Sell Zero-Coupon 10 Year Bonds For The First Time Ever

    07/13/2016 10:14:11 AM PDT · 23 of 28
    Norseman to Steve_Seattle

    >>And why would someone buy zero-interest bonds? Deflation?<<

    Yes, that’s a rational action if deflation is widely expected. Gold, silver, and other goods and property would decline in value and the bondholder, or holder of cash, could sell the bonds, maybe even at a premium in the case of the bonds, after the deflation event and would end up with more gold, silver, etc., than those who bought before the deflation.

    That said, the real reason people are buying German bonds that don’t pay interest, and U.S. Government bonds that will only pay 2.25% a year for thirty years, is that every now and then societies experience their own “tulip mania.” This one is likely to end the same way as all the others, but you never know how high the price of tulips, or bonds in this case, will go before prices plummet back to realistic levels.

    In other words, we’re witnessing the madness of crowds, once again.

  • Germany Is About To Sell Zero-Coupon 10 Year Bonds For The First Time Ever

    07/13/2016 10:07:10 AM PDT · 22 of 28
    Norseman to CurlyDave

    >>What is the difference between these and currency?<<

    Currency is harder to handle for a large institution investing hundreds of millions of dollars. But you’re essentially correct about the value, and both the currency and the value of the bonds will be influenced by inflation, with one difference. If people decide that inflation is back and will continue, currency will be devalued over time but the value of the bonds could plummet immediately, reflecting the cumulative effect of ten years of inflation.

    To illustrate with a 10% inflation rate, feared to be sustained, after a year the currency would buy 90% of what it would purchase initially. The resulting 9-year zero coupon bond, however, priced to yield 10 percent to maturity would be valued at around 42% of face value.

    In that outcome, currency would be a far, far, better choice, because you could convert it to goods (or gold/silver) after a year and buy over twice as much as the bond holder selling his bond after a year.

  • Germany Is About To Sell Zero-Coupon 10 Year Bonds For The First Time Ever

    07/13/2016 9:58:39 AM PDT · 21 of 28
    Norseman to BenLurkin

    >>They probably will sell at a discount which will determine the yield. Not interest per se but essentially the same.<<

    In normal times, you’d be right. Zero-coupon bonds exist and do effectively yield interest, such as the $25 savings bond that matured at $50.

    Today, however, in Germany, they might not sell at a discount. In fact, they might well be priced at a premium. If that’s the case, people are effectively treating German government bonds like a safe deposit box to store cash. The premium will be the equivalent of the box rental charge, and paid up front at that.

  • Conservatives: We Need To Fight And Win The Election We Have

    07/08/2016 2:29:05 PM PDT · 45 of 47
    Norseman to xzins

    Which is, of course, utter nonsense, but sometimes nonsense rules the day.

  • Conservatives: We Need To Fight And Win The Election We Have

    07/08/2016 2:27:10 PM PDT · 44 of 47
    Norseman to rhoda_penmark

    touche

  • Conservatives: We Need To Fight And Win The Election We Have

    07/08/2016 2:24:21 PM PDT · 42 of 47
    Norseman to xzins

    Here’s a thought experiment for you: Assume that the GOP delegates do manage to derail Trump and nominate someone else, unlikely though that might be.

    Will you vote for Clinton’s GOP opponent if it’s not Donald Trump?

    I ask this because the standard threat from Trump supporters is that if the nomination is “stolen” from him, the GOP is “dead to them” (which I take to mean that they will not support the nominee, thereby aiding Hillary’s chances.)

    Seems to me that the road runs in both directions on this matter of allowing Hillary to win.

  • Trump gets it right on Saddam

    07/08/2016 1:46:27 PM PDT · 28 of 36
    Norseman to TexasFreeper2009

    The part you miss is that Saddam, himself, was a terrorist, and one of the worst. Have you forgotten that he invaded Kuwait?

    Trump loyalty continues to pickle minds....

  • Putin signs sweeping surveillance measures into law; Snowden declares a ‘dark day for Russia’

    07/08/2016 1:37:42 PM PDT · 5 of 29
    Norseman to Berlin_Freeper

    Putin is “very bright” and a “strong leader” according to Donald Trump. What could go wrong?

  • The FBI, Credibility, and Government

    07/07/2016 8:51:38 AM PDT · 29 of 41
    Norseman to GilGil

    I happen to agree with Scott Adams who I’ve come to realize is one of the more insightful observers of this election process, and maybe of politics in general.

    People forget that AG Lynch is perfectly within her rights to reject Comey’s obviously faulty reasoning for not recommending charges be brought, and to proceed with an indictment anyway.

    By setting forth the results of his investigation, results which not even the Dems are disputing currently, and which put each of Hillary’s past lies on the matter on full display, Comey has made it clear that Hillary abused her position.

    And now, by “convincing” AG Lynch that no indictment is warranted (again, she is free to disagree and take action anyway), Comey has effectively sucked Lynch into Hillary’s circle of corruption, along with all the liberals who are now crowing that Hillary did nothing wrong.

    But Comey couldn’t have made it clearer that she did plenty wrong. The House is even now preparing to discuss perjury with Hillary given the clear contrast between her lies and his investigative findings, which is probably why the House wants to see his specific evidence.

    So, against all this background, the people get to decide whether they want someone of Hillary’s caliber to be the next President. Adams is right; Comey handled it well given his choices. And his comments on a government retaining credibility are worth considering as well, as they were quite insightful in my opinion.

    I also agree with his side point that we should consider sticking with an eight member Supreme Court. People forget that the original court was made up of six members which meant that overturning a Congressional action effectively required a 2/3 majority of the court. Otherwise any law passed would stand. In fact, we should consider returning to six.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/27/2016 8:23:58 AM PDT · 87 of 91
    Norseman to Boomer

    >>Before you do though; bear in mind he handed Obama a complete and total budget without the slightest hesitancy or change in what Obama presented.<<

    So, it’s your position that the budget that the House and Ryan approved is the budget that President Obama would have requested if he’d have had complete control of the process. The GOP didn’t restrain him in the least, right?

    Step back from your delusional state for just a minute and ask yourself what a budget totally designed by this president and his acolytes would really look like, absent Ryan and the GOP’s efforts.

    Maybe then you’ll realize that Ryan is not one of those acolytes, as virtually all Trumpsters claim, and is, instead, in the opposition.

    When Ryan haters pick out one, or even a dozen, actions that he’s taken that they disagree with, they’re differing on tactics. With a budget the size of the federal one, virtually everyone will find something to disagree with, but it’s nuts to then extrapolate those tactical disagreements to the point where you think Ryan is in league with Obama.

    But with Trump, no matter his past, and no matter how much he’s changed his mind...no problem. Nuts. Absolutely stark raving nuts.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 5:01:02 PM PDT · 81 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    By the way, you’re absolutely correct. I was for Cruz for quite a while and have been disgusted by Trump many times through all this.

    That said, I’d never vote for, or work for, Hillary and the day might yet come where Trump manages to convince me to vote for him

    But then, you don’t care and would just as soon I leave rather than have a rational discussion, right? After all, if someone differs with you, they can’t be rational anyway...

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 4:57:52 PM PDT · 80 of 91
    Norseman to little jeremiah

    I’m not clear why you’re obsessing over my comment history. (I’ve already said that my post history is zero because I’ve never posted an article here.)

    I can, however, clearly recall discussing Bill Clinton in here during his presidency if that is of any help to you. Or you can just keep repeating your search results if that makes you somehow feel superior. I couldn’t care less.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 4:53:24 PM PDT · 79 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    Yes, “be done with it.” That’s your answer isn’t it? Just tell people you disagree with to leave you alone so you don’t have to have your mind troubled by opposing thoughts.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:48:51 PM PDT · 68 of 91
    Norseman to blueunicorn6

    Instead of posing cute, but nonsensical, analogies, why not simply engage in intelligent discussion? Seriously?

    Or were you the one with the “alleged mind”? That might explain it.

    By the way, I pay very little attention to the name of posters in here (as indicated by the above comment.) I really don’t base my comments on whether someone appears to be supportive or not, but on whether they have something to discuss.

    Put another way, if Trump says something I find I disagree with I say so, rather than trying to rationalize it away. (You all know who you are...)

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:45:13 PM PDT · 67 of 91
    Norseman to little jeremiah

    Well, duh. Maybe that’s because I’ve never posted an article, which I haven’t.

    The comment I was questioning was the one that said I hadn’t posted anything before 2005. That directly implied that I’d never commented until then, which was wrong, but would have been a ridiculous point even if true.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:42:21 PM PDT · 66 of 91
    Norseman to little jeremiah

    Well I would hope not.

    Do you actually think I’m going to be shamed into changing what I say , or worse, what I already said, by insults?

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:39:28 PM PDT · 62 of 91
    Norseman to Thibodeaux

    Not to argue, since you seem supportive, but where exactly did I underestimate the bandwagon effect?

    This entire site has turned into one giant bandwagon, or maybe a steamroller? Disagree with a Trump supporter on anything or anyone and you’d better get out of the way.

    I don’t doubt that Jim’s inbox is being assaulted right now by people who can’t believe I’m still commenting after all their insightful putdowns.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:36:37 PM PDT · 60 of 91
    Norseman to little jeremiah

    Then your search had a glitch in it. Even if it didn’t, 11 years wouldn’t satisfy you? Good grief.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:33:59 PM PDT · 57 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    Yes, or you’re a raving conspiracy nut...

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:31:50 PM PDT · 54 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    Yep, that’s the way to pigeonhole yourself as someone who has no interest in engaging in a rational discussion: either the other guy is a hacker plant, or he’s an idiot.

    Why do you bother? All that means is that you enjoy insulting people. Or do you imagine that you’re actually convincing? Or just looking for “good boy” slaps on the back from those who think exactly like you? Nothing of value comes from it.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:27:45 PM PDT · 53 of 91
    Norseman to newfreep

    >>Clearly you are in a VERY, VERY small minority here at FR....<<

    Sadly, you’re right. That didn’t used to be the case, but the Trumpsters have pretty much driven anyone who actually wants to engage in rational discussions of politics elsewhere. Many have actually been banned for simply stating what they believe.

    I’ve erased several replies of my own over the past few months because I didn’t want to have the usual suspects telling Jim that I deserved the dreaded “Zot”. In fact, that’s a consideration now, in this thread, all because I don’t share the Trump supporters’ opinions of Paul Ryan, who I personally consider one of the most honorable members of Congress, whether he be Speaker or not.

    He’s done a great deal to bring order to the process in the short time he’s held the Speakership and if Trump wins he’ll gain a tremendous benefit from all the organizing that Ryan has already accomplished in terms of lining up the agenda for the next term, and for the upcoming election as well.

    But hey, Lyin’ Ryan rhymes, so let’s go with it. That’s about the extent of the depth of the discussion anyway.

    By the way, for those of you who run one presumed transgression up the flag pole and base your entire opinion of Ryan on that, ask yourselves what you’d have thought of any other politician other than Trump who took an NRA endorsement and then backed them into a corner. When you end up on a Democrat-generated No-Fly list someday in your local gun store, you’ll have the Donald to thank for not being able to make your purchase. Not that it’s really going to happen, however, because Ryan won’t let it, along with most of the other GOPers in Congress whom people in here regularly deride.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:15:19 PM PDT · 50 of 91
    Norseman to Dick Bachert

    >>But in my alleged mind,....<<

    Now there’s a classic.

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:14:05 PM PDT · 48 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    By the way, it’s Jim Robinson....I don’t bother researching histories in here, but that mistake alone would lead a conspiracist to mark you as a plant of some sort....sauce for the goose and all that...

  • Is Paul Nehlen poised to Knock Off Paul Ryan in Wisconsin

    06/26/2016 1:11:37 PM PDT · 46 of 91
    Norseman to Defiant

    Ah, the Inquisition begins...