ewsieg

I would concur, but she's got a big rack and that's enough for Trump.

Evidence #923 that Trump really is a dem trying to destroy the republican party (or simply a vain prick). Over the last few years he's pushed people to support his MAGA Inc PAC instead of other republican leaning PACs. There are estimates that his PAC has between 400 million and 1 billion. Many candidates, such as Paxton, have been hoping for an influx of cash from his PAC (as many of those others don't have as much cash anymore). Even as some of these candidates are asking the WH to stay home and not campaign for them, he's now going to be running ads in those areas that aren't even about the candidates, just ties them to Trump and it's a little rally style ad for Trump.

Perfect timing for her, the next white house press secretary.

He knows enough to know they need 500b more per year....stat!

https://www.theatlantic.com/national-security/2026/08/driscoll-hegseth-military-resignation/688479/ If True..... of course it's true... ugh. Good Article.

I had a little fun with my story, but that type of small C conservatism still exists today, those people are just called Moderates and the political system is stacked against them. They aren't adverse to change, but they generally would prefer incremental fixes to overhauls. As for the GOP, even pre-Trump, I think most people point to Gingrinch as the architect of where everything started to go wrong, but I think Grover Norquist is an underrated villain. Ironically he used political power to force folks from their small C conservatism and that led to a lot of unintended consequences.... go figure.

ahh, so you were just wrong.... 😉

You're confusing Conservatism with 'small-c' conservatism. Democrats can be conservative and traditionally (in my lifetime at least until Trump, Republicans generally espoused 'small-l' liberalism (as do most democrats too). It's not rejecting new information, but being generally cautious of making major changes to 'fix' something that is determined to be broken by the new information. In relieving the glory days of country (basically pre 2016), a good example would be someone noticing too many pedestrian traffic deaths and some Democrat finding a study that says that while minimal, painting white stripes across the road does gets drivers to pay a more attention. If they were less conservative and more progressive, they would demand that they paint every crosswalk like this. A conservative (most likely a republican), would say, are you sure it'll be helpful, that's a large costs and may not be the best solution, let's maybe only do a few of the higher risk areas and see if it helps. The Dem would then scream that the Republican hates walkers and wants them to die, they'd get their funding and paint everything. Years later when (assuming other variables don't change) pedestrians getting hit has either gone up or stayed the same because of the fact that we know now that while it does play some role in getting drivers attention, it gives pedestrians more confidence to cross without paying as much attention. Depending on the road style, Pedestrians getting struck either went up due to painting them or no difference was noted. Now we know that if you paint actual art, at least during daytime hours, you see a significant decrease in pedestrian incidents as the driver pays much more attention and it doesn't give the pedestrian a more secure feeling, so it keeps them alert as well. But due to the Democrat, no money is left to pay for murals and that same Dem is now running for governor and touting how they got all the crosswalks painted as a 'win' and all the non 'small-c' conservatives cheer them on. I miss those days.

Unfortunately I don't think the Tigers will win even one of these games.

The DataRepublican stuff was kind of wild. She basically outed herself after the undersecretary of the army was using her to publish some meaningless data for influence purposes and instead of understanding that this was data pulled from a FOIA request she thought it was a con by the undersecretary to get her to publish confidential files. This was one of the "journalists" that the got access to pentagon press briefings and never mentioned that she stopped that role.

Kim is getting sucked off by Trump, he didn't help the US with the straight of Hormuz, he didn't try to end the war in Ukraine, in fact he sent troops to prolong it. So if i'm any of the countries I listed I'm learning the only respect and chance I have to have the US defend me is to be the biggest "Alpha" on the block. And even if they don't help, at least I have a Nuke in my back pocket. Possibly something changes and we don't see a huge expansion to nuclear, but i'm positive that right now that those countries I listed are actively researching at a level they never thought they'd be at it. Maybe not Japan as legally they may not be able to, but there is pressure to look into changing it.

This is really nothing more than a 'which came first, the chicken or the egg' argument. In the US, Trump is the biggest threat IMO, but the GOP has done nothing to combat it. So as a conservative, I could vote against Trump but vote R for every other candidate. I have chosen to punish the entire GOP for the actions of .... pretty much the entire GOP. Bibi is the biggest threat to Israel IMO for many of the same reasons I feel with Trump. AIPAC, just like the GOP, blindly defends Bibi and his actions. So i'm not going to say you're wrong, but i'm not going to tell someone that claims AIPAC is the bigger issue wrong either. Bibi needs to go, but AIPAC will do nothing to make sure a good leader takes over, they will only make sure whoever takes over, is fully supported by the US, regardless of their actions.

If I ran a country that didn't have nuclear weapons today, I would recommend they go nuclear as well. Assuming no major policy change comes from the US soon, Japan, SK, Saudi, Iran, Poland, and Turkey will have nukes within 10-15 years.

Believe I saw you were going to see Rush too.... so which one was your favorite?

I failed. I thought telling Trump to 'f off', threatening to investigate any owner that voted no, encouraging steroid use after any shortened season to please the fans, and trying to have an affair with that one reporter apparently isn't the best path.