President Donald J. Trump

[pate]

.. smother .!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmhHsPCBI_Y

[pate]

'otter twang!

[PB the Deplorable]

... stay myopic...

Aren't you the guy, the Senate votes down several Trump agenda bills 52-48, 51-49, 48 Rs vote yes, all Ds and 2 or 3 Rs vote no and your response is ''they're all the same''?  How's that for myopia?

Or here's one:  ''Bernie Sanders would have been almost as good as Trump''. 

[Dr. MD MD]

Aren't you the guy, the Senate votes down several Trump agenda bills 52-48, 51-49, 48 Rs vote yes, all Ds and 2 or 3 Rs vote no and your response is ''they're all the same''?  How's that for myopia?

Or here's one:  ''Bernie Sanders would have been almost as good as Trump''.

No, I think you have me confused with someone else. I'm not really even sure what you're talking about.

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ePn6egc3KA

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNEydhdeXeE

[21st Century Man]

That's your choice. You know what they say about horses and water.

You are just assuaging your conscience because you decided not to vote in the 80's.  You think I give a rat's ass wwhat somebody who I've never even heard of thinks about Reagan?  I don't care what you think either.  My godfather knew Reagan and always spoke well of him.   I prize his opinion and my own opinion over your opinion or some dame's opinion. I'm not going to get mad because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.  Carry on.  I have no more to say on the subject.

[21st Century Man]

I'm not going to watch any of your videos.  You post these long-ass videos with no explanation of the contents, what the information you want people to see is, where it's located on the video:  just sit and watch an hour of it.  Then watch the next one.  And the next.  No one has the time or inclination to do that

The requests of others for a couple lines of explanation when you post them have fallen on deaf ears, so there's probably no point in bringing it up again. 


As far as this lady, no one has ever heard of her.  Do you know how many people worked in the Reagan Administration?  Or in any administration?  And later claim this or that?  I was paying attention - at the time - so any charges that Reagan wasn't what he seemed need to be backed up by a little more than the statement of some unknown person 40 years later.  You get that, right?

I looked her up in Wikipedia.  Turns out she was a policy writer for the Dept of Education, and was fired in 1982 for leaking information.  That's a pretty early exit for someone who claims to ''know'' about Reagan's hidden nefarious side.  It also serves as motive to trash Reagan.  It would be more believable if the dozens of known conservatives that worked for him echoed her charges, but they don't.  I can't believe I'm responding to this.  Or need to.

LOL.  Should have known.  It is obvious she has an ax to grind.  Good job, paperboy.

[Dr. MD MD]

You are just assuaging your conscience because you decided not to vote in the 80's.  You think I give a rat's ass wwhat somebody who I've never even heard of thinks about Reagan?  I don't care what you think either.  My godfather knew Reagan and always spoke well of him.   I prize his opinion and my own opinion over your opinion or some dame's opinion. I'm not going to get mad because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.  Carry on.  I have no more to say on the subject.

It has nohing to do with that. I wasn't of voting age yet. Obviously, you do care or otherwise why the heated responses? You're just as bad as the liberals you accuse of the same thing. You won't even look at the evidence because it tarnishes one of your golden claves. You already are mad and by that I mean angry and insane.

[Dr. MD MD]

LOL.  Should have known.  It is obvious she has an ax to grind.  Good job, paperboy.

Try looking at what she leaked, lamebrain. You accuse the education system of being Marxist. Are you really so deluded by your politics that you think this just started under Obama?! Good job, indeed.  :

In 1982 Reagan relieved her of her duties after leaking an important technology grant for computerized learningâ€"Project BEST: "Better Education Skills through Technology"[10] brought about by the scholarly writings and a large study by an education specialist named Dr. John I. Goodlad at the Center for Educational Renewal at the University of Washington, originally from British Columbia, Canada.[11] One book of which Iserbyt was critical, "Schooling for a Global Age", edited by Charlotte C. Anderson, James M. Becker, Institute for Development of Educational Activities, New York 1979, Iserbyt cited as having less to do with fostering learning and mainly to do with psychological manipulation of students, possibly against the teaching of the child's parents, for example, in arts classes.[12]

Parents and the general public must be reached also. Otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

â€" Dr. John I. Goodlad, Schooling for a Global Age-1979
and again later â€"

Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now... Parents and the general public must be reached also, otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

â€" Dr. John I. Goodlad, "Guide to Getting Out Your Message," National Education Goals Panel Community Action Toolkit: A Do-It-Yourself Kit for Education Renewal (September 1994); 6.[13]

[Dr. MD MD]

If you want to have a planned socialist economy but don't want to call it that what do you do? Maybe you form special relationships with certain corporations and then carve out legislation that would favor them as a monopoly (not right away, of course) and then reward some of the people involved with government jobs after the deal is done. It seems like this is how things have gone since WW2 more and more.

[PaulAtreides]

The new tariffs on aluminium will really fuck with you Trumpers when it comes time to but a new trailer.

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89SoQQssZKE

[Jackstar]

I bet that already the globalists are busy finding and grooming a "nationalist" sleeper candidate.

HuffPost: George P. Bush Wins In Texas After Breaking With Family On Trump. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw89uG7zc


The 'P' stands for 'Clone.' No one in that family can spell.

[PB the Deplorable]

HuffPost: George P. Bush Wins In Texas After Breaking With Family On Trump. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIw89uG7zc


The 'P' stands for 'Clone.' No one in that family can spell.

I thought is was Peewee, or just Pee for short

[PaulAtreides]

.

[PB the Deplorable]

.

Fantastic news.  Now that you know Trump is completely ineffective, everyone can dial back the hysteria and go back to lawn bowling.

[PB the Deplorable]

Try looking at what she leaked, lamebrain. You accuse the education system of being Marxist. Are you really so deluded by your politics that you think this just started under Obama?! Good job, indeed.  :

In 1982 Reagan relieved her of her duties after leaking an important technology grant for computerized learningâ€"Project BEST: "Better Education Skills through Technology"[10] brought about by the scholarly writings and a large study by an education specialist named Dr. John I. Goodlad at the Center for Educational Renewal at the University of Washington, originally from British Columbia, Canada.[11] One book of which Iserbyt was critical, "Schooling for a Global Age", edited by Charlotte C. Anderson, James M. Becker, Institute for Development of Educational Activities, New York 1979, Iserbyt cited as having less to do with fostering learning and mainly to do with psychological manipulation of students, possibly against the teaching of the child's parents, for example, in arts classes.[12]

Parents and the general public must be reached also. Otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

â€" Dr. John I. Goodlad, Schooling for a Global Age-1979
and again later â€"

Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now... Parents and the general public must be reached also, otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.

â€" Dr. John I. Goodlad, "Guide to Getting Out Your Message," National Education Goals Panel Community Action Toolkit: A Do-It-Yourself Kit for Education Renewal (September 1994); 6.[13]

Reagan was a hands off manager.  He hired good people, set policy, and expected it to be carried out.  And for the most part his tenure was a stunning success.  How else could one effectively run an administration, really?  That he was ill served by some is not a secret.  How could it be otherwise in a huge organization?

Reagan came to DC to get a country that was off-track back on the right track.  I don't have to list the accomplishments that changed the world in a positive way - it would take too long to do so.  And those accomplishments don't at all mesh with the policy commentary you quoted - just the opposite. 

The Democrats are the Party of Government.  The ultimate long term goal of the Left wing fascist ''Progressives'' is a one world government, run by them.  If Reagan was one of them, we'd have been there by now.  By the 1980s the US government was out of control - a vast unaccountable, unresponsive maze of tenured bureaucrats who can't be fired and who go on with their activities regardless of who the president is or what his policies and priorities are.  That these bureaucrats goals and priorities line up with those of the Democrat Party, and against anything a conservative president wants is not a coincidence.

Items like what you describe are not what Reagan wanted enacted.  Either the summary you presented is bias and spin, or what was presented to the administration team was very different, or it (the Education Department policy making) wasn't a priority in the White House at that time in light of everything else that needed to be addressed.  I'm going with all three. 


Trump has been in office for a year.  He's done great.  But look at how much hasn't changed, and won't change.  Years from now are we going to hear about some of what's going on currently in the bureaucracy, and blame Trump for doing it?

[Gd5150]

[lemming cut and paste]

Newsweek

[albrecht]

Newsweek

https://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek-cant-pay-its-rent-on-time-and-faces-eviction/

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/377046-newsweek-announces-strategic-structural-changes-amid-turmoil

https://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek-editors-blast-executive-to-his-face-what-youre-doing-is-bullshit-you-dont-understand-journalism/

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/newsweek-ibt-malicious-code-ad-fraud?utm_term=.gk649ZpMk#.aoEVo1mgD

https://www.wsj.com/articles/newsweek-in-turmoil-probe-into-finances-and-ties-to-bible-college-widens-1519560001

[Dr. MD MD]

Reagan was a hands off manager.  He hired good people, set policy, and expected it to be carried out.  And for the most part his tenure was a stunning success.  How else could one effectively run an administration, really?  That he was ill served by some is not a secret.  How could it be otherwise in a huge organization?

Reagan came to DC to get a country that was off-track back on the right track.  I don't have to list the accomplishments that changed the world in a positive way - it would take too long to do so.  And those accomplishments don't at all mesh with the policy commentary you quoted - just the opposite. 

The Democrats are the Party of Government.  The ultimate long term goal of the Left wing fascist ''Progressives'' is a one world government, run by them.  If Reagan was one of them, we'd have been there by now.  By the 1980s the US government was out of control - a vast unaccountable, unresponsive maze of tenured bureaucrats who can't be fired and who go on with their activities regardless of who the president is or what his policies and priorities are.  That these bureaucrats goals and priorities line up with those of the Democrat Party, and against anything a conservative president wants is not a coincidence.

Items like what you describe are not what Reagan wanted enacted.  Either the summary you presented is bias and spin, or what was presented to the administration team was very different, or it (the Education Department policy making) wasn't a priority in the White House at that time in light of everything else that needed to be addressed.  I'm going with all three. 


Trump has been in office for a year.  He's done great.  But look at how much hasn't changed, and won't change.  Years from now are we going to hear about some of what's going on currently in the bureaucracy, and blame Trump for doing it?

Yeah, sure...OK. Democratic spin from a conservative...who voted for him...and worked for him. Saying that Reagan gave away these things as "bones" thrown to the Democrats is exceedingly naive. That's like saying he didn't know anything about communist propaganda and how it worked. He was a witness for the investigation into unAmerican activities who named names. Hmmm? What kind of people usually turn evidence against former friends of theirs? It's usually people guilty of the same thing to an equal or lesser degree who are willing to talk to prosecutors to avoid prosecution. If you follow the governement's own research you can see that after WW2 they were considering attempting to achieve some sort of parity with communism without informing us or giving us a choice. Maybe they let Reagan in on this and said How would you like an opportunity at the role of a lifetime. We need a socialist president but we need to present him as a conservative to sell it to the public. You in or would you rather go to jail? I admit it's contradictory to many of the things he said and did but it's because of that that I think it's worth examining, especially in light of recent events and revelations regarding our intelligence community. I just can't account for why he would foster a Marxist education system or hire a socialist to help spread Democray to Central and South America otherwise.

[21st Century Man]

Yeah, sure...OK. Democratic spin from a conservative...who voted for him...and worked for him. Saying that Reagan gave away these things as "bones" thrown to the Democrats is exceedingly naive. That's like saying he didn't know anything about communist propaganda and how it worked. He was a witness for the investigation into unAmerican activities who named names. Hmmm? What kind of people usually turn evidence against former friends of theirs? It's usually people guilty of the same thing to an equal or lesser degree who are willing to talk to prosecutors to avoid prosecution. If you follow the governement's own research you can see that after WW2 they were considering attempting to achieve some sort of parity with communism without informing us or giving us a choice. Maybe they let Reagan in on this and said How would you like an opportunity at the role of a lifetime. We need a socialist president but we need to present him as a conservative to sell it to the public. You in or would you rather go to jail? I admit it's contradictory to many of the things he said and did but it's because of that that I think it's worth examining, especially in light of recent events and revelations regarding our intelligence community. I just can't account for why he would foster a Marxist education system or hire a socialist to help spread Democray to Central and South America otherwise.

You'd rather believe the ravings of one low-level disaffected Dept. of Education employee rather than the overwhelming evidence of a multitude of others who worked for and with the President.  She was in the administration for what a year and probably never even talked to the President.  Not to mention that she was disloyal by leaking information which led to her termination!   So we are supposed to believe her spin?  I don't think so.  Try again.

[Dr. MD MD]

You'd rather believe the ravings of one low-level disaffected Dept. of Education employee rather than the overwhelming evidence of a multitude of others who worked for and with the President.  She was in the administration for what a year and probably never even talked to the President.  Not to mention that she was disloyal by leaking information which led to her termination!   So we are supposed to believe her spin?  I don't think so.  Try again.

Probably? Maybe? Look, man, I don't want to debate some angry baboon so why don't you try exposing yourself to some of the source material or STFU! :

[Dr. MD MD]

You shut the fuck up, before I teach your to tongue your own taint!

Oh, hey, stupid faggot! You're back with a new name. <adds name to ignore list>

[21st Century Man]

Probably? Maybe? Look, man, I don't want to debate some angry baboon so why don't you try exposing yourself to some of the source material or STFU! :

No.  I've got better things to do with my time than listen to some disaffected former employee of the Dept. of Education who was fired for leaking after a year in the job.  I don't have a spare hour to listen to such drivel.

[Dr. MD MD]

No.  I've got better things to do with my time than listen to some disaffected former employee of the Dept. of Education who was fired for leaking after a year in the job.  I don't have a spare hour to listen to such drivel.

Really?! It seems like you have lots of time to respond with vapid, overly emotional posts. Are you sure you're not a Democrat?

[Dr. MD MD]

I was busy, but am back with infinite un-bannable proxies and thousands of sock-puppet accounts.

Great! I'll add all those to the list as well when I see them. 

[21st Century Man]

Really?! It seems like you have lots of time to respond with vapid, overly emotional posts. Are you sure you're not a Democrat?

You're the one who voted for Clinton, Gore and Obama, numbnuts.  Everyone here knows your voting record as a Democrat.

[Dr. MD MD]

You're the one who voted for Clinton, Gore and Obama, numbnuts.  Everyone here knows your voting record as a Democrat.

Right and people never change over time. They are always the people they are from the time they are born until they die. Is this really how desperate you are to finally win an arguement, you fucking moron?!

The reason you know about it is because I've been honest about it, unlike you, Mr. Christian. :

[21st Century Man]

Hey, MD.  Why don't you call in to Levin tonight and tell him your shit theory about Reagan.  He also worked for Reagan.  Or are you afraid of getting thrashed?