There is no doubt Trump has his loyalists/supporters, the latter of your comment is your opinion and your welcome to it. As we stand now because Trump has done nothing to ensure the integrity of our voting system or campaigning it's hard to believe it will be a fair one, the corruption of it worked in his favor and he is obviously counting on it again in 2020, what a just man, sure go vote for "him" again.

Good job with each one of them

sigh

Nationalism is fine as long as it stays within reason and not to the extreme as we've seen it done before with Hitler and Germany. It is important to be sure that self interest in promoting the country doesn't over ride any of its citizens, or have their construed obligations outweigh other individuals or group interests.

Yes, I too think its comprehension but in defense, we are manipulated with a constant feed of slanted information and opinion pieces rather just stating the simple facts on the occurrences of events. People are overly busy and exhausted to take the time to file through the misinformation. Not to mention their disgusted attitude which is justified, so what do they do, they go to their go-to spot and eat it up, falling right into the hole of being manipulated thereby allowing the cycle to continue.

I believe the responsibility should fall on the journalists to go back to the days of being more factual and not slanting the truths. Maybe slander should be more accountable.

Thank you CC, do you recall the movie where Newman says "what we have here is a failure to communicate", might have been Cool Hand Luke, well that about sums it up in the US right now. This propaganda is undermining us, we need to nip it.

Actually Linda this just about covers it...

More than a third of the men who've occupied the Oval Office have been either accused of sexual misconduct, alleged to have had an affair, fathered a child out of wedlock with someone they were conducting such an affair with, or boasted of their extramarital sexual escapades.

Starting with Washington

http://www.businessinsider.com/president-sex-scandal-history-2018-3

Doesn't do any good to point at one party over the other, it's built into our society going back before we were ever created, it used to be well accepted by kings and Royalty as commonplace.

As the right extremists.

Maybe no one, but then he is NOT the President of the UNITED STATES.

Neither Clinton ever spoke with such foul mouths, this guys has gone has low to use the F word while speaking, not to mention all the others, Kev's cartoon is on the money, sadly that is where we're at with this guy.

I agree suppression never helps. Suppression is the enemy of freedom.

As usual, much to contemplate, with many valid points, just a couple of comments, in your post..." while immorality, treach­ery, and atheism are "wrong. I, though not an atheist, would not include that in the list of that which is wrong.

I also do not agree that it is an attempt to overthrow our American liberties by "suppressing patriotic and moral attitudes in the schools." I do agree that both a healthy balance of patriotism along with a higher level of consciousness for world compassion can coexist. To everything and I do mean everything, there is a balance, a distribution of weight for stability, from being overly submissive in trying to keep the peace, to over aggressiveness for full control. Patriotism, along with nationalism, which is now being pushed again by the right, falls in between, in a balance.

I believe patriotism is not obedience nor blind loyalty but as you say "to love one’s country freely." for that there also has to be good reason.

Obstruction.. the word of the day for Trump. Where all his energies go to aside from family foreign trademarks.
China Grants 18 Trademarks in 2 Months to President Trump, Ivanka
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/donald-trump-ivanka-get-trademarks-china-1158882

HOW IS THIS NOT AGAINST THE EMOLLIENTS CLAUSE, AND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

That the phrase "Offices of Profit or Trust under the United States" applies to all appointed officials is undisputed, however, there is much debate as to whether it extends to elected officials.

History does not provide a clear answer: When he served as Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton produced a list of persons holding such offices at the request of the Senate; the list did not include any elected positions. Further, during their presidencies, while George Washington did not seek or obtain congressional consent for foreign gifts, Andrew Jackson did.

The Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966, on the other hand, enumerates several elected positions in its definition of "employees" who may not accept any gift of more than minimal value without congressional approval. Such "employees" include the President and the Vice President, a Member of Congress, and the spouses and dependents of the same.

The problem is in the wording and should be redefined, rather than gifts to be inclusive of any benefits, which would include trademarks for personal and private businesses, associated with such person.

If he ran for president I'd vote for him

Can you spell tool?