The inference by the person who posted this (Fodaoson) and the only reason this is here is meant to be backhanded slam at Conservatives. It’s the way of the liberals. Since they don’t have any original ideas, they insult and attempt to intimidate. Man – That won’t/don’t fly with me – you infantile little boy.
To infer that Conservatives DO NOT care about those things is not true nor based on any factual evidence. All citizens of the United States care about "the welfare of the people". Need proof? Our armed forces included both Conservatives and liberals (Republicans and Democrats) serving side-by-side in WWI and WWII; don't forget they did the same thing in Korea, Vietnam and now against our eternal enemy - terrorism, mainly Islamic terrorist, but also d******c t*******t. So, to infer that a Conservative does not care about the people of this country is contemptible and loathsome.
Now this is factual – NONE, I repeat, NONE of the laws passed for civil rights and civil liberties going back to the Thirteenth Amendment (abolishment of s***ery, https://tinyurl.com/u36o627), the Fourteenth Amendment (granted citizenship to everyone, https://tinyurl.com/sywl2vr) and Fifteenth Amendment (banning race-based v****g qualifications) passed during Lincoln’s Presidency would have passed in the House of Representatives or the Senate without support from Conservative Republicans. By the way, all 86 Republicans v**ed for the 13th Amendment while 56 of the 72 Democrats v**ed AGAINST IT. OOPS! You can look up the v****g by political party for the other two yourself if you’re interested (although I doubt it as when faced with facts, liberals run for the cover their usual MO of insult and intimidation instead). And since JFK days, in 1965, President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed the V****g Rights Act, guaranteeing African Americans the right to v**e. The bill made it illegal to impose restrictions on federal, state and local e******ns that were designed to deny the v**e to b****s. 112 of 138 Conservative Republicans v**ed in favor of LBJ’s (a liberals) signature legislation.
I am tired of hearing that we Conservatives do not care about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties. And, to say or infer that only Liberals look ahead and not behind welcoming new ideas and that Conservatives do not is absurd, it is d******e and unproductive.
Do you think we Conservatives do not read and understand U.S. history and learn from the mistakes of the past (like s***ery) and understand that new ideas and changes must be made in order to always care about the welfare of the people? Only a liberal would conceive of that idea and that they – and only they - have the lock on and progressive and productive ideas.
Now to address rigid reactions, which you again infer without saying it (you coward) that Conservatives are too rigid which causes stalemates and suspicions – thank you for pointing out to all of us our ability to think about and place limits on policies both at home and abroad. Thinking outside the box is an ability we Conservatives welcome because without it, some of the programs and policies implemented for civil rights and civil liberties would go out of control and lose their effectiveness for everyone that needs them not just those abusing them.
Now, be a good little liberal and try to think of something insulting that is original.

Hey, you are like all Trump h**ers! You are an angry man! Wipe your tears little man. How does it feel to wake up every day knowing that Trump is President and you are unable to do anything about it except – cry like a baby and wallow in miserable angry h**e? Trump has been President for just over three years, and it still you are miserable because of it. Get over it! Plus, you Trump h**er, you are facing another four years of him come this November which adds to the anger and misery.
You must not have much of a life hating Trump and knowing your team of Democrats are bunch of losers and can’t defeat him in the upcoming e******n. How it must hurt and add to your anger towards and h**e of Trump because he was not expected to be good as he is - but has measured up to, and far exceeded, the task of being President of the United States – and you can’t stand his success.
Should Trump not win the upcoming P**********l e******n, it is not going to break my heart as much as it will break yours when he does win. (Ha-Ha! IWLMAOAYWHDW – t***slated for you - I will laugh my ass off at you when he does win!). However, should he somehow get more Trump supporters than h**ers and pull out the e******n (again) and get reelected this year, I will enjoy it even more because you Trump h**ers will continue to be miserable. Even if he were to lose, you guys will still have miserable lives because you are losers yourself.
You and all you Trump h**er losers must pray to the gods whenever he does anything for it to fail. It is such a negative and pathetic way to lead your lives hoping that wh**ever he does will not be good for the citizens of this country. It must be a chore getting out of bed in the morning knowing that Trump is your President. Remember, there is the rest of 2020, plus four more years you will have to get out of bed every morning with a h**eful attitude.
GO Trump!! Go all of you in the Trump supporter nation. Stick it to the losers! Stick it to the Trump h**ers with a v**e for President Trump in the upcoming e******n so we can watch all these Trump h**ers cry like babies and continue to wallow in their miserable h**e.
Oh - and when you piss on Limbaugh's grave, I hope you add some good fertilizer to it so that the grass will grow even greener. Have a good day.

“We teach them: don’t follow an illegal order,” Kelly said. “And if you’re ever given one, you’ll raise it to whoever gives it to you that this is an illegal order, and then tell your boss.” See: https://tinyurl.com/Illegal-Order from Americanmilitarynews.com in an article "Gen. John Kelly: Vindman ‘did exactly what we teach;’ was right to testify in Trump impeachment".

The problem I have here is - What was Trumps order that was illegal that he gave to Vindman? Did he (Vindman) actually confront Trump identifying it as an illegal order? AND, who is Vindman's boss that he raised it with? If Gen Kelly is correct, Vindman didn't even follow established procedures.

It would NOT be a disaster for arresting this Purple Heart war hero Lt. Col Vindmen. Throw the book at him. Leavenworth should be his place of residence for the next 20 years. What the good LTC forgot was that the President has the final say on all foreign relations just because he is the President. Vindmen was pissed because Trump didn't follow his (Vindmen's) recommendation - in fact Trump did just the opposite. So Vindmen thinks "Hey I'm deep state (or a card carrying member of The Swamp), so Trump not following what I say is out of line." NOT! WRONG!!! An NSA Analyst does not outrank the President, so when Trump did not follow Vindmen's Powerpoint presentation, the poor misguided LTC got his feelings hurt. Plus, he desecrated the uniform by speaking out in public as he did. As a career soldier, he should know better. He disgraced the uniform for those who have served (career sailors like me) and those presently serving. Lastly, I think Vindmen thought that he was a protected species - an untouchable. But he forgot, if the President of the United States can be impeached, tried and acquitted, a lowly NSA analyst be fired and then tried and convicted.

Will Lt. Col. Vindman be punished? Here’s what Trump said
Army Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman, Director for European Affairs at the National Security Council, arrives at a closed session before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees on October 29, 2019, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. (Alex Wong/Getty Images/TNS)
February 12, 2020 Ryan Morgan

view the below at: https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/02/will-lt-col-vindman-be-punished-heres-what-trump-said/?utm_campaign=DailyEmails&utm_source=AM_Email&utm_medium=email

Lt. Col. Vindman is a disgrace to the uniform and should be punished severely.

United States Army Lt. Col Alexander Vindman’s fallout with the Trump administration may not have ended with his removal last week from the White House National Security Council (NSC).

President Donald Trump suggested on Tuesday that the Pentagon may consider further disciplinary action against Vindman, after Vindman testified for Democratic lawmakers working to impeach Trump, Fox News reported. Trump removed Vindman from the NSC on Friday and the officer is expected to be reassigned back to the Pentagon.

Asked by reporters if he favored disciplinary actions against Vindman, Trump said he would allow the military to “handle him any way they want” before adding that he expected commanders would provide some form of review of Vindman’s conduct.

“That’s going to be up the military,” Trump said. “We’ll have to see. They are certainly, I imagine, going to take a look at that.”

In a Saturday tweet, Trump claimed Vindman’s conduct within the NSC had concerned his direct superior, and Trump alleged Vindman had “problems with judgement [sic], adhering to the chain of command and leaking information.”
- ADVERTISEMENT -

In November, Vindman testified that he felt Trump had acted “inappropriately” in a July phone call with the Ukrainian president. Vindman’s testimony helped advance Democratic allegations Trump pressured Ukraine to take up politically motivated investigations of former Vice President Joe Biden.

Trump was acquitted of the impeachment charges by the Senate. Vindman’s removal from the White House came just days later. Critics of the decision quickly characterized Vindman’s removal as an act of retaliation by Trump.

On Monday, Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for 74 federal investigators general to investigate Vindman’s removal.

Schumer said the firing was part of a “growing pattern of retaliation against those who report wrongdoing only to find themselves targeted by the President and subjected to his wrath and vindictiveness.”

National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien said Vindman’s removal was not retaliation, though Vindman’s twin brother Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, who was also on the NSC, was also removed.

O’Brien’s characterized the firings as part of a broader effort to shrink the NSC, and on Monday O’Brien approved the firing of some 70 more NSC staffers, according to the Washington Examiner.

Ahead of Vindman’s removal from the White House, Defense Secretary Mark Esper also laid out assurances that the Pentagon would protect its service members from retaliation.

“We welcome back all of our service members wherever they served, to any assignment they are given,” Esper said.

1st, I would like for you to please provide me with a specific case of Trump being r****t. I'm sorry, but I need to be enlightened. Please take the time to give me an example so that I can understand your position. 2nd, I NEVER h**ed Obama - I disagreed with his policies. I thought he was a thoughtful guy, but always seemed to be lecturing. However, that's just my take. It seems to me, if I disagreed with President Obama, I should not be pigeon holed as a r****t. Look, I disagreed with Obamacare. So by your analysis, I am a r****t. Sure doesn't make any sense to me.
Anyway, I would appreciate you enlightening me on these two points.
Please respond.

Sorry - I don't "get it". Your talk is riddles filled with h**e. Calm down! Count to ten! Be a good little boy. Take another Valium.

Did a google.com search on the above. There are lots of different answers. For all of them go to - https://tinyurl.com/Income-Ine******y

Some short, interesting ones are:
How does the extent of income ine******y in the US compare to that of other nations around the world?
When measured for all households, U.S. income ine******y is comparable to other developed countries before taxes and t***sfers, but is among the highest after taxes and t***sfers, meaning the U.S. shifts relatively less income from higher income households to lower income households.

Why is there so much ine******y in America?
U.S. income ine******y is comparable to other developed nations pre-tax, but is among the worst after-tax and t***sfers. This indicates the U.S. tax policies redistribute income from higher income to lower income households relatively less than other developed countries.

What is the definition of income ine******y?
Income ine******y refers to the extent to which income is distributed in an uneven manner among a population. ... They average over 39 times more income than the bottom 90 percent. But that gap pales in comparison to the divide between the nation's top 0.1 percent and everyone else.

There is a website that explains Income Ine******y in great detail with charts, etc. Go to https://ine******y.org/facts/income-ine******y/

I guess the question for me is: Should we be outraged by income ine******y as the Democrats suggest? Is it outrage that the Democrats feel or is it jealousy? Look, I am not even in the the to 10%, however, I live comfortably, I'm retired, served in the Navy for a 20 year career and now have my military retirement and social security as income, I have some savings, yes I have mortgage but it is either mortgage or rent to live someplace, two cars, travel someplace 1 or 2 times every year, go out to eat or to movie 4-6 times per month, etc, etc. I don't own yachts or a second or third home, and when I travel I fly coach and look for the most economical airfare. So should I care that there are people in this country who make billions while my income is less that $100,000.00? Should I care that less than 1% pay 90% of our taxes?

In my view, the term "Income ine******y" is just another code word used by our Democrat brothers and sisters (who are actually c*******t in training) to get the juices/ill-tempers going of the ill-informed ignorant (some might even say stupid) sheeple following to have something to yell and scream about. They are not happy people unless they are unhappy - and using the code words "income ine******y" invokes hatred and unhappiness. Why can't they just be happy for the people who have the billions? AND, if you tell me that these rich people need to share their income, I say go fly a kite or in more graphic terms - go fornicate with yourself.

What are the "other tools and things" you reference? It would be nice to hear what they are. Like what, line up Marines at the border and shoot anyone coming across? Set up traffic lights in the tunnels that are built by the cartels? Are these the type tools you are referencing; and are there any others? Can you name a few? One? Come on man.

Well said. It's about time some our Republican Senators and Congresspeople start using similar language, etiquette, manners, attitude et al as the author of the quoted post does regarding their political beliefs and support of this president (and those that come after him who are similar thinkers). Stop the RINO crap and become real live Conservatives for the next five years (and beyond). When that happens, the friggin' snowy flakey ass's will have met their match and then and only then will they - SHUT THE FK UP! (It would be to much to ask them to sit down and hash out ideas that meet their interests as well as ours. Compromise has never worked with them. They don't and won't have that capability until they listen out ours - they don't have to agree - but at least give us some credit for using our brains. It would be nice have lefties stop the "they are our betters" attitude. It will never happen while I'm alive; an observation of mine for over 50 years).

Agree with your statement. The E*******l College "levels the playing field" between the large populated coastal areas (California, New York, etc.) and the small middle states. Which means - you gotta fight for your political life EVERYWHERE. As stated above - Hilary did not do the job - so she deserved to lose. That is the beauty of the E*******l College; it means that EVERY v**er needs to be touched; every v**ers v**e counts.

Look folks - enforcing our i*********n l*ws IS NOT R****T - and need I repeat - IS NOT R****T! Nor is enforcing the speed limit, or enforcing DUI/DWI laws NOT R****T (and there are others to many to mention)! Now WHAT IS r****t is any arrest or apprehension by police based on persons race/color of skin. So, if a person from Mexico is here in our country ILLEGALLY (it was once called "without papers") - and a police officer arrests this person for being here illegally (which is against the law) - that is not r****t. Judges who cannot enforce a simple law - whether they like it or not - should be removed/fired. I'm sure during the course of their serving that there were sentences/judgements that go against the grain - however, that comes with the job. A good example would be as a supervisor having to go through a force reduction and laying off three good workers. As a supervisor, you might not like it, but you do it. So, from my viewpoint, if these judges can't stand the heat (that comes with the job as well as the glory), then get outta the kitchen and let someone with the stomach do the job. GO! GET OUT!

OMG, you've been having nightmares again. Get a better mattress, it'll help you sleep better without having all those fantasy dreams. Good luck!

I was reading an article by someone - who made it a point - to be identified as a cisg****r. Per https://tinyurl.com/G****r-defs cisg****r is defined as denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and g****r corresponds with their birth sex. OOPs, I thought I was a male.

Per https://tinyurl.com/G****r-defs, Cisg****r relates specifically to g****r rather than sexuality. A person can be cisg****r (often abbreviated to just cis) and have any sort of sexuality. For example, two men may both be cisg****r but one straight and one gay. So, I can address my sister as sis, and she can cis me back! Go to https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-it-mean-to-be-cisg****r-103159 to learn "what does it mean to be cisg****r".

For some real confusion - again at https://tinyurl.com/G****r-defs, how about now being a pang****r or a big****r. Holy cow

What does Pan g****r mean?
A literal dictionary definition of bisexuality, due to the prefix bi-, is sexual or romantic attraction to two sexes (males and females), or to two g****rs (men and women). Pansexuality, however, composed with the prefix pan-, is the sexual attraction to a person of any sex or g****r. Confused yet?

What does it mean to be Big****r?
Big****r, bi-g****r or dual g****r is a g****r identity that includes any two g****r identities and behaviors. Some big****r individuals express two distinct personas, which may be feminine, masculine, ag****r, androgyne, or other g****r identities; others find that they identify as two g****rs simultaneously.

These are fabulous. Per snopes.com, this is misattributed to Clint Eastwood. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/clint-eastwood-quote-on-trump/. It was, however, written by a relatively unknown New Hampshire state Rep. Fred Doucette https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/members/member.aspx?member=377220 to the editor of the Eagle Tribune in September 2019 according to politifact.com at https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fact-checks/statements/2020/jan/02/facebook-posts/state-lawmakers-pro-trump-letter-wrongly-attribute/.