Child Yells Profanity Re: Hillary at Trump Rally

A 10 year old attending a Trump rally with his mother, Pam Kohler, of Mount Vernon, VA, stood up twice and yelled out "Take the b*tch down" when Trump mentioned Hillary Clinton's name.

His mother identified herself to reporters as and stuck up for her son's remark. She said, “I think he has a right to speak what he wants to."

Ms. Kohler and her son were sitting in the media section of the rally and according to the Wall St Journal, both were holding signs that said "Hillary for Prison.....Asked where he would learn such a phrase, she said, "Democratic schools"

BS. He learned it from his mother. [More...]

The most absurd (and insulting) column of the day is in the Wall St. Journal, arguing that Blacks would support because of how much they liked the Apprentice. He just has to pitch them.

"Mr. Trump hasn’t (yet) offended blacks to the extent that he’s offended other groups, but neither has he given many of them a reason to vote for him."

...For many blacks, Mr. Trump’s bling and brashness were as impressive as his net worth....Imagine if Mr. Trump took time to campaign in places like Jay Z’s old neighborhood and talk to the residents about why so many lots are empty, why all those buildings are boarded up, why foreign nationals run so many of the small businesses, why the bodega charges so much for milk and eggs, why good schools and jobs are so scarce. ..... He could explain how he would do things differently. Mr. Trump, billionaire developer, would have both the knowledge and credibility to discuss these matters. And he would have an audience, likely a big one.

Is he writing satire? Has he not seen the F*ck Donald Trump video by rappers YG and Nipsey Hussle, with 7 million views? A remix with G-Eazy has been sung at every stop this summer on YG and G-Eazy's Endless Summer tour, from Lollapalooza to St Louis to Nashville to Virginia. They even performed it in Tokyo.

Here's a clean version that aired on Comedy Central with the artists substituting "No Donald Trump" for "F*ck Donald Trump."

Here's the song being blared by protesters outside a Trump rally in San Diego. YG also turned the song into this very effective anti-Trump commercial.

On a related note, check out this Montel Williams rant against Trump insulting a military member even before the Khan mess. He's referring to Trump's slam of John McCain (and Montel points out he's no fan of McCain's politics.) Even Sarah Palin's son-in-law bashed Trump today.

So what happens when Trump figures out he can't win? Does he drop out leaving the race between Hillary and Mike Pence? NBC this week promised Trump will never be allowed back on the Apprentice.

No parent in his or her right mind would vote for Donald Trump.

< Cameron Douglas Released to Halfway House | Trump's Runaway Train >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Meg Whitman (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 10:19:40 PM EST
    This stuff is happening in real time (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 10:31:55 PM EST
    John Harwood tweets

    ....Manafort not challenging Trump anymore.  Mailing it in.  Staff suicidal.

    Response from an imbed

    Trump campaign source in reax to this "it's all true" and "way worse than people think"


    Meg Whitman's statement on Facebook: (none / 0) (#15)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 02:56:35 AM EST
    "As a proud Republican, casting my vote for President has usually been a simple matter. This year is different. To vote Republican out of party loyalty alone would be to endorse a candidacy that I believe has exploited anger, grievance, xenophobia and racial division. Donald Trump's demagoguery has undermined the fabric of our national character.

    "Trump's reckless and uninformed positions on critical issues - from immigration to our economy to foreign policy - have made it abundantly clear that he lacks both the policy depth and sound judgment required as President. Trump's unsteady hand would endanger our prosperity and national security. His authoritarian character could threaten much more.

    "Therefore, I have decided to support Hillary Rodham Clinton. It is clear to me that Secretary Clinton's temperament, global experience and commitment to America's bedrock national values make her the far better choice in 2016 for President of the United States. In a tumultuous world, America needs the kind of stable and aspirational leadership Secretary Clinton can provide. I urge all Republicans to reject Donald Trump this November."

    It should be noted that Whitman's revulsion toward Trump is already fairly well known. She had earlier supported Chris Christie's candidacy, only to completely denounce and repudiate him last February when he dropped out and endorsed Trump.

    The HP CEO is by far the most prominent Republican to break ranks and endorse Hillary Clinton. I suspect that she probably won't be the last.



    I would advise people to start DVRing (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 07:57:33 AM EST
    Morning Joe.  These shows the last couple of weeks particularly will probably end up in the Smithsonian or the very least the museum of broadcasting.  

    They are exploring topics in ways and with people, like Gen. Michael Hayden, no one else in broadcast journalism will touch.

    Scarborough just said something so amazing I had to run in from the kitchen to rewind to make sure I heard it right.   In the conversation with Hayden about what kinds of safeguards there are against crazy people getting their hands on the nuclear codes, there aren't many, he related a story.  I rewound to make sure I got the quote right.  I'm absolutely sure it will be up later.

    ".....um.....I'm.....uh, I have to follow up with that, and I'll be very careful here, (Stern look from Mica so this is probably her father we are talking about-speculation) several months ago a....uh....foreign policy..expert.  On the international level went to advise Donald Trump and three times he asked about the use of nuclear weapons.   Three times he asked 'if we have them, why can't we use them?'  ......three times in a one hour briefing, why can't we use nuclear weapons.

    Followed by a looooong and very uncomfortable pause for broadcast tv.

    Then Scarborough asked Hayden what is the time frame.  From the time Trump decided to use nuclear weapons, how long before they are launched?

    Hayden, it's dependent on the situation but it's a system that designed for speed and it's not designed to debate the decision.

    The whole show has been interesting so far but that, THAT.   That was some gripping live tv.


    Watch it on ThinkProgress (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:11:37 AM EST
    Yes, pretty terrifying (none / 0) (#29)
    by KeysDan on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:35:39 AM EST
    for the sane. But, this should put Trump back on track with his wingnuts.  And, it is not out of the Republican mainstream: Ted Cruz wants to bomb ISIS until the sands glow in the dark. And, then there was Cruz's carpet bombing, although, apparently, just your basic Dresden-type bombing.

    So Was Trump's Question Really Different From (none / 0) (#42)
    by RickyJim on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Madeline Albright's?
    Albright was an early opponent of the Powell doctrine that the United States should restrict its military interventions to situations in which its vital interests are threatened, and should always insist on using overwhelming force. In his memoirs, Powell recalled that he almost had "an aneurysm" when Albright challenged him to explain "What's the point of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?"

    But then, Powell chucked all that aside, ... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 02:49:38 PM EST
    ... along with his own credibility, when he waved that vial of talcum powder before the U.N. General Assembly and a worldwide broadcast audience on February 5, 2003, and alluded to us all that it was anthrax from Saddam's WMD program.

    4,501 American military personnel ultimately lost their lives and another 32,249 were wounded in that subsequent debacle in Iraq, thanks in no small part to that deceitful performance. Gen. Powell's own (now-former) reputation as a straight shooter served to convince many Americans -- and sorry to admit, but yours truly included, albeit reluctantly -- about the likely veracity of the Bush administration's claims, which later proved to be as phony as a $3 bill.

    I can appreciate the fact that Gen. Powell himself had expressed serious doubts about the evidence prior to going to the U.N., and may have further been deceived by a Bush White House that was all gung-ho for war in Iraq. But he should have then played the part of the honorable soldier, resigned his post as Secretary of State and gone public with his suspicions, rather than merely agree to be the good soldier and go along for the ride.

    Powell forever disgraced himself that day, as far as I'm concerned. What he did was unforgivable.



    Nukes... (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by desertswine on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:24:52 PM EST
    It's Nukes!  Who in their right mind wants Trump with Nukes!

    ?? You can do better than that. (none / 0) (#48)
    by RickyJim on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 03:05:48 PM EST
    I was asking about the similarity of the question asked by Donald Trump to "a foreign policy expert on international level", one that seemed to greatly upset Joe Scarborough, to that asked by Madeline Albright of Colin Powell.  I don't see the relevance of your ad hominem attack against Powell.

    Ad hominem implies a personal attack. (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:19:51 PM EST
    I didn't call him names or slur him. Rather, I simply stated those facts which support my own contention that "as far as I'm concerned," Colin Powell is no longer a credible source of information on the subject of foreign policy.

    As for your looking for similarities between Mme. Albright's reputed statement to Gen. Powell and Trump's question to an unnamed "foreign policy expert," since both are clearly second-hand and not primary-sourced quotes -- that it, they were recounted by a third party, who may or may not have a personal agenda of his / her own -- you're wasting your time comparing such hearsay.

    In short, what's your point? Are you dredging up Albright's reputed statement to somehow justify Trump's reported stance on the use of nuclear weapons? Or are you more interested in making a case that both sides are equally nuts, which in my opinion constitutes a false equivalence?



    Incorrect (none / 0) (#54)
    by RickyJim on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 05:29:00 PM EST
    From Wikipedia
    Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]

    I wish you wouldn't keep using argumentation tactics so similar to that of Donald Trump.  It is ridiculous to beg the question of the equivalence of Albright's and Trump's questions and who else is saying we don't have to worry about what Scarborough claimed Trump asked because it is hearsay?


    off topic (none / 0) (#58)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 07:50:40 PM EST
    stay on topic please

    Wall Street Journal (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by CST on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:34:46 AM EST
    has lost it if they think any minority is supporting Trump in any kind of number beyond token.

    There are a lot of Muslims in the black community as well, according to wiki about 25% of all Muslims in America are African Americans, and they make up the majority of Muslim converts.  Now, most black people in this country are Christian, but even the Christians are more likely to be friends and neighbors with Muslims.  Nevermind that they already vote 90% Democrat on average.

    Besides, I think most minorities - even Asians and black people who aren't being directly targeted - can see the problem with empowering someone who clearly has disdain for civil rights.

    Don't be too relaxed (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Lora on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:02:21 AM EST
    Remember when it was impossible for Trump to get the nomination?

    Don't underestimate the power of cult brainwashing.

    He's whipping up a frenzied hatred of all things Hillary.

    If we don't have an adequate reply, the impossible will become reality.

    Hillary comes pre-hated (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:56:42 AM EST
    Really nowhere further for them to go with that particular theme.

    My rightie FB friends (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:59:23 AM EST
    are now passing around the historical stuff to remind themselves why they hate her. Remember when she killed Vince Foster? Oh yeah!

    After (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:09:16 AM EST
    the disastrous Bush administration I don't think anybody especially not Hillary is taking anything for granted. However there comes a point where you have to be about more than just hatred for Hillary. Hatred for Hillary will get you oh, 35 to 40% of the vote. We've seen this angry old white guy strategy go down the tubes a number of times already. Don't discount it but don't overestimate its appeal either.

    Hmmmmm (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:24:28 AM EST
    they are now planning an intervention

    No, really.  And calling it an intervention.  Good luck with that Reince.

    This is from WaPo-

    There is a rule, Rule 9, which spells out how a nominee can be replaced. But: "The rule is pretty clear about the conditions for filling a vacancy," Putnam writes. "The list is short: death, declination or otherwise. And let's be clear here: The rule is intended to fill vacancies, not to lay the groundwork for a replacement.
    "Some have speculated that 'otherwise' is ambiguous. Taken out of context it is," he continued. "However, under the provisions for filling vacancies, it clearly fills in any gap between death and declination (i.e.: an incapacitating illness, but one that leaves the nominee neither dead nor able to decline to run further). And that was the intention." In other words, the only way Trump won't be the nominee is if he drops dead, falls into a coma or simply decides not to run.
    It's not clear which of those is least likely. Probably the coma, just given the odds.

    From an article titled something like "sorry, you are stuck with him.

    I think thats true.

    There is a theory that this whole thing actually reinforces his "fixed" meme.  And while it IMO certainly will not help him win, every day this goes on he is more of a hero to his insane supporters.  And will in all likelihood assist his creation of a Batsh!t media empire.

    I just saw a guy who said "I've said he would have to kill some one but if he killed the right person, I would still vote for him"

    Who do you think the "right person" would be?

    This is where we are.

    Embrace the horror.


    I saw this (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:58:53 PM EST
    earlier. They are stuck with him short of Trump deciding he's sick of running for president and quits himself. And there seems to be an expiration because at a certain point it's too late to take his name off the ballot.

    Yes, I expect the next step to be for them to be openly advocating for the murder of Hillary. They're not there YET but they are inching toward that direction.


    You need to keep up (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 01:08:56 PM EST
    Trump should campaign... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:35:52 AM EST
    in the Marcy projects?  Yeah that'll be the day...lol.  What's he gonna tell the residents?  "If I am elected I will tear down your home and redevelop the area for the next batch of rich white kids trying to be hip to live in.  I'll make a fortune, yous guys should move to Camden or Newburgh, me and mines vision of the city doesn't include yous guys."

    i never swear (none / 0) (#1)
    by linea on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:38:44 PM EST
    but isn't the disinclination to use profanity (to curse? to be vulgar?) a social class thing?

    In my experience (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:43:58 PM EST
    The best people curse the most.

    i must be a terrible person then (none / 0) (#5)
    by linea on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:51:31 PM EST
    cuz i never swear even when i'm angry or upset.

    You should try it sometime. (none / 0) (#6)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:56:54 PM EST
    It's fun, and when used judiciously it can be rather useful in getting others to do what you want. Just don't overdo it, or it loses its shock value and others won't take you seriously.

    The mom will probably take that 10 yo (none / 0) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 10:02:30 PM EST
    to see SAUSAGE PARTY

    I know I'll be in line the first day


    He's already pushing (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:42:38 PM EST
    The idea that the election is "fixed".  He's says it at pretty much every stop now.

    The speculation, from Joe Scarborough, is that his best scenario is to lose by a small enough margin that he can forever say the election was fixed then start a Beck like media empire with Russian money to continue fleecing his followers.

    His words not mine.

    It will just do wonders for the already failing trust in our public institutions.

    Roger Stone (none / 0) (#31)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:43:13 AM EST
    The deafacto campaign manager

    I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly," Stone said. "He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: `I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there's voter fraud. If there's voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.'"

    "If you can't have an honest election, nothing else counts," he continued. "I think he's gotta put them on notice that their inauguration will be a rhetorical, and when I mean civil disobedience, not violence, but it will be a bloodbath. The government will be shut down if they attempt to steal this and swear Hillary in. No, we will not stand for it. We will not stand for it."

    And the proof of widespread voter fraud? (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Peter G on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 02:44:55 PM EST
    The fact that court after court in the last few weeks has stuck down, in state after state, Republican-pushed voter suppression statutes (including voter ID laws), for lack of proof of voter fraud that could justify their otherwise unconstitutional provisions. According to the Trump campaign's twisted logic, in other words, the inability to demonstrate the existence of any past voter fraud proves there will be massive voter fraud.

    And when the polls do not show that (none / 0) (#32)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:54:38 AM EST
    I suppose they are rigged too.

    I don't say this often, but I think most people are smart enough to see through that kind of rhetoric when the bald facts are staring them in the face. No one is going to riot in the streets to make Trump the POTUS.

    But that won't stop Stone and Trump from ranting  about it for the next 3 months.


    Have you met (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:58:16 AM EST
    A Trump supporter?

    Just askin.

    There really are quite a few.  And personally I can totally see some strange days.

    Am I saying this would change anything or put the republic at risk?  No I am not.


    True, anyone who is already a supporter (none / 0) (#38)
    by ruffian on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:21:23 PM EST
    is going to buy anything he says, or pretend to. Hard to tell anymore.

    They are now denying (none / 0) (#39)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:25:56 PM EST
    This meeting described by Joe Scarborough ever happened.  

    Another rope a dope?

    I doubt he would have said that th way he did if he was not prepared to back it up.  I will be surprised if they don't bring the person described in that meeting forward to back it up.

    Will it be Zbig?


    I have met several (none / 0) (#52)
    by Lora on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:42:12 PM EST
    ... who think Hillary is the Antichri$t and think Trump is the G@d-given answer to her. And FYI, if my little corner of the world is at all representative, the Hillary haters/Trump zombies are growing. Thanks to the Trump campaign.  Hating Hillary may be all they've got, but it could potentially be enough.

    Do not underestimate the brainwashing of the American people.


    I also know several (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 04:54:07 PM EST
    My experience is different.  Early on I talked a lot about "smart" and even "liberal" people who were Trump supporters.  That's beyond all the rednecks I know or are related to.

    Nearly all of the former are no longer Trump supporters. And I'm finding the latter group is becoming smaller and smaller.  And some are becoming more and more uncomfortable admitting it or defending it.

    The flip side of that is I think there is a not insignificant number of people who will vote for Trump but not admit it.  To you or to a pollster.

    I think the fact that Trump supporters are getting crazier and crazier is absurdly obvious.  We are separating the wheat for the chaff and the chaff is getting more chaffed by the day.  


    At least (none / 0) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 05:37:58 PM EST
    on Facebook they are getting loud and proud with their conspiracy theories. I'm seeing the same thing you are. I'm even seeing former Republicans try to talk the Trumpsters off the ledge. It's not going well telling them to quit posting conspiracy sites on their walls on Facebook. Basically they seem to be the same as the Romney supporters less some percentage. I've also seen some Trump supporters either move away from Trump or go silent. You never know which. One friend thought Trump was the greatest until this last week and now no longer posting in support of Trump. Those are the kind of voters you never know if they're going to sit home or leave the presidential ballot blank or what.

    Roger Stone (none / 0) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:15:41 PM EST
    fits in well with the quality of the Trump campaign: he is long-time political operative, including a one time aide to Bob Dole, until resigning in one of the big s$x scandals of the day.
    Stone's non-violent bloodbath prediction skates pretty close to either extortion (a threat, vote for Trump if you want to save yourself---nice house you got there, Mr. Voter, is it flame retardant?) or sedition (fomenting incitement of discontent against the government).  

    I only posted it (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:18:09 PM EST
    To illustrate the "fixed" meme.  They have been pushing it hard.  This stuff plays right into it.  They will push it even harder.

    Yes, I understood. (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by KeysDan on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 12:27:23 PM EST
     And agree. Just wanted to take the opportunity to provide the provenance.  

    Apparently, the Trump campaign ... (none / 0) (#4)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 09:51:01 PM EST
    ... has put out a call for more shovels and volunteers, so they can dig their hole faster and deeper.

    Is it Palin's son-in-law? (none / 0) (#13)
    by CoralGables on Tue Aug 02, 2016 at 11:17:09 PM EST
    Did they ever get married?

    yes, in June (none / 0) (#45)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 02:49:20 PM EST
    According (none / 0) (#18)
    by MKS on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 08:43:18 AM EST
    to Morning Joe, Trump asked a national security advisor three times why we can't use nukes.

    And, Trump is on the record with Tweety saying why do we build nukes if we can't use them.

    The guy is not funny or just posing.  

    I put this up thread with a link (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:01:05 AM EST
    Don't know if you read this, it's everywhere, of if you were watching.  I've been watching.  Just got off the StairMaster having gotten thru the first 2 hours.

    It's been non stop.  Non stop.  They are on a mission.  The only "pro Trump" person was Ari Flescher who squirmed and admitted he agreed with everything that had been said but is still voting for Donald because, Hillary.  They destroyed him.  They annihilated him.

    Say what you want about these two, I've said plenty, they are doing good work on this subject.


    John Karl on Good morning America (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:18:24 AM EST
    Quoted by Heilmann on MJ-

    "I'm told that senior officials of the party are actively exploring what would happen if Trump dropped out.  How to replace him on the ballot'.... and the answer according to this is that the Repiblicsn National Committee can't force Trump out, he would have to drop out voluntarily then 168 RNC members would pick a new candidate.  They would have to do so by early Sept."

    I think it's safe to say we are in uncharted territory?


    Definitely (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:33:56 AM EST
    uncharted territory. Yes, it's been pretty much all over the place that the GOP can't get rid of Trump. Interesting thing I'm seeing anecdotally is people either going into overdrive smearing the Khans saying they're part of the Muslim Brotherhood and are terrorist appeasers or just leaving the GOP and going over to Gary Johnson which brings up another interesting point. These same people have been yelling about abortion forever and now they're going to a candidate that believes there should be no restrictions on abortion and that freedom of religion is a bad thing? Truly conservatism has become obviously completely ideologically bankrupt. These evangelical voters have become nothing but knee jerk anti-Hillary voters.

    Obama short-circuited "Dump Trump" (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Towanda on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 06:14:38 PM EST
    with his amazing denunciation yesterday from the White House -- not just the party convention -- according to intriguing analyses.

    Why?  Because dumping Trump now means agreeing with Obama.  The GOP is not gonna go there. . . .

    I would not want to play chess with Obama.


    Exactly yes (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 06:22:33 PM EST
    It seems to have had two purposes.  He made a good job of separating republicans and conservatives from Trump in his convention speech.  This, they say, is part of a play for reasonable conservative voters.   By not demonizing republicans but Donald.  And at the same time tieing him around the neck of republican office holders.

    Pretty darn smart.


    It might be a good day (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:24:34 AM EST
    To stay near a news source.

    Just sayin


    I wonder if Trump is an admirer (none / 0) (#22)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 09:25:43 AM EST
    of George Wallace's old running mate Curtis LeMay..

    He seems to be appealing to the same "take the bitch down" segment of the populace Wallace appealed to..

    But Wallace was sane (none / 0) (#28)
    by MKS on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 11:33:42 AM EST
    thread cleaned (none / 0) (#59)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Aug 03, 2016 at 07:52:12 PM EST
    of off topic comments