The Biden Conspiracy

 

Let us begin with the now-common conclusion that US presidential candidate Joe Biden is, to one degree or another, senile; and thus physically incapable of acting as President of the United States of America, the most powerful and influential office on the planet.

It has come to my attention that some Republican voters believe the worst possible outcome of this fraud would be for the Democratic candidate for Vice President to immediately take Biden’s place after his election to President. If only that were so. In that case, most voters would know who they were truly voting for or against: the VP candidate versus Donald Trump.

Even if that was the Democrats’ plan, it would be shameful for Republicans to allow it to proceed. Obviously, any candidate unfit for the office is equally unfit for the candidacy. To accept a senile candidate is to make a mockery of our elections. Democrats should be forced to put forth a substitute candidate.

But let’s assume Biden will be tolerated to remain the presidential candidate and that he will be elected President. Democrats would have another, more nefarious option.

Joe Biden could remain President.

So long as Democrats avoid, stall, or disrupt attempts to impeach the senile President, the real powers could remain hidden. We cannot assume the Vice President would be the primary “advisor” who drafts the President’s policies and speeches. Any person or group could work beyond public scrutiny, without ever being certainly revealed to the press, to direct the pawn voters naïvely selected as a national figurehead.

In other words, to accept a senile man as a presidential candidate is to accept the potential outcome of a nameless, faceless President-in-hiding whom not one American voted for. Such a possibility is an abomination. It would call into doubt the whole of our democratic system. It would threaten not only our own republic but all nations affected by American foreign policy.

Act now, Republicans. There is precious little time to defend the legitimacy of our country’s executive branch.

Published in Elections
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 82 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    MarciN (View Comment):

    Frankly, the voters themselves are as capable of making such an assessment as any court would be.

    I think we should be pushing for a debate in a public setting. I think that’s all we need to do.

    I might agree except (1) leftist media coordinate to hide information from non-right voters and (2) many voters would assume the VP candidate will replace him and then wonder why he hasn’t been impeached yet — they would vote for the VP candidate and not get the VP as President. 

    • #31
  2. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Aaron Miller:

    In other words, to accept a senile man as a presidential candidate is to accept the potential outcome of a nameless, faceless President-in-hiding whom not one American voted for. Such a possibility is an abomination. It would call into doubt the whole of our democratic system. It would threaten not only our own republic but all nations affected by American foreign policy.

    Act now, Republicans. There is precious little time to defend the legitimacy of our country’s executive branch.

    Aaron,

    Once more I am sickened by the state of the Democratic Party. Anyone with an ounce of integrity would call a foul on this. Where are the George Wills, Romneys, and the rest of the phony never Trump brigade? If you don’t speak out against this abomination now, any claim to being a conservative or even just an American with a respect for the Constitution is a complete joke.

    Nothing could be more fraudulent than this. The Democrats have their regular ways of stealing an election going, vote harvesting, mail-in ballot fraud, illegal aliens voting, rigged social media platforms, and plain old ballot box stuffing. This is beyond all of that. This is a completely sick crime against everything this country has ever stood for. Shame on those who say nothing.

    Thanks for the post Aaron.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #32
  3. DrewInWisconsin, Unhelpful Communicator Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unhelpful Communicator
    @DrewInWisconsin

    James Gawron (View Comment):
    Where are the George Wills, Romneys, and the rest of the phony never Trump brigade? If you don’t speak out against this abomination now, any claim to being a conservative or even just an American with a respect for the Constitution is a complete joke.

    Nothing could be more fraudulent than this. The Democrats have their regular ways of stealing an election going, vote harvesting, mail-in ballot fraud, illegal aliens voting, rigged social media platforms, and plain old ballot box stuffing. This is beyond all of that. This is a completely sick crime against everything this country has ever stood for. Shame on those who say nothing.

    But Orange Man Bad. : (

    • #33
  4. DonG (skeptic) Coolidge
    DonG (skeptic)
    @DonG

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):
    I have no reason to think the Biden political machine would have any desire to hand control of the Presidency to the VP’s political machine. Best case for the Biden political machine would be if another member of the team could be placed as VP so control over both positions could be had.

    Does Biden have a political machine?  Trump didn’t have anyone when he came into office.  Obama had his Chicago group to pull from.  GWB had his Texas group and his dad’s people to choose from.  But who does Biden have?  Jill?  Hunter??  There is just he Obama left-overs and whoever can force their way inside.  Not having a crew is another reason Senators are weak choices for executive branch.

    • #34
  5. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring
    1.  We all know Biden is a placeholder for someone who can’t get elected because that person was too far left for the Dems to run at the top. 
    2. We can assume that high-powered leftie(s) is/are the puppet masters. Who are they? Pelosi/Schumer? Obama? Soros? AOC and her merry band of loonies? 
    3. With all the rush to create Cloward/Piven confusion and chaos, we can assume their (Dem) metrics show Trump is ahead. They wouldn’t create additional dissent for an election victory for one of their own. All the mail-in voting is ripe for cheating and contesting the outcomes. 
    4. Why have a puppet President? So someone who can’t be President otherwise can rule? So, who is that? The Vice President? Susan Rice is a puppet. Kamala Harris? Possibly, but wouldn’t she have been more ruthless in the primary? I suggest the VP is also the puppet. They must be quite careful who they pick, if they want a puppet. If the overlord were the VP, the choice wouldn’t be so tough. Perhaps competing overlords are duking it out over their own puppet.
    5. One news opinion I heard on the radio commented that if a President couldn’t be selected by inauguration due to chaos over election, Pelosi would become President. The commenter seemed to assume Pelosi would be Speaker and not some other Democrat or even a Republican. Who knows if Democrats are thinking this way. If so, it would be the culmination of a four year coup. This would be madness. If an already angry electorate were subjected to 2 1/2 months of something worse than Florida 2000, this would not happen peacefully.
    6. What if the EC vote winner dies or becomes unable to assume the office before inauguration? This has no clear answer. The President and Vice President have run for different offices since the Constitution was amended. Having not been sworn in to assume their offices, should that happen to Biden, the VP isn’t VP, yet, and has no claim. The person with the second most votes for President should then be President. Wouldn’t that require a recertification of EC votes by Congress? This hasn’t been tested. Dems wouldn’t approve of Trump. More chaos.
    7. What if Dems let Biden serve a token period then decide it is time to declare him unfit so the VP can assume the office?  What if Republicans say, “you chose him, live with him,“ and don’t give them the 2/3 votes needed to remove him? Trump would be enjoying his retirement and doing a lot of “miss me, yet” ads.
    8. What if Dems cheat, win, piss off half the country, then decide to fulfill their vengeance and go after Trump to ruin him, sending a message to any Republican who dared run for President in the future? 
    • #35
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Unhelpful Communicator Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unhelpful Communicator
    @DrewInWisconsin

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):
    Does Biden have a political machine? Trump didn’t have anyone when he came into office. Obama had his Chicago group to pull from. GWB had his Texas group and his dad’s people to choose from. But who does Biden have? Jill? Hunter??

    Biden has Antifa.

     

    • #36
  7. jeffversion1.0 Coolidge
    jeffversion1.0
    @jvanhorn

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    There is a very small chance that Biden is playing the greatest rope-a-dope in history. He is pretending to be senile this summer and will come out after Labor Day and [as] the most charming and brilliant candidate since William Jennings Brian.

    And here’s to hoping Biden and Bryan’s candidacies would be equally successful!

    • #37
  8. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    Arahant (View Comment):

    JamesSalerno (View Comment):

    “Come on, man?”

    “Are you a junkie?”

    Why the questioner didn’t offer to submit to a drug screen if Biden would to a cognitive test is beyond me- unless of course he does take drugs…..

    as to Biden faking it… as the Brits say “too clever by half”-and I’ve never heard Biden described as clever.

    • #38
  9. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):
    I have no reason to think the Biden political machine would have any desire to hand control of the Presidency to the VP’s political machine. Best case for the Biden political machine would be if another member of the team could be placed as VP so control over both positions could be had.

    Does Biden have a political machine?

    The political machine has Biden.

     

    • #39
  10. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    There is a very small chance that Biden is playing the greatest rope-a-dope in history. He is pretending to be senile this summer and will come out after Labor Day and [as] the most charming and brilliant candidate since William Jennings Brian.

    Reagan Mastermind on SNL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5wfPlgKFh8

    I’d say if Biden was pulling this off, it would be more akin to NYC mobster Vincente “The Chin” Gigante, who was being hunted by the feds in the late 1970s and tried to fight it by walking around his Greenwich Village neighborhood openly trying to show the public he was suffering from dementia.

    I don’t think Biden’s sizeable ego would allow him to run a scam like that. But I still think it’s possible, and based on his last debate effort in March against Bernie, that if he can get the adrenal glands going enough for a major event, he can get it together for short periods of time, which is why if I were Trump and his people, I’d still go into the debates expecting the angry, combative Joe Biden from the 2012 debate against Paul Ryan, and not just assume he’s going to be a drooling idiot on the debate stage (and it also wouldn’t be a shock if Biden can get through the first debate that Team Joe then cancels the final two, and the media backs him by saying he’s already proved his mental acuity).

    • #40
  11. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Right now the desires of Jill Biden and the rest of the Democratic Party’s Hillary/Obama wing are in alignment, in that they all want Joe Biden nominated for president. But Dr. Jill wants Joe to actually be president, either because she actually thinks he can do the job, or she wants to be Edith Wilson. The Hillary/Obama people are locked in with Biden only to the point he’s nominated and his VP selection is approved, because they don’t want Bernie Sanders and his people to gain control of the nomination and the party, since they fear that would result in McGovern v2.0 in November.

    We have no idea what the crony capitalist wing of the Dems will do in September or October, if Biden is forced to make public appearances and bombs out there or on the debate stage — the only thing we can be sure of is his VP pick will be lauded as the greatest VP pick in American history by the usual media outlets, just to set the stage in case they do have to make a replacement before Election Day.

    More likely, they’re hoping to get Joe past Nov. 3 and even sworn into office before we start getting the stories about Biden’s declining mental faculties, and how the 25th Amendment may have to be invoked (though even there, they still might pretend nothing’s wrong for a while, if Jill or whoever’s actually running things in the White House is all-in on pushing the approved agenda. They really don’t care who Melakon is to Biden’s John Gill, just as long as Melakon’s on their side).

    • #41
  12. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    I made this comment on another post but it better belongs here.

    My thoughts seem to keep devolving into the most depressing. For the past several months I’ve been thinking, Why even have a president?

    I may be wrong but it seems that presidential Executive Orders are used more and more, but they are ephemeral. Instead of taking years to craft a law, one that will take years of concerted effort to overturn, the president signs and EO that will only last until the next president (though this new means of legislation is so new we don’t know how it will develop). The government has come to be largely run by entrenched bureaucrats.

    Now with the prospect of a life-long, self-absorbed corrupticrat of diminishing mental capability, I foresee an empty Oval Office with a series of congressional staffers marching in, using a presidential seal to sign legislation, and walk out again.

    Until Trump, the CIA and that MIC ran the show in international affairs and various executive departments ran domestic. Presidents’ campaign sloganeering, when enacted, amounted to minuscule alterations if the government’s direction. Now between Pelosi and Schumer and Chief Justice Roberts if doesn’t matter if the president agrees with congress or not, the law will be passed and carved in stone. Clinton’s “safe, legal and rare” changed nothing. Trump’s rule-of-law “lock her up” has come to nothing, and his “build the wall” has gone from thousands of miles to hundreds, over three years, not just because of legislators’ opposition, but largely because of the federal court system’s negating it.

    The beauty of the Constitutional Republic was supposed to be that little would be legislated (and that what was legislated would be in line with goals determined by democratically elected representatives). And judges would apply the law. And the president would administer the laws and would be the first voice and the quickest hand in securing the country in event of insurrection, invasion or war.

    But now we are really debating (those who are willing to debate) electing a mushroom — albeit an angry, arbitrary, corrupt and greedy mushroom — to the position of chief executive.

    But not to worry: the bureaucracy-in-place will handle everything. The layers of elected representatives will assure that the vote counting leads to the New Green Deal (or the next story in its Tower of Babel). The nation’s District Attorneys will exercise discretion in who will be prosecuted, regardless of the law. The Supreme Court will maintain a starry-eyed stare decisis.

    And the president will spend his days clutching children and sniffing their hair.

    • #42
  13. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Flicker (View Comment):

    I made this comment on another post but it better belongs here.

    My thoughts seem to keep devolving into the most depressing. For the past several months I’ve been thinking, Why even have a president?

    I may be wrong but it seems that presidential Executive Orders are used more and more, but they are ephemeral. Instead of taking years to craft a law, one that will take years of concerted effort to overturn, the president signs and EO that will only last until the next president (though this new means of legislation is so new we don’t know how it will develop). The government has come to be largely run by entrenched bureaucrats.

    Now with the prospect of a life-long, self-absorbed corrupticrat of diminishing mental capability, I foresee an empty Oval Office with a series of congressional staffers marching in, using a presidential seal to sign legislation, and walk out again.

    Until Trump, the CIA and that MIC ran the show in international affairs and various executive departments ran domestic. Presidents’ campaign sloganeering, when enacted, amounted to minuscule alterations if the government’s direction. Now between Pelosi and Schumer and Chief Justice Roberts if doesn’t matter if the president agrees with congress or not, the law will be passed and carved in stone. Clinton’s “safe, legal and rare” changed nothing. Trump’s rule-of-law “lock her up” has come to nothing, and his “build the wall” has gone from thousands of miles to hundreds, over three years, not just because of legislators’ opposition, but largely because of the federal court system’s negating it.

    The beauty of the Constitutional Republic was supposed to be that little would be legislated (and that what was legislated would be in line with goals determined by democratically elected representatives). And judges would apply the law. And the president would administer the laws and would be the first voice and the quickest hand in securing the country in event of insurrection, invasion or war.

    But now we are really debating (those who are willing to debate) electing a mushroom — albeit an angry, arbitrary, corrupt and greedy mushroom — to the position of chief executive.

    But not to worry: the bureaucracy-in-place will handle everything. The layers of elected representatives will assure that the vote counting leads to the New Green Deal (or the next story in its Tower of Babel). The nation’s District Attorneys will exercise discretion in who will be prosecuted, regardless of the law. The Supreme Court will maintain a starry-eyed stare decisis.

    And the president will spend his days clutching children and sniffing their hair.

    The real question is, why have a Legislature?  They have failed to Legislate/set policy in any kind of meaningful way for at least a decade.

    • #43
  14. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    I made this comment on another post but it better belongs here.

    My thoughts seem to keep devolving into the most depressing. For the past several months I’ve been thinking, Why even have a president?

    I may be wrong but it seems that presidential Executive Orders are used more and more, but they are ephemeral. Instead of taking years to craft a law, one that will take years of concerted effort to overturn, the president signs and EO that will only last until the next president (though this new means of legislation is so new we don’t know how it will develop). The government has come to be largely run by entrenched bureaucrats.

    Now with the prospect of a life-long, self-absorbed corrupticrat of diminishing mental capability, I foresee an empty Oval Office with a series of congressional staffers marching in, using a presidential seal to sign legislation, and walk out again.

    Until Trump, the CIA and that MIC ran the show in international affairs and various executive departments ran domestic. Presidents’ campaign sloganeering, when enacted, amounted to minuscule alterations if the government’s direction. Now between Pelosi and Schumer and Chief Justice Roberts if doesn’t matter if the president agrees with congress or not, the law will be passed and carved in stone. Clinton’s “safe, legal and rare” changed nothing. Trump’s rule-of-law “lock her up” has come to nothing, and his “build the wall” has gone from thousands of miles to hundreds, over three years, not just because of legislators’ opposition, but largely because of the federal court system’s negating it.

    The beauty of the Constitutional Republic was supposed to be that little would be legislated (and that what was legislated would be in line with goals determined by democratically elected representatives). And judges would apply the law. And the president would administer the laws and would be the first voice and the quickest hand in securing the country in event of insurrection, invasion or war.

    But now we are really debating (those who are willing to debate) electing a mushroom — albeit an angry, arbitrary, corrupt and greedy mushroom — to the position of chief executive.

    But not to worry: the bureaucracy-in-place will handle everything. The layers of elected representatives will assure that the vote counting leads to the New Green Deal (or the next story in its Tower of Babel). The nation’s District Attorneys will exercise discretion in who will be prosecuted, regardless of the law. The Supreme Court will maintain a starry-eyed stare decisis.

    And the president will spend his days clutching children and sniffing their hair.

    The real question is, why have a Legislature? They have failed to Legislate/set policy in any kind of meaningful way for at least a decade.

    Well, a king would do.

    • #44
  15. jeannebodine, Verbose Bon Viva… Member
    jeannebodine, Verbose Bon Viva…
    @jeannebodine
    • #45
  16. Bob W Member
    Bob W
    @WBob

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):
    I don’t think you can force someone to take a cognitive ability test…especially if you’re not a family member. How do you propose Republicans disqualify Biden apart from Trump skewering him if the debates are ever held?

    At the very least, they could sue via the Supreme Court, right? SCOTUS decided the “hanging chad” issue, so I assume it has a history of rulings on presidential elections.

    For any election to be valid, the candidates must be valid. Republican lawyers can argue from the same public evidence that has convinced journalists to the effect of a court order to verify mental competence. It could be required of both parties’ candidates to minimize doubts.

    State legislators could move to withhold state electors until mental health tests are performed on all candidates.

    Half our representatives are lawyers. There are probably other options. In any case, they must try.

    At the very least, make the argument repeatedly in the media. Don’t let it be a talking point only on the right and only among non-politicians. Make American voters think about it.

    Rodin and I had a conversation about this a while back.  Courts won’t get involved in this. The Constitution provides political methods for installing presidents and for removing presidents either for crime or disability,  and doesn’t allow courts a say in it. If the political methods for removing a senile president are not invoked, who is the court to do it? Or to declare a candidate invalid? The next thing would be challenging a candidate’s validity because he’s a racist or something. 

    • #46
  17. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    After discussing these matters with a teacher of government, I must make a couple corrections. 

    First, the process for removing a President with a mental incapacity is not impeachment. That is not an impeachable offense (“high crimes and misdemeanors”). Rather, per the 25th Amendment, a senile President must be removed by his own Cabinet — meaning his own party.

    If Biden is elected and Democrats want him to stay, there is nothing Republicans can do other than try to make Democrats’ own voters demand Biden’s removal. 

    Second, though there is no precedent for deliberate establishment of a hidden “shadow President” immune from legal and political scrutiny, there is precedent for an unelected President. Gerald Ford was appointed as the replacement Vice President under President Nixon and then succeeded Nixon. 

    • #47
  18. Jon1979 Inactive
    Jon1979
    @Jon1979

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):

    After discussing these matters with a teacher of government, I must make a couple corrections.

    First, the process for removing a President with a mental incapacity is not impeachment. That is not an impeachable offense (“high crimes and misdemeanors”). Rather, per the 25th Amendment, a senile President must be removed by his own Cabinet — meaning his own party.

    If Biden is elected and Democrats want him to stay, there is nothing Republicans can do other than try to make Democrats’ own voters demand Biden’s removal.

    Second, though there is no precedent for deliberate establishment of a hidden “shadow President” immune from legal and political scrutiny, there is precedent for an unelected President. Gerald Ford was appointed as the replacement Vice President under President Nixon and then succeeded Nixon.

    In the case of the ‘shadow President’ it would simply come down to a matter of spin within the Democratic ranks and the media outlets who support them — i.e., Joe Biden is fine and completely in control of his mental faculties until he isn’t fine and is not in control of his mental faculties.  Doesn’t really matter what the GOP thinks here — the talking points on Biden’s acuity could turn on a dime, and where the next question would be who’s in on those talking points flipping.

    That’s why you had the leaks 10 days ago about Chris Dodd being wary of Kamala Harris and her ‘loyalty’ to Team Joe. It isn’t just that she’d start her 2024 campaign the moment she was sworn in, it’s that the VP’s office could start leaking like a dyke in Holland about Biden’s problems at cabinet meeting and elsewhere, as a way to set up the spin that the 25th Amendment needs to be invoked and Harris needs to take over as president ASAP.

    • #48
  19. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    If we do have a Presidential debate, I propose that persons seeking to be debaters, moderators, or audience members be required to take this qualification test.  Under the American form of government,

    1. Who sets taxes?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. Big Pharma
    2. Who creates private sector jobs?
      1. The President
      2. The Economy
      3. Prospective employers and job applicants in the private sector
    3. Who runs the economy in America?
      1. The President
      2. The Fed
      3. Nobody
    4. Who is responsible to provide health care?
      1. The President
      2. The Congress
      3. Private citizens
    5. Who is responsible to create and produce medicines?
      1. The FDA
      2. The President
      3. The drug industry
    6. Who determines the annual deficit?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. The Federal Reserve
    7. What is the effect of a higher trade deficit on the American standard of living in the current year?
      1. No effect
      2. It lowers it
      3. It raises it
    • #49
  20. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    We need to strengthen the states and cities and towns, and that means taking back responsibilities and money. 

     

    • #50
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    If we do have a Presidential debate, I propose that persons seeking to be debaters, moderators, or audience members be required to take a qualification test, under the American form of government,

    1. Who sets taxes?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. Big Pharma
    2. Who creates private sector jobs?
      1. The President
      2. The Economy
      3. Prospective employers and job applicants in the private sector
    3. Who runs the economy in America?
      1. The President
      2. The Fed
      3. Nobody
    4. Who is responsible to provide health care?
      1. The President
      2. The Congress
      3. Private citizens
    5. Who is responsible to create and produce medicines?
      1. The FDA
      2. The President
      3. The drug industry
    6. Who determines the annual deficit?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. The Federal Reserve
    7. What is the effect of a higher trade deficit on the American standard of living in the current year?
      1. No effect
      2. It lowers it
      3. It raises it

    This is great, Mark.  but you left out the correct answer for #3.  The answer is 4. Everybody.

    • #51
  22. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    If we do have a Presidential debate, I propose that persons seeking to be debaters, moderators, or audience members be required to take a qualification test, under the American form of government,

    1. Who sets taxes?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. Big Pharma
    2. Who creates private sector jobs?
      1. The President
      2. The Economy
      3. Prospective employers and job applicants in the private sector
    3. Who runs the economy in America?
      1. The President
      2. The Fed
      3. Nobody
    4. Who is responsible to provide health care?
      1. The President
      2. The Congress
      3. Private citizens
    5. Who is responsible to create and produce medicines?
      1. The FDA
      2. The President
      3. The drug industry
    6. Who determines the annual deficit?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. The Federal Reserve
    7. What is the effect of a higher trade deficit on the American standard of living in the current year?
      1. No effect
      2. It lowers it
      3. It raises it

    This is great, Mark. but you left out the correct answer for #3. The answer is 4. Everybody.

    Flicker,

    Hm. This made me think.

    Now, having already had my two Manhattans, I am obviously not permitted by the Interwebs Code to write. But at least you made me think.

    • #52
  23. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    I assume were the Democrats to win the Presidential election, Joe Biden would become and remain in name President. 

    EHerring (View Comment):

    •  We all know Biden is a placeholder for someone who can’t get elected because that person was too far left for the Dems to run at the top. 
    • We can assume that high-powered leftie(s) is/are the puppet masters. Who are they? Pelosi/Schumer? Obama? Soros? AOC and her merry band of loonies? 
    •  

    I therefore feel free, when debating the presidential election with someone who nominally supports Mr. Biden, to argue from the policies of the most extreme Democrats who have spoken on any topic, since we don’t know who will really be setting policy.

    Almost all of the Democrats have publicly signed a document supporting the elimination of at least the free speech clause of the First Amendment..

    Many Democrats concurred with Robert O’Rourke’s proposals to punish any church that does not preach government-approved theology.

    Many Democrats also concurred with Robert O’Rourke’s plan to confiscate guns, and implicitly the midnight raids that would be required to implement such a plan. (Mr. “Beto” O’Rourke has been helpful in saying out loud the parts that were supposed to be kept under wraps.)

    The Democrats who would run things also will prevent you from traveling by air (and these days probably by car too), will force you to remodel your house, will greatly restrict your choice of car to buy (assuming they let you buy a car), etc.

    The Democrats will encourage riots in your town, and will encourage their supporters to commit violence against anyone who disagrees with them, as they have in the past (Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, [the crazy elderly black female Representative from Los Angeles], Sen. Hirono, etc.).

    The point being that when debating the Presidential election, it is reasonable to paint the most horrible picture possible of a Democratic administration, because we don’t know who will actually be running things.  

    • #53
  24. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    I assume were the Democrats to win the Presidential election, Joe Biden would become and remain in name President.

    EHerring (View Comment):

    • We all know Biden is a placeholder for someone who can’t get elected because that person was too far left for the Dems to run at the top.
    • We can assume that high-powered leftie(s) is/are the puppet masters. Who are they? Pelosi/Schumer? Obama? Soros? AOC and her merry band of loonies?
    •  

    I therefore feel free, when debating the presidential election with someone who nominally supports Mr. Biden, to argue from the policies of the most extreme Democrats who have spoken on any topic, since we don’t know who will really be setting policy.

    Almost all of the Democrats have publicly signed a document supporting the elimination of at least the free speech clause of the First Amendment..

    Many Democrats concurred with Robert O’Rourke’s proposals to punish any church that does not preach government-approved theology.

    Many Democrats also concurred with Robert O’Rourke’s plan to confiscate guns, and implicitly the midnight raids that would be required to implement such a plan. (Mr. “Beto” O’Rourke has been helpful in saying out loud the parts that were supposed to be kept under wraps.)

    The Democrats who would run things also will prevent you from traveling by air (and these days probably by car too), will force you to remodel your house, will greatly restrict your choice of car to buy (assuming they let you buy a car), etc.

    The Democrats will encourage riots in your town, and will encourage their supporters to commit violence against anyone who disagrees with them, as they have in the past (Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, [the crazy elderly black female Representative from Los Angeles], Sen. Hirono, etc.).

    The point being that when debating the Presidential election, it is reasonable to paint the most horrible picture possible of a Democratic administration, because we don’t know who will actually be running things.

    • #54
  25. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    If we do have a Presidential debate, I propose that persons seeking to be debaters, moderators, or audience members be required to take a qualification test, under the American form of government,

    1. Who sets taxes?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. Big Pharma
    2. Who creates private sector jobs?
      1. The President
      2. The Economy
      3. Prospective employers and job applicants in the private sector
    3. Who runs the economy in America?
      1. The President
      2. The Fed
      3. Nobody
    4. Who is responsible to provide health care?
      1. The President
      2. The Congress
      3. Private citizens
    5. Who is responsible to create and produce medicines?
      1. The FDA
      2. The President
      3. The drug industry
    6. Who determines the annual deficit?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. The Federal Reserve
    7. What is the effect of a higher trade deficit on the American standard of living in the current year?
      1. No effect
      2. It lowers it
      3. It raises it

    This is great, Mark. but you left out the correct answer for #3. The answer is 4. Everybody.

    Flicker,

    Hm. This made me think.

    Now, having already had my two Manhattans, I am obviously not permitted by the Interwebs Code to write. But at least you made me think.

    You don’t know what an honor you have paid me.

    • #55
  26. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    The big story on Trump tonight is that he pronounced “Thailand” with a “th” rather than a “t”. The same way I have always pronounced it. 

    They are getting desperate. 

    • #56
  27. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    If we do have a Presidential debate, I propose that persons seeking to be debaters, moderators, or audience members be required to take a qualification test, under the American form of government,

    1. Who sets taxes?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. Big Pharma
    2. Who creates private sector jobs?
      1. The President
      2. The Economy
      3. Prospective employers and job applicants in the private sector
    3. Who runs the economy in America?
      1. The President
      2. The Fed
      3. Nobody
    4. Who is responsible to provide health care?
      1. The President
      2. The Congress
      3. Private citizens
    5. Who is responsible to create and produce medicines?
      1. The FDA
      2. The President
      3. The drug industry
    6. Who determines the annual deficit?
      1. Congress
      2. The President
      3. The Federal Reserve
    7. What is the effect of a higher trade deficit on the American standard of living in the current year?
      1. No effect
      2. It lowers it
      3. It raises it

    This is great, Mark. but you left out the correct answer for #3. The answer is 4. Everybody.

    Flicker,

    Hm. This made me think.

    Now, having already had my two Manhattans, I am obviously not permitted by the Interwebs Code to write. But at least you made me think.

    You don’t know what an honor you have paid me.

    You don’t know what an honor you have paid me.

    • #57
  28. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    The big story on Trump tonight is that he pronounced “Thailand” with a “th” rather than a “t”. The same way I have always pronounced it. 

    Thighland? Sounds like the place for me.

    • #58
  29. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Charles Mark (View Comment):
    The big story on Trump tonight is that he pronounced “Thailand” with a “th” rather than a “t”. The same way I have always pronounced it.

    Thighland? Sounds like the place for me.

    Please.  It’s soooo Hangover 2.

    • #59
  30. JustmeinAZ Member
    JustmeinAZ
    @JustmeinAZ

    Charles Mark (View Comment):

    The big story on Trump tonight is that he pronounced “Thailand” with a “th” rather than a “t”. The same way I have always pronounced it.

    They are getting desperate.

    There wasn’t a peep when Obama pronounced Marine Corps as Marine Corpse.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.