Most people who will read this saw my announcement towards the end of 2017 saying that I intended to change my blog format over into video rather than written. There have been a lot of bumps along the way, and every time I put a video out, I learn a little bit more about how to make it better. But I'm 20 videos along right now, and I want to make sure my audience stays with me
If you want to see what I've been up to since February, and subscribe or leave a comment, I can be found here
J Edgar/Ed's World
Additionally, all of my videos are linked to the Twitter account that I associate with this blog. That is @edsblogtw1tter
I've had to wave the white flag on writing even though I'd love to do both. With my full time job, I had to pick videos or written word, and I hope that my videos will improve my audience to both
Always remember, never take the words of bloggers, podcasters, or journalists as gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusions
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
Sunday, January 28, 2018
The Announcement
Hello, readers
I want to start by thanking everyone who has read my blog. I started out writing about lifestyle and dating, but the Socialist movement and the fact that I couldn't really get a good job in the market that was going on when I started writing really fired up my passion about the state of the country, and my blog gave me an outlet to express how I interpreted the events in the various governments that affected me from day to day, and occasional policy advice. Writing about politics and policy really forced me to look things up and ask a lot of questions, so I could have a decent understanding of what was going on above me. While I don't consider myself an expert, I do find that I'm usually more informed than comment thread extremists on both sides. But that's what I strive for. My goal is to get enough information that I can present a logical argument, and a defense for my point of view. I don't necessarily set out to change anyone's belief system, but I do hope to present some information that you may have never heard, or never considered in a particular context.
As some of you already know, but many of you will be finding out for the first time, my girlfriend of 2 and a half years decided that she didn't want to be with me anymore. I know some of the people who I told initially told me how terrible it was, and I felt the same way at first. But it was honestly a long time coming. We'd been having problems for nearly a year, but while we were starting to have some progress again over the last two months, there really hadn't been any fix to it. While we were having problems, we spent a lot of time apart and started discovering passions about ourselves, and we both really changed. I'm not writing this article to air our dirty laundry for the world. I do want to say that what I've just told you changed the timeline of my big reveal. I also want to say that I am ok, and it's honestly for the better.
In 2014, when I moved, there was no reliable internet where I lived. I could try and get some bits and pieces of writing done where I worked, but I never finished an article, because I found it so hard to piece one together between phone calls, and from day to day. I was posting articles twice a week, and plenty of people were reading them, as I had Facebook to transmit them. By that time, I also was going half and half about on lifestyle and politics. After my ex and I moved in together, and life slowed down a touch, I realized that I had broadband internet again. I also realized that California was trying to secede from the union and I had strong feelings about that. The problem that came along with this is that print fell kind of dead somewhere in the interim. It was already dying when I started blogging. I remember when 100+ views was a common number for every article. By this point I'm lucky to get 30-40. I've had one 50+ since I came back to the medium.
I wrote in an earlier article that a part of my inspiration to return to political commentary came from current political pundits. (see My Journey from a Quiet Democrat to Conservative Commentator). Steve Crowder, who has stated numerous times that he started his webshow from absolutely nothing, started to inspire me. Everyone knows about Hannity, who is backed by Fox News money, or Rush, or the trio that transmit every day from the Daily Wire. These are people that are backed by big money, and get big sponsorships to deliver news and commentary from an alternative viewpoint to what's accepted as the Mainstream. But over the last few years, there has been a surge in people, like Crowder, who started production from nothing and have made a name for themselves, along with a pretty comfortable bankroll that they use to hire other bloggers and vloggers. Those bloggers and vloggers are people who started out, coincidentally, just like me.
Before my breakup, I was already planning on making a format change. I had reached out to some people who already were active in the media, and started pricing out equipment. On Christmas weekend, I had actually planned for my first video to hit YouTube this weekend. Unfortunately, a week after that, I was put in a position where I was spending hours after hours drawing and re-checking budgets, and hoarding money away for a down payment, and to pay a couple items out of my credit report. After today, I think I'm in a position where I am ready to start moving forward. And I think I'm at the start of something good.
Over the last six months, I've been listening to and watching a wide variety of podcasts. I've put an analytical eye on all of them, so I can look at what I like and what I dislike about them. I've also asked people what works and what doesn't work for them in podcasting and talk radio in general. With all of the information circling in my head, I think I've come up with some formats that will probably work.
A solo analysis and presentation of items in the news is where I got my start, so it stands to reason that I am going to continue with that format. It's been the primary starting point that has helped propel anyone who's made a name for him or herself in commentary into web fame. The advantage to presenting my news and commentary in this fashion is that I'll wind up doing about the same level of research to each show, but it takes the chore of typing and replaces it with a shorter recording. There are chores that come along with the format, but they take the place of 6 hours of typing for an article that typically takes 5 to 15 minutes to read.
When I started recommending podcasts to people, one of the comments I got back consistently was that it is hard for people to listen to a solo voice for a half an hour. I find the same difficulty honestly. Nightvale is the only single voice podcast I can really get the entirety of the script out of. I do ok, with the Daily Wire Guys, but with Hannity and Rush, I tend to only get about 50% of their monologues out of. I usually get more out of their call-in segments, but those monologues get hard to follow. Many of the famous vloggers like Matt Christiansen, Blonde, Roaming Millenial, and the Conservative Millennial draw audiences, but their single-voice videos are much shorter than the average podcast. I'd like to have a longer podcast once a week, with a co-host, where we discuss various news stories back and forth. I'm up in the air on who I want my co-host to be. I have some names in mind, but I don't know if I should have someone established, or find a new voice, and promote him or her, and perhaps even inspire that person to create some content of his own. I'll probably spend a few weeks or months just doing a solo vlog, but I do want to get into having a discussion show, and I'll most likely rotate a few hosts in until I find someone who is the right fit.
Lastly is my dream for podcasting. A couple of people do something similar, but no one on the conservative side of the aisle does a show quite like I've envisioned. I mentioned Steven Crowder before, who has a segment of every show that is a roundtable discussion. What I dislike about Crowder's show is that even though the speech tends to flow pretty freely, it's always a discussion between the same three people: Steve Crowder, Not Gay Jared, and Gerald Morgan Jr.. Michael Knowles also has a regular segment on his show called the Panel of Deplorables. Knowles has a different set of guests on each week to discuss the news, but it's highly turn-based, where Knowles delegates the news story and the question to each guest, one at a time. My dream is different. I have a podcast in mind in which I get 3 or four guests on each week, and just read news articles to them to discuss. I don't want to delegate my stories to them. I just want them to go at it, and discuss, and maybe even argue over them. It's important to me to have a rotating panel of guests, so we don't fall into an echo chamber on the roundtable. I also want the chance for people to shill for their own endeavors. Since it will most likely be a Skype show, if I have a business owner in, I want him to have as much opportunity to have his logo in the background. If I get Shapiro on, I'd expect him to be drinking from the Leftist Tears tumbler with The Daily Wire Logo all over the background.
I'm still looking at a few weeks minimum before I start changing format, but I determined over the last week that it will be best for me to start doing solo shows in my old apartment. That gives me practice with recording, angles, lighting, and editing before I start inviting people to discuss the events of the week with me. But this is definitely coming down the pipes. This is something that I've been looking forward to for a long time. The dream of a writer is to reach an audience, and I hope that this move lets me reach out to a whole new audience
Thank you everyone again for three years of reading, and I hope the majority of you follow me into this new adventure. I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading
I want to start by thanking everyone who has read my blog. I started out writing about lifestyle and dating, but the Socialist movement and the fact that I couldn't really get a good job in the market that was going on when I started writing really fired up my passion about the state of the country, and my blog gave me an outlet to express how I interpreted the events in the various governments that affected me from day to day, and occasional policy advice. Writing about politics and policy really forced me to look things up and ask a lot of questions, so I could have a decent understanding of what was going on above me. While I don't consider myself an expert, I do find that I'm usually more informed than comment thread extremists on both sides. But that's what I strive for. My goal is to get enough information that I can present a logical argument, and a defense for my point of view. I don't necessarily set out to change anyone's belief system, but I do hope to present some information that you may have never heard, or never considered in a particular context.
As some of you already know, but many of you will be finding out for the first time, my girlfriend of 2 and a half years decided that she didn't want to be with me anymore. I know some of the people who I told initially told me how terrible it was, and I felt the same way at first. But it was honestly a long time coming. We'd been having problems for nearly a year, but while we were starting to have some progress again over the last two months, there really hadn't been any fix to it. While we were having problems, we spent a lot of time apart and started discovering passions about ourselves, and we both really changed. I'm not writing this article to air our dirty laundry for the world. I do want to say that what I've just told you changed the timeline of my big reveal. I also want to say that I am ok, and it's honestly for the better.
In 2014, when I moved, there was no reliable internet where I lived. I could try and get some bits and pieces of writing done where I worked, but I never finished an article, because I found it so hard to piece one together between phone calls, and from day to day. I was posting articles twice a week, and plenty of people were reading them, as I had Facebook to transmit them. By that time, I also was going half and half about on lifestyle and politics. After my ex and I moved in together, and life slowed down a touch, I realized that I had broadband internet again. I also realized that California was trying to secede from the union and I had strong feelings about that. The problem that came along with this is that print fell kind of dead somewhere in the interim. It was already dying when I started blogging. I remember when 100+ views was a common number for every article. By this point I'm lucky to get 30-40. I've had one 50+ since I came back to the medium.
I wrote in an earlier article that a part of my inspiration to return to political commentary came from current political pundits. (see My Journey from a Quiet Democrat to Conservative Commentator). Steve Crowder, who has stated numerous times that he started his webshow from absolutely nothing, started to inspire me. Everyone knows about Hannity, who is backed by Fox News money, or Rush, or the trio that transmit every day from the Daily Wire. These are people that are backed by big money, and get big sponsorships to deliver news and commentary from an alternative viewpoint to what's accepted as the Mainstream. But over the last few years, there has been a surge in people, like Crowder, who started production from nothing and have made a name for themselves, along with a pretty comfortable bankroll that they use to hire other bloggers and vloggers. Those bloggers and vloggers are people who started out, coincidentally, just like me.
Before my breakup, I was already planning on making a format change. I had reached out to some people who already were active in the media, and started pricing out equipment. On Christmas weekend, I had actually planned for my first video to hit YouTube this weekend. Unfortunately, a week after that, I was put in a position where I was spending hours after hours drawing and re-checking budgets, and hoarding money away for a down payment, and to pay a couple items out of my credit report. After today, I think I'm in a position where I am ready to start moving forward. And I think I'm at the start of something good.
Over the last six months, I've been listening to and watching a wide variety of podcasts. I've put an analytical eye on all of them, so I can look at what I like and what I dislike about them. I've also asked people what works and what doesn't work for them in podcasting and talk radio in general. With all of the information circling in my head, I think I've come up with some formats that will probably work.
A solo analysis and presentation of items in the news is where I got my start, so it stands to reason that I am going to continue with that format. It's been the primary starting point that has helped propel anyone who's made a name for him or herself in commentary into web fame. The advantage to presenting my news and commentary in this fashion is that I'll wind up doing about the same level of research to each show, but it takes the chore of typing and replaces it with a shorter recording. There are chores that come along with the format, but they take the place of 6 hours of typing for an article that typically takes 5 to 15 minutes to read.
When I started recommending podcasts to people, one of the comments I got back consistently was that it is hard for people to listen to a solo voice for a half an hour. I find the same difficulty honestly. Nightvale is the only single voice podcast I can really get the entirety of the script out of. I do ok, with the Daily Wire Guys, but with Hannity and Rush, I tend to only get about 50% of their monologues out of. I usually get more out of their call-in segments, but those monologues get hard to follow. Many of the famous vloggers like Matt Christiansen, Blonde, Roaming Millenial, and the Conservative Millennial draw audiences, but their single-voice videos are much shorter than the average podcast. I'd like to have a longer podcast once a week, with a co-host, where we discuss various news stories back and forth. I'm up in the air on who I want my co-host to be. I have some names in mind, but I don't know if I should have someone established, or find a new voice, and promote him or her, and perhaps even inspire that person to create some content of his own. I'll probably spend a few weeks or months just doing a solo vlog, but I do want to get into having a discussion show, and I'll most likely rotate a few hosts in until I find someone who is the right fit.
Lastly is my dream for podcasting. A couple of people do something similar, but no one on the conservative side of the aisle does a show quite like I've envisioned. I mentioned Steven Crowder before, who has a segment of every show that is a roundtable discussion. What I dislike about Crowder's show is that even though the speech tends to flow pretty freely, it's always a discussion between the same three people: Steve Crowder, Not Gay Jared, and Gerald Morgan Jr.. Michael Knowles also has a regular segment on his show called the Panel of Deplorables. Knowles has a different set of guests on each week to discuss the news, but it's highly turn-based, where Knowles delegates the news story and the question to each guest, one at a time. My dream is different. I have a podcast in mind in which I get 3 or four guests on each week, and just read news articles to them to discuss. I don't want to delegate my stories to them. I just want them to go at it, and discuss, and maybe even argue over them. It's important to me to have a rotating panel of guests, so we don't fall into an echo chamber on the roundtable. I also want the chance for people to shill for their own endeavors. Since it will most likely be a Skype show, if I have a business owner in, I want him to have as much opportunity to have his logo in the background. If I get Shapiro on, I'd expect him to be drinking from the Leftist Tears tumbler with The Daily Wire Logo all over the background.
I'm still looking at a few weeks minimum before I start changing format, but I determined over the last week that it will be best for me to start doing solo shows in my old apartment. That gives me practice with recording, angles, lighting, and editing before I start inviting people to discuss the events of the week with me. But this is definitely coming down the pipes. This is something that I've been looking forward to for a long time. The dream of a writer is to reach an audience, and I hope that this move lets me reach out to a whole new audience
Thank you everyone again for three years of reading, and I hope the majority of you follow me into this new adventure. I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading
Monday, January 15, 2018
DACA and Shithole Countries
I wanted to take a hiatus from blogging while I sorted my life out and worked on getting a home secured, but Trump and Congress had other ideas. Also look for my upcoming reply to Oprah attempting a Presidential Run. I may have cut the cord, and particularly detest Hollywood Awards shows, but don't think for a second I missed that one.
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump called an open door meeting with members of both parties and both chambers of Congress to discuss the Dream Act. Most people following the news will remember that back in September, The Donald rescinded the executive known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. When he did, he put a condition in place stating that he was not going to take any action until March. So Now it's January, and with Tax cuts in the books and a repeal of the funding mechanism for the ACA now in place, It's time to take on the next issue.
When Trump said he would wait until March to enforce DACA, he did it for a reason. The act was an Obama-Era Executive Action, and as such, could be wiped away with the flick of a pen. The President insisted that Congress, instead, should propose a bill that would give any consideration to the childhood arrivals permanent, whichever direction it goes. It's really only fair. I hate to cite Hollywood elites, but they are partially right in this issue. The Dreamers, under their current status, are in a state where they are both Legal and Illegal immigrants who's fate can literally change day-to-day. It's impossible to live a life when you're under that kind of stress all the time. Therefore, Congress must decide which direction to carry the law. As I mentioned, Executive orders can disappear with another executive order, but Congressional laws take months and years to repeal, along with getting enough people out of 535 on your side.
So a meeting was called, and in an unprecedented fashion, the Main Stream Media was allowed in to record the majority of the event. The video is still on my to-watch list, but the highlights that have made the news are pretty much common knowledge. Pelosi said that she wanted a Clean DACA bill, Trump said that they would get nothing without funding for the wall, and he said that he would sign anything that came across his desk. He also said that ICE agents tell him that we can't get border security without a wall in places that aren't naturally defended. The right went nuts over that last comment. Everyone went into a panic thinking that Trump was turning back into a Democrat, and rescinding his promise to build a contiguous wall all across the southern border. When I read and heard the quote, I don't believe that was the case. Trump was attempting to quote federal agents, saying that there are places along the border that are already protected, and they don't have to enforce those areas as heavily. Trump never said that he didn't want to build the whole wall, just cited that the immigration enforcement knows that there are areas that don't need it. But it falls into the same line as the clean DREAM act and Trump saying he would sign anything.
The more right leaning Conservative show hosts started tripping over themselves to defend Trump saying he would sign whatever came across his desk. I'm very surprised that the hashtag #4dchess didn't trend on Twitter that day. The younger, less established, and more libertarian among us tended to turn on the President, saying that he was turning his back on his campaign promises. Many of them claimed that he was going to turn into a Democrat, or at least a Democrat shill. I had a different idea, but if the shithole comment that I will touch on in a moment happens to be true, then I wound up being dead wrong, too. I'll never say "4D chess" seriously, except to quote someone else, but I will say I thought it was strategic. Trump came in saying he was going to drain the swamp, referring to lifelong politicians who fight with each other on CNN and social media, but are figuratively in bed with each other out of the media eye. As we learned with the tax cuts, the Republican party has a majority in both chambers, but they still really need to get support from the Democrats to do anything effectively. So the Republicans have a hard time just drawing a bill up in the dead of the night and sneaking it over to the White House without the Dems knowing. If Trump were to sign a bill that didn't reflect the immigration policies that got him elected, Republicans who ran with the same agenda would suddenly have to own that bill. And they would have to go back and explain to their constituents at home why that bill hit the Oval Office. With a March Deadline, they would also have to do so before primary votes take place in an election year. With all of the seats that are considered "safe" because they are in red or majority red districts, I'd probably pay money to see a press conference for that explanation.
On Thursday night, there was a closed door meeting in the Oval Office to discuss a bill that was being proposed. According to CNN, along with 60% of Twitter and Instagram, Trump is cited as asking "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?" As soon as it happened, the majority of social media jumped up to defend Haiti and Sub-saharan Africa. At the same time, the Trump army jumped back to express the fact that these countries are war-torn shitholes. Only a handful of people have realized that there is no evidence to this. Let us not forget that just a month ago, the Democrats were going to take to the streets because Trump was planning on secretly firing Mueller while the Christmas season was masking the events. And while they were taking to the streets, they would be repeating the seven words that Trump allegedly said weren't allowed to be said in any budget proposal. The two stories were both found to be fabricated, but they launched massive social media and physical protests. Right now there is no reason to believe that Trump said this about these countries. But what if he did?
If this is true, it means that our President saw something in a bill about these countries that he didn't like. Perhaps it was a level of amnesty, or a way to shuttle more refugees from war-torn countries and give them automatic citizenship. To my knowledge, the contents of the bill have not been released to the public yet. But perhaps the alleged expletive came from the Democrats showing their hands. Trump claimed he would sign anything that came to his desk, and now that he's spoken out on it, I think the majority of America wants to know what he cursed about. Maybe the Social Justice Left doesn't care, but I can't believe that if the bill gets released to the public that they will be able to ignore it for long. Meanwhile, Congress should be working on finding a common ground to get border security in place, and find a way to make a definitive decision on the Dreamers, because they can't stay legal and illegal at the same time forever.
Do you think Trump said "Shithole Country"? Do you want to see what was in the proposal? Do you think it was 4D chess to have the President state that he would sign anything? I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading
On Tuesday, Mr. Trump called an open door meeting with members of both parties and both chambers of Congress to discuss the Dream Act. Most people following the news will remember that back in September, The Donald rescinded the executive known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. When he did, he put a condition in place stating that he was not going to take any action until March. So Now it's January, and with Tax cuts in the books and a repeal of the funding mechanism for the ACA now in place, It's time to take on the next issue.
When Trump said he would wait until March to enforce DACA, he did it for a reason. The act was an Obama-Era Executive Action, and as such, could be wiped away with the flick of a pen. The President insisted that Congress, instead, should propose a bill that would give any consideration to the childhood arrivals permanent, whichever direction it goes. It's really only fair. I hate to cite Hollywood elites, but they are partially right in this issue. The Dreamers, under their current status, are in a state where they are both Legal and Illegal immigrants who's fate can literally change day-to-day. It's impossible to live a life when you're under that kind of stress all the time. Therefore, Congress must decide which direction to carry the law. As I mentioned, Executive orders can disappear with another executive order, but Congressional laws take months and years to repeal, along with getting enough people out of 535 on your side.
So a meeting was called, and in an unprecedented fashion, the Main Stream Media was allowed in to record the majority of the event. The video is still on my to-watch list, but the highlights that have made the news are pretty much common knowledge. Pelosi said that she wanted a Clean DACA bill, Trump said that they would get nothing without funding for the wall, and he said that he would sign anything that came across his desk. He also said that ICE agents tell him that we can't get border security without a wall in places that aren't naturally defended. The right went nuts over that last comment. Everyone went into a panic thinking that Trump was turning back into a Democrat, and rescinding his promise to build a contiguous wall all across the southern border. When I read and heard the quote, I don't believe that was the case. Trump was attempting to quote federal agents, saying that there are places along the border that are already protected, and they don't have to enforce those areas as heavily. Trump never said that he didn't want to build the whole wall, just cited that the immigration enforcement knows that there are areas that don't need it. But it falls into the same line as the clean DREAM act and Trump saying he would sign anything.
The more right leaning Conservative show hosts started tripping over themselves to defend Trump saying he would sign whatever came across his desk. I'm very surprised that the hashtag #4dchess didn't trend on Twitter that day. The younger, less established, and more libertarian among us tended to turn on the President, saying that he was turning his back on his campaign promises. Many of them claimed that he was going to turn into a Democrat, or at least a Democrat shill. I had a different idea, but if the shithole comment that I will touch on in a moment happens to be true, then I wound up being dead wrong, too. I'll never say "4D chess" seriously, except to quote someone else, but I will say I thought it was strategic. Trump came in saying he was going to drain the swamp, referring to lifelong politicians who fight with each other on CNN and social media, but are figuratively in bed with each other out of the media eye. As we learned with the tax cuts, the Republican party has a majority in both chambers, but they still really need to get support from the Democrats to do anything effectively. So the Republicans have a hard time just drawing a bill up in the dead of the night and sneaking it over to the White House without the Dems knowing. If Trump were to sign a bill that didn't reflect the immigration policies that got him elected, Republicans who ran with the same agenda would suddenly have to own that bill. And they would have to go back and explain to their constituents at home why that bill hit the Oval Office. With a March Deadline, they would also have to do so before primary votes take place in an election year. With all of the seats that are considered "safe" because they are in red or majority red districts, I'd probably pay money to see a press conference for that explanation.
On Thursday night, there was a closed door meeting in the Oval Office to discuss a bill that was being proposed. According to CNN, along with 60% of Twitter and Instagram, Trump is cited as asking "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?" As soon as it happened, the majority of social media jumped up to defend Haiti and Sub-saharan Africa. At the same time, the Trump army jumped back to express the fact that these countries are war-torn shitholes. Only a handful of people have realized that there is no evidence to this. Let us not forget that just a month ago, the Democrats were going to take to the streets because Trump was planning on secretly firing Mueller while the Christmas season was masking the events. And while they were taking to the streets, they would be repeating the seven words that Trump allegedly said weren't allowed to be said in any budget proposal. The two stories were both found to be fabricated, but they launched massive social media and physical protests. Right now there is no reason to believe that Trump said this about these countries. But what if he did?
If this is true, it means that our President saw something in a bill about these countries that he didn't like. Perhaps it was a level of amnesty, or a way to shuttle more refugees from war-torn countries and give them automatic citizenship. To my knowledge, the contents of the bill have not been released to the public yet. But perhaps the alleged expletive came from the Democrats showing their hands. Trump claimed he would sign anything that came to his desk, and now that he's spoken out on it, I think the majority of America wants to know what he cursed about. Maybe the Social Justice Left doesn't care, but I can't believe that if the bill gets released to the public that they will be able to ignore it for long. Meanwhile, Congress should be working on finding a common ground to get border security in place, and find a way to make a definitive decision on the Dreamers, because they can't stay legal and illegal at the same time forever.
Do you think Trump said "Shithole Country"? Do you want to see what was in the proposal? Do you think it was 4D chess to have the President state that he would sign anything? I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)