2 Likes
Thatâs an outright lie on your part, congrats.
Many of the suggestions there have nothing to do with prayer or religion at all.
You didnât even give it a ten second glance or youâre a bald faced liar, which is it?
Divide and conquer.
The only way you get disparate groups with different interests to work together is to convince them they have a common enemy.
In this case itâs everyone on the right.
See there you go again with this broad brush. The right doesnât have a common enemy in the left?
And the 'others" cheered at most of the presidents speech . The dems didnât care about the economy , jobs report , even when the president said black and Latino unemployment was at itâs LOWEST level in history ! The dems seemed upset 5 million Americans were OFF food stamps and put on those pouty faces . The sat on their hands when the president said where their was a barrier in SD the influx of illegals dropped to almost none . Did you even watch ??? 
Of course none of this is true. Show me video of the Dems not applauding and/or standing for the economy? Unless what Trump said was a lie, everyone should appreciate jobs.
Prove itâŚ
You canât possibly show that to be true.
They sat stone faced and still when Trump pointed out the record low UE numbers for blacks and Hispanics.
And caught hell as a result.
In 1982, Democratic congressman Dennis Eckart of Ohio was so intrigued by the âover-the-topâ synchronized cheering from Republicans that he went across the aisle and picked up a copy of Reaganâs remarks. They differed in one key respect from the remarks distributed to Democrats: Specific applause cues were peppered throughout. So the next year, Democratic House Speaker Tip OâNeill acquired an early copy of Reaganâs text and decided that Democrats would all cheer at the vaguely pro-government sentiment that âwe who are in government must take the lead in restoring the economy.â
National Journalâs George E. Condon Jr. writes that Reagan was flustered but âquickly recovered and shot back, âAnd here all that time, I thought you were reading the paper.â It was the Republicansâ turn to roar and applaud their leaderâs witty riposte. From that moment, the State of the Union address was changed forever. Duelling standing ovations, often triggered by the most banal comment, were here to stay.â
I need to prove to you what your own eyes can see?
In 1982, Democratic congressman Dennis Eckart of Ohio was so intrigued by the âover-the-topâ synchronized cheering from Republicans that he went across the aisle and picked up a copy of Reaganâs remarks. They differed in one key respect from the remarks distributed to Democrats: Specific applause cues were peppered throughout. So the next year, Democratic House Speaker Tip OâNeill acquired an early copy of Reaganâs text and decided that Democrats would all cheer at the vaguely pro-government sentiment that âwe who are in government must take the lead in restoring the economy.â
National Journalâs George E. Condon Jr. writes that Reagan was flustered but âquickly recovered and shot back, âAnd here all that time, I thought you were reading the paper.â It was the Republicansâ turn to roar and applaud their leaderâs witty riposte. From that moment, the State of the Union address was changed forever. Duelling standing ovations, often triggered by the most banal comment, were here to stay.â
That doesnât begin to support your claim that all speakers control the applause lines and when their members stand. Not even close.
You either didnât read, or, more likely didnât understand, the article. It most certainly did.
Sorry, I can not help you if you can not understand such basic things.
6 Likes
It isnât there, period.
Saves on nausea. ⌠.
Thank youâŚ
Itâs close enough for me.
Brilliance can be so simple at times.
Next year this will be my TV.
1 Like
ENTITLEMENTS !!!