I watched the entire speech last night. For the first time since he became president, I think his speech (More than likely written by a professional) was very presidential in nature. I think he made things very clear what he wants to do. And in some (not all) instances made it clear how he wants to go about his agenda. He reached across the isle numerous times with very little response from the dems. Which is shameful. They really should be ashamed of themselves for at least not acknowledging his attempt at unity.

The biggest disappointment to me was when most of the dems would not stand to honor our fallen hero:

https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/03/terrible-stone-faced-democrats-refuse-stand-navy-seal-widow-honored-trump/

The dems have become so bitter that they won't honor our dead soldiers. Sad and disgraceful. 

I watched the entire speech last night. For the first time since he became president, I think his speech (More than likely written by a professional) was very presidential in nature. I think he made things very clear what he wants to do. And in some (not all) instances made it clear how he wants to go about his agenda. He reached across the isle numerous times with very little response from the dems. Which is shameful. They really should be ashamed of themselves for at least not acknowledging his attempt at unity.

The biggest disappointment to me was when most of the dems would not stand to honor our fallen hero:

https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/03/terrible-stone-faced-democrats-refuse-stand-navy-seal-widow-honored-trump/

The dems have become so bitter that they won't honor our dead soldiers. Sad and disgraceful. 

They were talking about this on NPR this morning and that Trump had a game plan and a script, both for the speech and the entire "event", and that Trump stuck to the scrip.  I was out with the GF last night, so I'll have to watch the speech later.

NPR was grilling Sebastian Gorka and NPR seemed to be trying to lead him into saying things, taking statements out of context, etc.  Gorka wasn't having any of is and had good counters based on FACTS and offered context of statements that otherwise could have been taken with a very different message (really spin).  The guy is really impressive.  Need someone like him to argue 2A stuff! 

They were talking about this on NPR this morning and that Trump had a game plan and a script, both for the speech and the entire "event", and that Trump stuck to the scrip.  I was out with the GF last night, so I'll have to watch the speech later.

NPR was grilling Sebastian Gorka and NPR seemed to be trying to lead him into saying things, taking statements out of context, etc.  Gorka wasn't having any of is and had good counters based on FACTS and offered context of statements that otherwise could have been taken with a very different message (really spin).  The guy is really impressive.  Need someone like him to argue 2A stuff!

People were saying things last night like he became the president with that speech. He will win over more than his base with that speech. It was powerful and for the first time he acted like the POTUS. etc.

My personal take is that he had a speech writer. Not putting that down. Just that it was not typical Trump speak. No "Big time. Big league" or any of his usual terms he uses. I actually liked the speech very much. It was powerful, he delivered it powerfully. I think he should also hire a joke writer to throw some humor in with more of his speeches. I used to love listening to Reagan speak. Powerful and entertaining. I think the biggest thing he should do with the speech writer is to try and continue to speak to the dems through his speeches. Using the pulpit to encourage the dems to work with the repubs. After a few times of that he should then personally reach out to the minority leaders behind the scenes. And then deliver a speech about the outcome of his meeting. His base and those on the fence will love the idea of transparency. Good or bad. If he is able to bring some dems over to some compromise and give them a little of what they want, he could turn out to be a great president. Of course this is JMHO.

I liked the part where he talked about repealing and replacing "Obamacare" and at least a half dozen of the "women in white" Democrat congresspersons animatedly gave the thumbs down action, at least twice. Media: crickets. Now, imagine if during Obama's first speech to the joint session one month after his first election a similar number of Republicans had made the same gesture several times to statements of Obama's intended legislative goals. Media: crickets? I think not. It woulda been the end of the world proof of rampant racism. Talk about "fake news", or at least "bias beyond the pale". 

People were saying things last night like he became the president with that speech. He will win over more than his base with that speech. It was powerful and for the first time he acted like the POTUS. etc.

My personal take is that he had a speech writer. Not putting that down. Just that it was not typical Trump speak. No "Big time. Big league" or any of his usual terms he uses. I actually liked the speech very much. It was powerful, he delivered it powerfully. I think he should also hire a joke writer to throw some humor in with more of his speeches. I used to love listening to Reagan speak. Powerful and entertaining. I think the biggest thing he should do with the speech writer is to try and continue to speak to the dems through his speeches. Using the pulpit to encourage the dems to work with the repubs. After a few times of that he should then personally reach out to the minority leaders behind the scenes. And then deliver a speech about the outcome of his meeting. His base and those on the fence will love the idea of transparency. Good or bad. If he is able to bring some dems over to some compromise and give them a little of what they want, he could turn out to be a great president. Of course this is JMHO.

That's basically what I was hearing from NPR and other accounts.  Sounded like a lot of bipartisan support for much of what was said. 

Even then, still lots of discussion of Dems twisting words out of context.  I will eventually watch the speech, but if it wasn't for a Rep being in some of the coverage to clarify things, I could see how people could be swayed to the twisted message that the MSM tries to spin.  That just makes me 

It was good, really good.  The best thing about it was that it showed how terribly disconnected the democrats are with the rest of the country.

I watched the entire speech last night. For the first time since he became president, I think his speech (More than likely written by a professional) was very presidential in nature. I think he made things very clear what he wants to do. And in some (not all) instances made it clear how he wants to go about his agenda. He reached across the isle numerous times with very little response from the dems. Which is shameful. They really should be ashamed of themselves for at least not acknowledging his attempt at unity.

The biggest disappointment to me was when most of the dems would not stand to honor our fallen hero:

https://milo.yiannopoulos.net/2017/03/terrible-stone-faced-democrats-refuse-stand-navy-seal-widow-honored-trump/

The dems have become so bitter that they won't honor our dead soldiers. Sad and disgraceful. 

and the truth comes out about "Trump used the SEAL widow as a prop"...
http://ijr.com/2017/03/814188-mourning-nation-watched-trump-honor-seals-widow-now-we-learn-of-secret-meeting-before-it-happened/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Owned&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_campaign=ods&utm_content=Politics

I liked the part where he talked about repealing and replacing "Obamacare" and at least a half dozen of the "women in white" Democrat congresspersons animatedly gave the thumbs down action, at least twice. Media: crickets. Now, imagine if during Obama's first speech to the joint session one month after his first election a similar number of Republicans had made the same gesture several times to statements of Obama's intended legislative goals. Media: crickets? I think not. It woulda been the end of the world proof of rampant racism. Talk about "fake news", or at least "bias beyond the pale". 

and our "representative" miss tulsi, wore the same wrinkly, faded long sleeve shirt she always wears...
http://media3.s-nbcnews.com/j/msnbc/components/video/201702/d_tov_womenwhite_170228.nbcnews-ux-1080-600.jpg

Dan Grilo, a staffer for Hillary Clinton, sent out a tweet attacking the Navy widow and calling her an idiot.  He immediately deleted the tweet and deactivated his account after the sh*t storm started!

So much for "we go high", unless that was a reference to being impaired.

and the truth comes out about "Trump used the SEAL widow as a prop"...
http://ijr.com/2017/03/814188-mourning-nation-watched-trump-honor-seals-widow-now-we-learn-of-secret-meeting-before-it-happened/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Owned&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_campaign=ods&utm_content=Politics

It must be a slow news day or the reporter got his butt hurt cuz he wasn't invited to the meeting. 

I liked the part where he talked about repealing and replacing "Obamacare" and at least a half dozen of the "women in white" Democrat congresspersons animatedly gave the thumbs down action, at least twice. Media: crickets. Now, imagine if during Obama's first speech to the joint session one month after his first election a similar number of Republicans had made the same gesture several times to statements of Obama's intended legislative goals. Media: crickets? I think not. It woulda been the end of the world proof of rampant racism. Talk about "fake news", or at least "bias beyond the pale". 

Yes I remember when he spoke about Obama Care. He either looked right at the dems or pointed out that way. Especially when he said it was imploding. Sort of like looking at the people responsible but not coming right out and saying it. And the women giving the thumbs down I thought was kinda stupid. As it turns out some of the MSM outlets actually called the speech good. Some like CNN, MSNBC and NYT had nothing but faults with Trump and his speech. But I think that the people are really starting to see through some of their crap. Not the hardcore Rachel Maddow loving butt hurt snowflake buttercups. But the people who have an open enough mind to realize they have been lied to about Trump, and things like climate change that will come around to being a supporter of the president.

Yes I remember when he spoke about Obama Care. He either looked right at the dems or pointed out that way. Especially when he said it was imploding. Sort of like looking at the people responsible but not coming right out and saying it. And the women giving the thumbs down I thought was kinda stupid. As it turns out some of the MSM outlets actually called the speech good. Some like CNN, MSNBC and NYT had nothing but faults with Trump and his speech. But I think that the people are really starting to see through some of their crap. Not the hardcore Rachel Maddow loving butt hurt snowflake buttercups. But the people who have an open enough mind to realize they have been lied to about Trump, and things like climate change that will come around to being a supporter of the president.

Sebastian Gorka had a bunch of excellent counter points and facts on hand for the NYT comments.  Things appeared to be taken out of context most of the times where if you only read the NYT "analysis" that it would probably leave you 

Then when Gorka explained how it was taken out of context and provided the bigger picture, it made sense.  Was actually kind of funny when you could sort of tell that threw the NPR person for a loop. 

Sebastian Gorka had a bunch of excellent counter points and facts on hand for the NYT comments.  Things appeared to be taken out of context most of the times where if you only read the NYT "analysis" that it would probably leave you 

Then when Gorka explained how it was taken out of context and provided the bigger picture, it made sense.  Was actually kind of funny when you could sort of tell that threw the NPR person for a loop.

I know a lot of people that are conservative that listen to NPR religiously. From what I have listened to NPR they are liberal but not as far left as the fake news crews are. They sort of pretend to report both sides but they never seem to represent the right side very well.

I know a lot of people that are conservative that listen to NPR religiously. From what I have listened to NPR they are liberal but not as far left as the fake news crews are. They sort of pretend to report both sides but they never seem to represent the right side very well.

I started listening to them mostly because I wanted some news on the radio while I drive and the news via NPR tended to be more neutral, at least relatively.  Though I was surprised at the way the NPR person (I can't think of his name right now) sort of kept at Gorka.  First time I recall them pushing one side so.  I never viewed them as swaying too far one way or the other, so that sort of attack kind of shocked me. 

I know a lot of people that are conservative that listen to NPR religiously. From what I have listened to NPR they are liberal but not as far left as the fake news crews are. They sort of pretend to report both sides but they never seem to represent the right side very well.

A lot of news BRANDS have changed to liberal over the years.

Just like Coca Cola's recipe, even though the brand is the same.