12

National Review turns all guns toward Trump.

Posted by Eudaimonia 3 years, 1 month ago to Politics
154 comments | Share | Flag

Last night, National Review dropped its latest edition. It is a formal declaration against and excoriation of Donald Trump.

Trump and his supporters will not (and have not) taken this lightly. Prepare for fireworks.
SOURCE URL: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430126/donald-trump-conservatives-oppose-nomination


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 11
    Posted by ewv 3 years, 1 month ago
    The lemming-like behavior of so many conservatives to run after the 'man of action' with his populist pandering and no principles other than 'everything is a deal' is a sign of the movement's intellectual bankruptcy. Trump should have been publicly denounced long before this, as some of us have been on this forum.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • 10
    Posted by  $  ObjectiveAnalyst 3 years, 1 month ago
    Hello Eudaimonia,
    Wow! All guns blazing! They really don't like him... Well, duh... He is no conservative. He is a populist. He is ring leader of the circus. Of course the circus is at least entertaining in a pleasant way. Fireworks indeed.
    The story is always the same; it only depends on whose Ox is being gored.
    A benevolent dictator is still a dictator; though living under one may feel like relief after years of being trampled under foot. The least statist candidates will be largely ignored by the media, and the electorate, who cry out foolishly for the government to come to the rescue... Einstein's definition of insanity comes to mind...
    But alas, we all must do with what we have...
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
      My guess is that if he wasn't worth billions, he would be a sideshow performer at a circus or a 3 card monte specialist.

      However, with that being said, I for one am still going to wait until November to see who I am going to vote for. Cruz is making a intelligent run against Trump, so far!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
        Does Trump have any dirt besides the bankruptcies or is he truly the Teflon Don?

        All the rest including Cruz have dirty underwear what makes him so special?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Gonzotr 3 years, 1 month ago
          It is not whether there is any dirt, there most certainly is. It matters only if anyone cares, and does anything about it. A populist movement with out any grounding has no care for this till it is way too late.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
          It may not be dirt per se however he has a history that is kind of hard for him to run from! Everything he is parroting is almost exactly the opposite of what he has been promoting over the years.

          Unfortunately for him, being as wealthy and famous as he is, there are reams of quotes and miles of tape capturing his persona and beliefs. For that reason, many of us are having trouble taking his rhetoric seriously! His statements up until recently (past year) have been contrary to much of what he is pushing these days.

          Wouldn't you agree that is the case? Basically, everyone seems to be willing to give him a pass, much like the electorate did twice with Obama. Look what we ended up with!!!!! I for one would rather not make that mistake with Trump.

          At least with several of the other candidates, you "sort of" know where they are coming from. There is some past performance that shows consistency between their rhetoric and their actions historically. We shall see won't we?!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  blarman 3 years, 1 month ago
          Aside from support for Kelo v New London (eminent domain) - which few care about - and his marriages - which few care about - there really isn't much there. He's been giving money to both sides for a long time. He lives in New York, so he's met with almost all the politicians there.

          A few things Trump has going for him:
          1. His media presence. "The Apprentice" and other such shows mean he's a household name. I think people also like his no-nonsense attitude that focuses on performance in these shows. They're sick of the politicians where the performance is all acting.

          2. That he is crusading on just one or two real policy matters, and they are resonating with people: especially illegal immigration. The Democrats have been pushing this for a long time - long enough for the results to start being known to people as a net negative.

          3. His refusal to be politically correct, which he has parlayed into a platform from which he can say outrageous things like "I could kill a man in New York City and not lose a vote." and get away with it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 1 month ago
    Sanity on Trump. Bravo National Review.
    Now, how about sanity on the never ending betrayal by the GOP against conservatives, and the obvious solution: libertarianism.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 3 years, 1 month ago
    I'm against Trump too.
    What to do if the Walmart lemmings get him the republican election? Nasty, executive-power, insider Hillary is the worst thing in a long time. However, an honest, fool-socialist Bernie might actually be better for the US than a completely uninhibited, narcissist Trump as long as there is a republican-controlled congress to beat up the little fairy-tale school boy. Basically a stale-mate for 4 years and government power is in check.
    Be careful what you wish for. Trump could do for conservatives what Bush did...ensure an Obama/two house control in the next election, and it is over.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
      Why do you think he's a conservative? I can't think of a single reason to accord him that unless you are using the original and not the pop political definition. Right wing of the left national socialist is as far as I could make that realllllyyyyy long stretch before the rubber band snapped.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eyecu2 3 years, 1 month ago
    This might draw disagreement from the rest of you out there but my position is that I will vote for anyone against Clinton. And while I do not support Trump. I am against Clinton.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
      Relax! With her current problems, she probably will not be the one running! Even the Clinton's have their limitations as do most Americans....
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 1 month ago
        Yesterday I heard on Fox radio that if Clinton is taken out Biden will likely take her place.
        My conscience is already forcing me to vote (for whoever the GOP front runner may be) against the continuation of Obama's destructive policies.
        As for the policies of Bolshevik Bernie, those would nuke us into a third world country with a double-downed debt..
        Sanders would multiply whatever this will grow into http://www.usdebtclock.org/ by 2. Maybe 3 for the ballooning interest
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jabuttrick 3 years, 1 month ago
          You are not "forced" to vote for the Republican nominee. When the choice is between a socialist and a fascist, vote libertarian.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 1 month ago
            Reminds me of how Ross Perot helped Bill Clinton get elected.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 1 month ago
              And the Republicans since that time have been as bad or worse than Clinton. Keep on voting for the statists and you get bigger government.
              this is not rocket science or brain surgery, its observing actions vs promises.
              The GOP is worse than the Dems because they claim to be your saviors and they always betray your interests in favor of their own power. They are traitors and deserve the punishment for that crime just as much as the Dems.
              To paraphrase Valentine in Trading Places, "it occurs to me that the best way you hurt powerful people is by turning them into powerless people."
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Mamaemma 3 years, 1 month ago
                "Turning them into powerless people". That is soooo perfect, for nothing would be worse for them! Remember the myth is that Satan said, paraphrasing, he would rather rule in hell than serve in heaven.
                Edit: clarity
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 1 month ago
                I agree with you about the GOP. I recently received a donation seeking questionnaire from Paul Ryan and the Republican Party. Questions about standing up against Obama had me writing beside the multiple choices stuff like "When you quit kissing his butt."
                At the end I was asked to give a written suggestion and I wrote "Get rid of that RINO Paul Ryan." For a donation I wrote, "$00.00.
                Not having to provide a stamp encouraged me to do all that.
                I've seen posters here hope that a Clinton or a Sanders should be allowed to crash the economy so people will wake up and raise a renewed republic from the ashes like the proverbial Phoenix.
                Such an idealistic hopeful outcome may instead slam into a brick wall of hard reality.
                My concern is that calling down destruction may only accomplish just that permanently.
                I've written this once before on this board~"How do we know 2084 won't end up like the novel 1984? If not Mad Max?"
                Recently saw The Purge with "new founding fathers" that had to be psycho.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
              Is that an excuse for voting left wing? It's all a matter of personal ethics. Those with no depth nor commitment will always find an excuse to vote for socialist fascists they are one and the same.

              Unless that individual is a supporter of left wing fascists.

              Republicans are at best the right wing OF the LEFT. At worst they are the lapdogs of the left. Doesn't matter how you flush your vote.

              Sad.....

              That's how the left ensures and insures we will always be given no choice in their rigged elections and ensure one of their kind will win no matter what.

              Sorry I don't support The Party.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 1 month ago
                I don't either.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
                  I know that I tried to write it so it wouldn't be you but supporting what you were trying to say because true that's how it turned out.. why do I feel like we thats you and me are still being manipulated by that episode?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by  $  allosaur 3 years, 1 month ago
                    Not sure what you are trying to say about what you tried to write..
                    I'm leaning heavily toward voting for Cruz in the primary because the GOP hates his guts for solid conservative views.
                    Just little me trying to make my FU GOP pipsqueak statement.
                    Don't think he will win but IMO voting for the quixotical libertarian attempt right now is a way emptier thing to do.
                    What I do about the presidential election depends on how things play out.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jabuttrick 3 years, 1 month ago
              Huh? Perot was the fascist!
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
                No, he was like Teddy Roosevelt who ran on the Bullmoose party (who then siphoned away enough votes from the Republican incumbent who was anti-Federal Reserve) who made it possible for Wilson (the Progressive Democrat) to win that election, the rest is history.

                The similarity was that Perot also siphoned off about 20% of the vote allowing Clinton to defeat Bush 1 without a plurality. History does repeat itself and it is usually planned that way!

                For what its worth!
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by jabuttrick 3 years, 1 month ago
                  Perot ran as the anti-establishment self-financed "can do" successful business guy who wanted to get around the "darned Constitution" that threatened to interfere with his plans to make America great again. Sound familiar?
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
                Fascists are found left of center they range from Communistas and Nazis on down through secular progressives to Democrats in Name Only socialists through Republicans in Name only or Neocons as some call them where they are the right wing OF the left. A bit further to the right you find the true center which is NOT the center of the left.

                The center was and still is the Constitution....and there resides those who believe citizens should control government not the left wing other way around government should control citizens view.

                All the puzzling pieces come together quite rapidly when proper definitions not propaganda definitions are used.

                Keep going to the right and you find the opposite of totalitarian government the true anarchists. after a series of less is best.

                Rinos and Dinos and their enablers are ALL left of center which is why the Demos can always get the Repos to cave....Same party same basic philosophy some more National Socialist and some more International Socialist. Not a mouses eeek worth of difference.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Eyecu2 3 years, 1 month ago
        True but that would most likely have Sanders as the dem candidate which is even worse.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
          Well! If the nation is stupid enough to elect Sanders, then we all deserve what we get. Remember, these people reflect us "we the people" and they would not be where they are if it weren't for the "Soundbite".

          If our culture has been so "dumbed down" then it is on us because we allowed it to happen. Gramsci understood this as did Allinsky. So, perhaps if parents took a little more time to understand our corrupted (progrssive, Hegelian) educational system, we would not have several generations of brainwashed, growing population of self-absorbed, socio-paths voting for more freebies and being disappointed that they were given jobs and wealth, all the while failing to understand that those things only come through hard work and not through the Progressive rant "that everyone is special"and deserving of getting everything they have been promised and then not seeing it materialize. That is the reason the millennials are so sour.

          Yes, Trump, Corzine, Clinton, Sanders and the rest of the gaggle of Beltway politicians are truly representative of our own cumulative degenerating values and intellectual laziness. Make way for the leader we deserve!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Suzanne43 3 years, 1 month ago
      Right on! I will vote against the Democrats, no matter who their candidate is. I will vote for Trump even thought I don't like him much. He got where he is because the Republicans underestimated the anger of Conservatives and others in the country. The staff of the National Review has only itself to blame.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
      Of course I'll disagree but not with rancor. I hate to see anyone join the dark side for any reason. Once you give in .....well enough on that except it shows a certain lack of depth in the third law of objectivism. You might be young enough to recover. I'm not and I don't believe in last second absolution nor expect it. Nor would I grant it too myself. In the end I'm the only opinion that counts.You get the same courtesy.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Eyecu2 3 years, 1 month ago
        I don't see this as going to the dark side, then again evil people rarely see themselves as evil. I see this as choosing the lesser of 2 evils. If there were a truly good choice. Someone who supported the ideals Ms Rand laid out, I would back them 100%. As it stands I will be voting for someone who seems to be wanting to carry us all to Hell at least marginally slower.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
          The other option is not to let anyone carry you to Hell, quickly or slowly. Sounds like you have gotten on the bus and waiting for it to leave the station, and missed the going away party. You get to decide if you will cooperate with the collective.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Eyecu2 3 years, 1 month ago
            Seems to me that like it or not we are all on this bus together, and I would LOVE nothing more than to turn this bus around. Until we can get a driver willing to go in the right direction, I will support the slowest driver.

            So I ask for your opinion as to who you think might turn this bus around? Cause without a person to back slowing down is the better option.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
              Right now it will probably be someone from the military. They have the legal authority, duty, responsibility.

              I don't know Webb, Johnson, a number of names have been bandied about. None that have ignited any real interest because within the confines of a closed single party system that can't really be done nor any of them trusted. The one group that had potential was this supposedly Non Rino group of elected officials who could and should bolt the party while IN office. Turned out they were just play acting. They haven't So there's no leadership there.

              I don't personally know of any that's left except that aren't probably too old like the Allison from BB@T a long time Objectivist and Rand supporter who finally went to the Rand Institute and then the Cato Institute attempt to get something accomplished.

              Failing someone like that with bona fides it's the military supporting it's oath of office in the current stages. Everyone else is too busy cutting their own throats to pick up the garbage so it's the rats and snakes who benefit.

              It's also the reason Obama is making a run and suborning and co-opting the military from that duty - what you might call a counter revolution but as of 31 December evening speech it's not only that but a legal one. If they do they can't be stopped. But if they don't it's for one of two reasons and one reasons. the leadership has been co-opted and taken an oath to Obama or they don't think the country and people are worth it. Can't say I blame them there.

              Either way that's where my loyalties lie. "Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic....that does not include self confessed traitors.

              Third choice they take over using their real oath and keep the country instead of putting it back under the Constitution.

              And the police? Most are veterans and so are many others in the nation.

              So? Should that happen. It's legal and in absence of a Constitution other than as a platitude to wave before pissing on it as Obama did New Years Eve they have my vote. I like majority rule.

              And if the people don't like it?

              Tough. You get what you ask for.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
          The lesser or greater is a matter of degree of supporting evil. What Rand said was, "For any question there are three answers.. Right, Wrong, and Compromise. That makes two wrong and one right choice." You chose one of the wrong answers.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Eyecu2 3 years, 1 month ago
            Then what do you suggest as the Right choice?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
              I don't. That's the point of objectivism. Independent choice. Not giving in. But as a clue suppose you determined voting for any of the provided candidates were the wrong choice. Where would you go to look for other choices and they do exist. You'll find them scattered throughout this forum for the last year. Not like you've been left hanging. Resources abound. Starting with the Three Laws of Objecrtivism.

              All I had to do was say None Of The Above and invoke the third law of objectivism. That may not work for you. That's for you to decide.

              Couch Potatoes are a dime a gross.

              Hint' Why did you say lesser of evils. and then accept that self evaluation? We don't tell people what to do we enourage independent free thinking. That way you "never have to say your sorry."
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by D_E_Liberty 3 years, 1 month ago
    I'm not really the kind to name call - its just that the idea that Trump is seriously being considered by any party, let alone a major party, is so surreal that I literally can't wrap my mind around it.

    My reaction to his candidacy was the same as my reaction to the news that Kanya West announced his intention to run, or Colbert, or Scrooge McDuck.

    I seriously can think of few personalities in the public eye that are less suited to be the leader of the western world. Its not hyperbole when I say that he reminds me of Caligula, who thought himself a living God - who berated, then beheaded anyone, including elected roman senators, for no other reason than they displeased him, let alone criticize or dare to challenge him. His name calling of women, minorities, and anyone who dare question him is so patently infantile that, this alone should disqualify him to deserve the admiration, let alone the elegance of any fair minded objectivist (which SHOULD be redundant). The entire philosophy it about finding the truth about the world and the people who live on it. Can anyone in this forum or beyond say that they objectively agree with "Trumps Truth?"

    As Ayn said, we should only follow others if they truly reflect our values, principles and ethics. To do otherwise is a contradiction of logic, and a betrayal of oneself. Does anyone here want to say that Trump is even a remote reflection of their own ethic? Does his sense of life comport with yours?

    Yes, I know, I know, he is supposedly the poster boy for the disaffected - those who are so frustrated with the do-nothing political system, that they want a bomb thrower who will blow it all up.

    He also is locking down the Chicolina vote. (For those of you who don't know, Chicolina is a porn star who was elected to the Italian parliament by a constituency the wanted demonstrate what a farce the Italian ruling body truly was). As far as I know, Trump has not appeared in any porn movies, but his public rants and embarrassing "dancing monkey" antics before any camera, are just as obscene.

    By Objectivist standards, he is worse than a man with the wrong values and ethic, he is man with opportunistic personal principles... in other words, he is consciously unprincipled and void of any ethical standards. I think Ayn would call him the height of hypocrisy and evil.

    He is the worse kind of fraudulent dealer who panders to the fear and confusion of minds that are truly defenseless, because they lack the acumen to see Trump for the fraud he is.

    Another historical parallel is Sen. McCarthy who road runaway fear and conspiracy theories to public prominence in the 50s. Ironically, his underlying opposition to socialism was justified (Ayn actually testified before his committee), but it became abundantly clear that McCarthy lost sight of the "cause" and became a demagogue whose means were perverted to one end, his own power and aggrandizement.

    Trump marks the return of the kind contagious McCarthyistic disease... the symptoms of which are defined by the kind of mass insanity that needs a figurehead to be the embodiment of their deepest frustration and fear.(and ignorance).

    But just as McCarthy had his Edward R. Morrow - a man who had the common sense and bravery to point out that the "Emperor has no clothes", so the National Review is a least attempting to call us back from the brink of the abyss that is "The Donald."

    I note with interest, but not surprise, that the media, including much of the conservative media (read Fox), have betrayed their primary role as gate keepers who are charge with exposing the absurdity of those who are delusional enough to aspire to the most powerful position in the free world, yet totally lack the temperament, skill, or even a modicum of good will toward the people they, in theory, should represent. The Trump, people are pawns, whose only purpose is to play the role of surfs in his imperial Presidency.

    Why have the press not been savaging him for his truly ridiculous behavior as the buffoon he proven, time and again, that he is?

    Answer is obvious, Trump virtually guarantees a Clinton presidency. This is true if he gets the Republican nomination or not. If he fails, it is clear that he intends to run as a third party candidate, splitting the "right of center vote." Hillary walks into the West Wing, giggling at the stupidity or her opponents (the ones she said on national TV were her enemies - i.e.Republicans).

    What do we, the sane, do to stop any of this nightmarish reality from coming to pass. No scenario looks promising. Hillary or Trump? Hillary vs. who? say Cruz, when the only way Cruz could win is to buy Trump off with a major position in the Administration. Vice-President? Sec of Estates, er, I mean State?

    Talk about picking your poison. Either option leaves us just as dead.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
      Cruz still has to past the bar. The one that will vote on his legality. If he does any differently he's just another Obama. Not in where he comes from but by weazel worming his way in past the obstacle of the 9th Amendment. The rule is what it is. The definition of the time is what it is and what it was then, There are no rights granted to do anything different. For those who think differently show me where it says he can run for that office OR where it says the Constitution can be changed without either an Amendment or a Supreme Court ruling.

      You like to sneak around it too.l What makes you different fro Clinton or Obama?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
        Annouooncement Cruz past the bar. After begging for some supporting evidence t that end and receiving only Larry King huff and puff oen of our stalwart group provided the source to the sources.

        Now he has to prove the rest of it. Why would we vote for a right wing of the left candidate. Something that bedevils Trumps even more.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 1 month ago
    Conservatives have shown their power in 2012 and 2014. The Tea Party has shown that they haven't disappeared and are still a force to be reckoned with. What did they get for it? A group of pretenders with the guts of a chum bucket. Here comes a strong man who owes allegiance to no one. Not only that, he talks off the top of his head and shoots from the hip. He's the Lone Ranger. He takes off his liberal mask and shows up as a conservative underneath. To those whose hopes in the form of elected politicians has been shredded, he seems like -- at last, someone telling it the way we want to hear it. Those of his supporters have yet to stop and take a deep breath. If they ever do they might discover that they backed a new Mussellini. (sp?) They might well be going from the Lone Ranger to the Loan Arranger.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
    Its a shame! All this hoopla about supporting a guy that has billions, went bankrupt 4 times, married three and has no track record of any conservative values, shows that in America, the "soundbite" is king and we as a nation are willing to risk it all (again) on a bunch of populist soundbites.

    "Hope and Change" anyone????
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
    I hate to say this, but I feel my fellow Gulchers are buying in to the same media personality assassination that built a false picture of Sarah Palin, when it comes to Trump. I'm skeptical of any vested interest figures when they rabidly attack someone as aggressively as they have Donald Trump, and look behind the public image to draw my own conclusions.

    I have yet to see one former Trump employee on camera, bleating about what a cruel, heartless boss he is, and you can bet the media has been feverishly seeking such persons out. His children are productive and without the trainwreck of a life so many offspring of the wealthy inhabit. He's a philanthropist who insists there be no publicity about his gift-giving. His ex-wives insist he's a kind, thoughtful man, with an obsession with his business that made it impossible for them to stay with him.

    Is he an ideologue? Absolutely not, but he is focused on making the government work, and understands the office of the President requires a diplomat, not an autocrat, when dealing with Congress (a lesson that totally escapes Obama). The word that he uses constantly is "negotiation," which is an art form most hard-nosed conservatives are sadly lacking.

    Ted Cruz, the darling of the conservative crowd, flip-flops as much as any other candidate, but he's a great debater who points with pride that he's impossible for other Senators to work with. That may impress the purists, but getting nothing done isn't what I want in the office of the Executive.

    I admit that I sometimes cringe at some of Trump's statements, but when I dissect the statements of other more polished politicians, I find they've mastered the art of saying nothing with great sounds of importance. It's difficult for any public figure to be perfectly flawless and consistent, but are we looking for the best orator (which was what got Obama elected) or someone who's determined to herd the dissonant cats of Congress into the right direction?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
      I hate to be a negativist about Trump however you must look at his history across the board. His dealings with politicians over the years have been exactly the opposite of what he now supposedly believes, that is if you take his rhetoric seriously.

      In the past he has espoused exactly the opposite of his rhetoric today so, the question is "Who is the real Donald Trump?".

      You said that you do not like Cruz because he "flip flops" on issues. Can you cite these flip-flops?

      In addition to Trump having been a Democrat and having endorsed or given donations to a host of Democrats including the Clintons (I cand add the list if needed), how can anyone in all honesty take him seriously?

      I have been skewered by many of my "Conservative" friends for not jumping on the Trump bandwagon however every time I ask for some form of proof that he is the real deal, no one can provide it. Why is that?

      Anyway, I am glad you and a host of other Americans have finally found the "Champion" that is going to lead the country to the "Promised" land however, being the Doubting Thomas that I am, all I can say is: "I'm from Missouri, show me!".
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
        ,,,,he may be the devil you didn't want. I'm reminded of the choices made in Europe almost a hundred years ago. National versus International Socialism. Adolf versus Lenin.

        At some point the only way to win is not to play and I've rolled the dice with these non choices for too many decades. The next round is the sixth chamber.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 1 month ago
      "he is focused on making the government work"
      Yes, for HRM Donnie Trump and uses looters power against everyone else that gets in his way even his own partners. Trump has little business acumen that can be applied toward the job, and he has shown through his actions and his words that he can not be trusted to limit his actions as president to the original constitutional limits. Character assassination of Trump is not necessary; his actions and words have shown his character and ethics clearly.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 1 month ago
        I hear these accusations frequently, but no one ever seems to give examples. Did four of his business enterprises declare bankruptcy? Definitely, but it was the only rational course given the circumstances. Some investors may not like the outcome, but there are no guarantees in business - if you think it isn't a crapshoot, you're delusional.

        The Trump businesses have one of the highest percentages of female and minority executives, and they aren't "tokens". He doesn't make a big deal of this, as to him it's only the natural course of him being open to talent and initiative without prejudice.

        A lot has been said about his support of eminent domain, but he's open about it as a natural tool of business. I suspect others in the arena have benefited from use of this mechanism, but are careful to keep their mouth shut.

        He's the only candidate who makes no bones about how easy it is to buy politicians with money or favors. Like Bernie Sanders, he also doesn't support big money or super-PACs for his campaign (of course, Bernie, unlike Trump, can't self-finance).

        If you want a tested Washington politician, vote for Kasich, who has an admirable record there, and as a successful governor. However, I think people are sick of the way that system acts (I wanted to say "works," but it doesn't), and are willing to give an outsider a try.

        When you have more specifics about Trump instead of baseless invective, I'm willing to listen.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ewv 3 years, 1 month ago
          Eminent domain is not a "natural tool of business". Trump's support of government force to seize private property while mocking and taunting the victims in his usual style have been documented and discussed extensively on this forum. That he "openly" calls his abuse "wonderful" is reason to reject him; his "open" pronouncements of his evil are no reason to support him.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 1 month ago
          The discussion is about Trump, not another statist politician that you think makes Trump look better by comparison. This is the same tired excuse that the GOP uses to keep the sheep voting for the lesser evil. I have done research on Trump and his lack of ethics is clear in his actions and his history of statements in favor of big government power . It is clear to me that you and I have significantly different measures of ethical behavior, how much power a president can constitutionally use, and how a persons past actions define the expectations of behavior in a powerful position of public trust.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 3 years, 1 month ago
    So, one wonders if things had gone according to schedule and that stalwart conservative Jeb Bush were the candidate would they still line up such an impressive argument?

    While there are many things I don't like about Trump he seems to be the one the insider statists of both parties like the least -- which certainly is attractive.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
      Relax, Jeb Bush is not going to be the candidate regardless! He is even having problems running against the other possible Establishment candidate, Marco Rubio and Rubio is either in 3rd or 4th place at this point.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 3 years, 1 month ago
    What a strange piece. The implication is that we actually could get a conservative in the White House(?) I haven't thought that for quite some time.

    I never really connected to Beck at all. He always missed the mark with me. It's like his arguments start off strong, making a good point, just before the conclusions veer off into the tumbleweeds.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by D_E_Liberty 3 years, 1 month ago
    JEOPARDY QUESTION OF THE WEEK:

    THE CLUE:

    This presidential candidate has been variously described by the use of these adjectives, all of which start with with the letter "B":

    Buffoon, Bully, Braggadocios, Brash, Bankrupt, Bald-faced, Belittling, Boar, Baby, Bitter, Baffled, Baffling, Beginner, Back-Stabbing, Back-Handed, Back-tracking, Backward, Bitchy, Benedict Democrat, Bias, Bigoted, Blow-hard, Bozo, Botched, Blathering, Basher, Bleeding-heart, Bloody, Besmircher, Besmearer, Bombastic, Bad-mannered, Belligerent, Bellicose, Blasphemous, Bickerer, Big-Mouthed, Balderdash, Boob, Badgerer, Bamboozling
    Bandit, Babbling, Batty, Bag-man, Bawdy, Bad-mouther, Bedeviling
    Baulker, Bawler, Bazaar, Barker, Begrudger, Berater, Boot-strapper, Bewildered, Botched, Byzantine. BAD.

    The Answer is: Who is ****____?

    (and that's just the "B"s)

    Ok... partly tongue in cheek but I challenge you to make a case against the appropriate application of any of these adjectives. If even half are true, is this really the man an Objectivist could vote for with a clear conscious. My question. What would Ayn say? What would she do?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
    I ask myself what Trump's core values are and they are even more elusive tha Obama's were. He was for abortion, then he's ProLife. He's for gun control, now "second amendment rights need to be protected". The Clintons were "a wonderful couple, now they are corrupt. Cruz was a "terrific guy", now "he's nasty and no one likes him". The Stimulus Package wasn't big enough. We should have Single Payer Healthcare.
    I could go on and on listing the issues he has supposedly changed his views on. He is not only inconsistent, he's a lier. We already have a lier with a huge, but fragile ego, in the Whitehouse.
    Another presidential candidate is an even better lier, but she will likely be indicted before the general election. Her primary opponent is probably the most honest candidate running, unfortunately he is wrong on almost every issue.
    I stayed home for the last two elections because the choices were two Statists. We may get to choose from two Statists again this year. If this country wants to commit suicide, it would be better to give it a quick death, rather than a slow more painful one.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by JoleneMartens1982 3 years, 1 month ago
      See and though I am leaning towards Trump or Cruz, these arguments are very valid as well. This will most definitely be a very difficult choice for those of us who are still able to think freely, honestly they all stink, but find me a politician who doesn't. It's all a power struggle and they'll say whatever to gain the power then do what they want once they get that power. Obama is a prime example.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by TinLizzy 3 years, 1 month ago
    Who would best defend the Constitution? Ted Cruz. Who's for limited government? Yes, Ted again. Those with Trump are following the same fever that brought us Obama and a weak Republican party.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jabuttrick 3 years, 1 month ago
      Ted Cruz, defender of the Constitution, wants to "carpet bomb" people in the middle east without a declaration of war as mandated by the Constitution. Ted Cruz, defender of the Constitution, wants to strictly enforce federal drug laws unauthorized by the Constitution. Ted Cruz, advocate for limited government, supports laws criminalizing abortion.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by TinLizzy 3 years, 1 month ago
        The belief system of a candidate should be taken for what it is...not what you are saying. We have in this country a system of checks and balances. What Obama has attempted to do, and with alarming success, is to make the office of President into a kind of Emperorship. No wonder you wish to be upset to think that Cruz would do the same. But he would not. I would counsel Trump supporters to be careful. There are more similarities between Obama and him than is being discussed in the media.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
          The checks and balances system was first dismantled when the the States were stripped of their balancing power against the central government back in 1913. You are only a hundred and 3 years behind the times to be counseling anyone. Not that you are wrong about Trump. Just about about what Obama HAS done. the attempt stage started with Roosevelt, Nixon and Carter.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • -1
        Posted by JoleneMartens1982 3 years, 1 month ago
        Sorry, I see your point, but I agree that we should do all three of those things. Isis is a problem, get rid of the problems! Drugs need to go, they destroy lives, economy, and our children who are our future. As for abortion, how is that even still legal! It is murder of innocent human children! Just my opinions but I would debate these 3 topics relentlessly.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
          I'll buy a ticket.
          ISIS,.... Can I kill them if they threaten me?
          Drugs,..... Do I have the right to stop someone from destroying their own life?
          Abortion,.....Who should be made to support the child if the mother refuses or isn't capable?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by JoleneMartens1982 3 years, 1 month ago
            Valid arguments, but aren't we constantly fighting to have poison ommited from our foods, so why wouldn't we want to commit to removing poison from our society. Not to mention, drugs lead to neglect, prostitution, abortions, its a gateway to greater "evils".
            Isis has killed how many? And plan to kill how many more? Enough said.
            As for abortion, killing is killing no matter what you name it. They cut babies out of mothers that are not usually even educated on alternatives. I think rather than keeping abortion clinics going, they should pool those resources into affordable birth control methods and educating young mothers to make better decisions. It costs between $400 and $1500 to get an abortion, it's $10,000 with insurance to get a tubilligation. And rapists get a slap on the hand if that, rather than justice served. They ruin lives and get no or very little punishment. That's why we still have abortions.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • -2
              Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
              Did I make an argument, or ask questions?
              Is someone forcing you to eat poisoned food?
              Do I have the right to tell someone they can't have sex for money?
              Is it my responsibility to educate people? Who should be forced to pay for their education or their abortion? Who should we force to pay for their birth control?
              If "killing is killing no matter what you name it", is killing a baby the same as killing ISIS or a rapist?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Temlakos 3 years, 1 month ago
    The battle is definitely joined. Trump said--correctly, in my view--that NR did this in a desperate bid to drive circulation. And the Republican National Committee found they could neither ignore nor excuse this breach of etiquette. So they disinvited NR from sponsorship of their February debate.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 1 month ago
      Trump always claims anyone who is accurately critical of him has ulterior motives- of course, any supreme narcissist would. His comment doesn't really make sense though. If they wanted more readers they would be more likely to back the front runner and gain his supporters who are more numerous. Instead of refuting the criticism (an impossible task with the truth against him) he attacks the messenger. As usual trump is full of himself, and his brown eyes show what else he is full of.
      The fact is that this is all a side show to distract the voters from the truth: neither the GOP nor the Dems deliver what the voters want because prosperity comes from individual liberty, not from state control which has been the only accomplishment of the fedgov regardless of which party is arguably in power.
      The only rational response is for voters to abandon the GOP and the Dems for a third party that has for decades consistently defended individual liberty.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
        You are correct! The Republican party has become a joke and it is now in my opinion, very close to its own demise. They seem to be now as was the case with the Whig party that eventually gave way to the modern Republican party (its a birth/death issue). I want to see just how the establishment "leadership" are going to play this out!

        I believe that Trump, with his past being a true representation of his core beliefs and, with nothing to show that his rhetoric today is a true representation of his "real" core beliefs, that he an Rubio are probably now the "preferred" Establishment candidates regardless of the faux bluster that they (the establishment) are spewing.

        In addition, I believe Trump (who is already attracting many Democrats) will govern more like the Democrats with their core beliefs rather than all of the supposed conservative, populist tripe that he has been promoting in order to capture the Republican base. This could be the bait and switch of the century!

        For what its worth!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 3 years, 1 month ago
    National Review has been a typical neocon establishment publication since the first issue. The neocon writers named do not surprise me. Not even Sowell surprises me. Sowell is a follow-the-pack neocon in everything other than economics and the other writers love government, too — the difference is they want to run it their way. If Reason Magazine came out with a special edition hit piece, that would disappoint me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
    Voters seem to fall into several blocks that will be voting in the Republican Primaries.
    1. Hard Core Conservatives
    2. Libertarians
    3. Religious Right
    4. Constitutionalists
    5. Establishment Republicans
    6. Starstruck Republicans
    and
    7. Starstruck Reagan Democrats.

    Which blocks support Trump? Cruz? Rubio? Bush? Carson? etc? Are there other Republican voting blocks of consequence, that I've missed?
    Objectivists are not a substantial voting block.


    The religious folks seem to be all over the board, depending in part what they "feel " about abortion, immigration and income inequality. The Jews mostly vote Democrat. Catholics like immigration from Mexico and South America, but not so much from the Middle East and Africa. Protestants are Pro Lifers. Muslims typically vote Democrat. I consider all religious folks irrational and somewhat unpredictable.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 1 month ago
      IMO you missed the most important block in your summation and the block that few even realize are interested. How many eligible voters are just so disgusted, angry and disinterested in the entire political process that they just stay home on election day? How many who have never bothered to watch a Primary Debate have tuned in in mass? How many who have never showed up for a political rally of any sort are packing stadiums just to hear Trump say what no others dare? This block, IF, and it is a big IF, they show up at the election booth then all bets are off and all the other blocks will be inconsequential. Trump is a dentist who has exposed a nerve, a very raw nerve, and he keeps poking it in all the right places to awaken a sleeping mass with a major toothache. So what if he turns out not to be all that he claims to be, has any of the others ever been?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Retfird 3 years, 1 month ago
        Thanks
        I may and up in that block of people who stay home, but I meant to talk about people who will end up cast a vote.
        One scoop of shit or two? I'll pass.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 1 month ago
          I doubt any of us alive today have ever seen a political campaign like the one we are living in right now. A lot can happen over the next 10 months to sway your vote and mine but one thing for sure is we all won't ever be happy. It is refreshing to see a lively discussion and to see there are just as many here who think I am just as wrong as I think they are. Given the diversities of personalities right here it is easy to see that a real world Gulch would fail right off the starting line.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 3 years, 1 month ago
    I am all for gun control! Conservatives, Republicans should be banned from owning guns because they just shoot the legs out from under their own candidates. This Gulch is not much different than the defunct Tea Party in that many right here will trash all and refuse to come together guaranteeing that Hillary will be our next looser in the WH! Bush sucked, McCain sucked, Romney sucked and we ended up with 8 years of BHO yet you fools think you have the right ideas.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by xthinker88 3 years, 1 month ago
      Vote for and drink your half cup of poison instead of a full cup? Either way your choice of the lesser of two evils is still poison. So long as people keep choosing evil they will keep getting evil.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wmiranda 3 years, 1 month ago
    It seems the article will give Trump a boost. The National Review is an example of people that think they are the only true conservatives and no one else is conservative enough. BTW, I'm not a conservative although I believe in most conservative ideals.
    Some people never learn. If you want to bring Trump down, leave him alone. Instead bring someone else with a chance up. But don't waste your efforts on the one and two percenters.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by JoleneMartens1982 3 years, 1 month ago
      So very true. If you want to get behind a candidate but you are not supposed to be behind them, you stir the pot. Say you hate them and its like telling America to vote for them subliminally. It's that ever present urge to rebel, especially after the potus that is leaving.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RonC 3 years, 1 month ago
    Reagan is attributed for saying, "If you want to be a leader, step in front of a parade." I think that is what Trump has done. He raised issues no professional politician had the stomach for and found a huge parade of anti government folks. For me, the problem with Trump is that he is no different than Obama in his method. I don't want a President that leads by Executive Order and fiat. I want a constitutional government. Because Trump may execute a more populist agenda doesn't make him a better President.
    Having said that, if he decided to work with congress and passing legislation that could be signed into law, he "may" have the ability to get cleaner bills and less pork. All of the candidate yearn for the line item veto, so they can strike the pork barrel funding, but that will never happen. Congressmen get re-elected by bringing the federal money home to their constituents.

    A tertiary point regarding both Trump and Romney is that both guys made fortunes in the American business environment. I for one, would love to learn from and follow a leader like that. Imagine what Romney may have taught Americans about achievement, charity, and efficiency. I would guess the same is true of Trump. To face challenges and find workable solutions is something we haven't seen in a while and I believe American's need a refresher course. When you have a major group of young people that complain about their situation, spend their money on piercings and tattoos, have enough cash to buy pot and stay stoned, yet still demand what they "need and deserve" from the achievers, they need a lesson. Something along the lines of, "you are only as valuable as the service you provide for others." Or. "You can get everything you want out of life if you just help enough other people get what they want."

    If there is a retail politician offering that, please fill me in.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  WilliamShipley 3 years, 1 month ago
      The big question is whether he would use executive orders or work with congress. Is there any reason other than his ego that leads you to believe his method would be by executive order?

      He keeps talking about making deals -- even wrote a book on the subject.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RonC 3 years, 1 month ago
        I read the book when it was a best seller. In one sentence "The Art of the Deal" is to get what you want first, then negotiate the downside to the other guy. I guess what alarmed me was his bombast. Like we need to stop all Muslim immigrants from entering this country. That would never happen, it's unconstitutional. Then he walks it back the next day and says "temporarily" and "I didn't mean all Muslims".

        On the one hand he says he will put a tariff on China, something like 35%, then later I hear him say it will never happen, they will concede on their currency manipulation before they would face that tariff.

        It is a fact that every piece of information I have ever read on success states you get the best results when you improve your skills working with people. So, I would concede Trump knows how to work with people. I recall from the Art of the Deal, one of his first deals was in Cincinnati. Trump had been told the seller enjoyed French food, so they had the meeting to discuss the deal at the Maisonette. That was not an accident, he has always known how to reach out to people. In the last several months I have come to understand Trump will exaggerate an issue, attracting maximum press, then fine tune the issue later. He has played the press like on old violin.

        He's not my first pick because my fantasy would be seeing President Ted Cruz swear in Supreme Court Justice Anthony Napoletano. I prefer to go by the constitution and in particular the 10th Amendment. That's just me. If Trump is the republican nominee, I will gladly vote for him because if it's Hillary or Bernie I don't think we will have a country after their term.

        What I don't get is why, from the point of view of the establishment republicans, why is it perfectly acceptable for me and my ilk to hold our nose and vote for John McCain, G.W. Bush, or Bob Dole. It is expected for millions of guys like me to go along with the party choice. Why is it unacceptable to them to have a candidate Like Trump or Cruze? Why can't they hold their nose? I certainly have had second thoughts but then voted for the establishment guy. And what has it gotten me? I heard on Fox today if you divide the National debt by the population, it's like having $331,000.00 of credit card debt.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by JoleneMartens1982 3 years, 1 month ago
      I agree with you. While Trump does set off my red flags, I have a funny feeling that he could do great things for this country and for the deficit, but I could also see him being a behind closed doors communist, or becoming one to speed the process along. I fear the power will quickly go to his head. And even if I am wrong on these ideas, it could set in to motion celebrities in the white house, that could end very badly. For instance, could you imagine Tom Cruise in the white house, my mind cannot even create that sort of carnage.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
        I have a hard time imagining Tom Cruise as an actor. Along with Looney Clooney but Sean Penn? Best job he ever did was pretending to be a soldier or was that a space cadet?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RonC 3 years, 1 month ago
        Could be. But like an Art. V convention that must be ratified by the states, celebrity President would have to be elected. I guessing Sean Penn may have a hard time.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
      For the most part I agree with some of your thoughts on Trump however there are some significant issues that you have not addressed.

      For instance, you mentioned that both Trump and Romney made their fortunes in a "business environment". Romney was a Wall Street type (mostly populated by Democrats) as was Jon Corzine (past NJ governor) who incidentally was one of the worst governors that NJ ever had. His business acumen was being basically a boiler room salesman. That is not creating something of value per se. This was also the environment that Romney made his wealth in.

      Trump is also be his own definition, a Big Government, Crony-capitalist who loves the use of Eminent Domain. That is exactly what most the Establishment and the Democrat party like.

      You also mentioned that you don't want a president to govern by the use of Executive Orders, fine, but what you have (and what Obama knew) was that Congress is moribund! The leadership is in the tank with the lobbyists and the donor class calls the shots, not the electorate.

      Now, if you said that but also indicated that perhaps it were time for real term limits, then I would be in agreement with you. That, unfortunately will not come to be if we rely on our elected representatives who currently infest the Beltway to vote for an amendment to the Constitution in order to make that happen. It won't in a million years.

      In order to shake DC up, there should probably be an Article V Convention of the States to effect a Constitutional Amendment for Term Limits. George Mason ensured that safety valve was there just because he knew empirically that Congress would not make certain changes themselves.

      For these reasons, Trump will not be the savior that we think he will because he will either be a dictator or he will deal with Congress as is being done now. For what its worth!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RonC 3 years, 1 month ago
        Article V convention is fine with me, I read Levin's book on the subject a couple years ago. Many wrongly believe a Art. V could become a run away, bu that's not so because the states have to ratify or a super majority I believe. The thing I find most amazing about this site is people will measure the minutia against the philosophy of Rand, as they we taught in college, then when a real world John Gault runs for President they forget all about doing a thing for the love of it, or because your good at it, or even because you want to...at that point they forget Rand's philosophy and start counting bankruptcies and divorces. Just seems strange to Rands ideads only apply to trivial things, at least sometimes.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ewv 3 years, 1 month ago
          The danger is not a "runaway convention" making the Constitution worse, it's runaway compromise at a convention making the Constitution worse.

          The fundamental cause of the decline is bad ideas spread throughout the culture as a result of the intellectual influence of the European Counter Enlightenment driven by false moral and anti-reason premises of self-sacrifice, collectivism and faith not properly addressed the first time. The decline is not fundamentally caused by corruption concentrated in Washington, which only cashes in on the rest. A convention of states is no solution to that. The politics of the states has its own corruption and the same false premises.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by fosterj717 3 years, 1 month ago
            All of that may be true however if so, what is the solution? Mother said "never bring a problem without having a solution in mind".

            The COS is a solution, whether it is the right one or the wrong one, that is an academic question and could only be answered by trying it. To not try it is to either endure the encroaching status quo or worse yet, putting our faith in a hero with feet of clay and no record of wanting to reverse the creeping Crony-capitalism engulfing our country!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by ewv 3 years, 1 month ago
              It is a legitimate mechanism, but suffers the same problem as any mechanism in a society with bad philosophical premises. That is not circumvented by choosing a different mechanism. There are no silver bullets. Wishful thinking doesn't make it so. The solution is to change the bad premises. There are no shortcuts to that, but without it, nothing will work other than short term gyrations which may or may not slow the overall descent.

              We engage in various actions all the time fighting government abuse, and some of it helps to at least live to fight another day or another year. But do it without self delusion. Amending the constitution in a flurry of Mark Levin's tactic is not the Big Solution he claims. It is one mechanism among many, subject to the same underlying limitations, which takes enormous effort and resources which may or may not make a dent as it opens up the possibility for more "compromises". And even if every one of Mark Levin's proposed amendments were to be somehow adopted as he stated them it still would not change the downward direction of the country.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by  $  MichaelAarethun 3 years, 1 month ago
          The only ones who object are the ones who know they will lose and those who don't believe int he Constitution anyway. All these years to file an amendment and it wasn't important so guess what....their opinion isn't important."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo