Little Bang
Registered Member
The only clown in this thread is the low information voter that started it.
2016 Republican Presidential Clown Car Begins!
- Thread starter joepistole
- Start date
which only shows your missing the point. there are people with room to criticize even mccains capture and torture. Trump isn't one. the issue is one of a coward attacking someone who isn't. also mccain also got a bump for being a survivor of the forrester incident
Trump's appeal to the Republican base is completely normal and ordianry. He's saying the kinds of things that made Ann Coulter the best selling "conservative" pundit and Rush Limbaugh the central media figure and Fox News the core Party propaganda operation. He's not saying anything about McCain different in kind from what his fellow Republicans have said about political opponents - including McCain, in past primaries (remember the illegitimate black baby stuff?) - for a generation. And he isn't saying anything out of character for himself. There's nothing new here.
Why would anyone revile Trump now, who voted for the duty-shirking W's swiftboating of Silver Star Kerry? Because W hired it done instead of saying it himself? Because Kerry was a douche and McCain had at least some redeeming features of character in his youth?
McCain had a choice, long ago, and chose to sacrifice his honor and integrity to get into bed with Karl Rove and the boys. It isn't pretty, and we can feel sad for the man, but it isn't like with Kerry (or Carter or Dukakis or Clinton or Gore or Obama) who never had it coming.
Why would anyone revile Trump now, who voted for the duty-shirking W's swiftboating of Silver Star Kerry? Because W hired it done instead of saying it himself? Because Kerry was a douche and McCain had at least some redeeming features of character in his youth?
McCain had a choice, long ago, and chose to sacrifice his honor and integrity to get into bed with Karl Rove and the boys. It isn't pretty, and we can feel sad for the man, but it isn't like with Kerry (or Carter or Dukakis or Clinton or Gore or Obama) who never had it coming.
Last edited:
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
And others simply don't believe him, like https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/no_author/sen-tokyo-rose-r-az/
Walker leads Trump in new Iowa poll.
I guess it takes a halfwit egomaniac like Trump to make Walker more attractive?
God help us all.
I guess it takes a halfwit egomaniac like Trump to make Walker more attractive?
God help us all.
That's probably because Iowa is right next to the state Walker governs and the two states are a lot alike. Both states are rural farm states and Trump is a New Yorker, one of "dem" city boys.
LOL...well why don't you enlighten us then? The problem is you cannot. All you can do my friend is mindlessly repeat the things Republican entertainers have told you to say verbatim. I suppose I should give you some credit for possessing the intellectual capacity to memorize and repeat small portions of material verbatim. But I would much rather you be better informed and be able to think rationally and act on your own.
The irony here of folks such as yourself, devotees of Republican entertainment, accusing others of "low information" is rich indeed. Study after study has shown folks like you, devotees of Republican entertainment to be the least well informed folks on the planet, less well informed than folks who watch no news a all. Now that is bad.
If you feel differently and have some evidence and can make a logical case to support your beliefs, well please do express them and show them. But here is the problem for you, you cannot. Because you cannot make a logical case for your irrational beliefs, the things Limbaugh and company have taught you to believe.
Accusing others of being a "low information voter" allows you to summarily dismiss unpleasant truths, truths which are inconsistent with your beliefs. That is why Limbaugh and company taught you to call people who express truths which run counter to the beliefs they have taught you "low information voters", so you can summarily and without thought dismiss reality lest you discover the truth. God forbid you should discover the truth, Limbaugh and company wouldn't have a job. Instead of summarily dismissing truths because they run counter to what Republican entertainers have taught you to believe, perhaps you should look at them and question what Republican entertainers have taught you to believe rather than mindlessly accept what they tell you as gospel. That is what a rational person would do.
Last edited:
That isn’t the issue here, as much as you want it to be the issue, that isn’t the issue here. Republican accusations against Kerry were not truthful. Republican leaders didn’t mind slandering Kerry, but now they are going to get all upset with Trump? That is quite simply hypocritical. All Republicans now upset with Trump for attacking McCain’s military record had no problems slandering Kerry, the only difference being Kerry was a Democrat.
I think it’s pretty clear McCain was reckless in his early years. But, it is also very clear; that McCain’s conduct while a POW was very honorable. McCain was offered early release and special treatment because of his father’s rank. McCain refused.
I think Trump survives this, unlike most TV pundits, I think Trump easily survives this because Republican entertainers and most importantly Rush Limbaugh still supports him. Limbaugh told his audience today that Trump didn’t say what the media says he said. Well that is typical Limbaugh/Republican historical revisionism in action - just deny reality and rewrite it the way you want it to be.
“So let's use Trump as an example. By the way, I'm no apologist for Trump, but I've looked at this. Sharyl Attkisson has written a great analysis of this, and it is a fact that Trump did not say what he's being reputed to have said. “ – Rush Limbaugh
As long as Trump retains the support of Republican entertainers, Trump is fine.
A Road Best Not Taken?
Well, yes, it could ....
You know, my problem with McCain's status as a war hero is only that it sometimes clouds other discussions; it is well enough to worry about the person who came home, because that person is in no wise heroic.
Think of Arlington, though, for a moment. Please.
Think of the Second War.
Did you know that data returned from the field indicated that soldiers fresh out of boot weren't shooting at the enemy? Some ridiculous number just couldn't kill straight off the training wheels. And, certes, we can wonder if we choose, how many of the names given to mourning and memory might have had more days to live and wander to and fro about the Earth had the greenhorns just ... shot ... their ... fucking ... targets.
We can wonder if we choose. But do we really want to go back and question honors as such? Is that really a road we want to go down?
My objection to Sen. McCain's status as a war hero is entirely concerned with those occasions on which we give it too much credit; to wit, there is some strange relationship between his being a war hero↱ and the idea that he is some sort of foreign policy sage↱. You know, the guy who wants to "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran"? We were supposed to write it off as a joke in 2007↱, but it turns out he was kind of serious↱.
In truth, the tale you recount only reiterates a certain sentiment: Of course John McCain wants to go to war.
But I am uncertain whether this attack vector is wise; it might seem well enough in the moment, given the political figures involved, but it's a Pandora's box of worms and crab lice, I promise you. This is not something Americans really want a taste of.
At least, so says me.
To the other, a couple of brief notes: The accusation against Secretary Kerry was never factual. Also, you know, with the penitentiary and Bergdahl analogies, there are functional problems. If we should assert that John McCain did his military job poorly, we are still asserting that he did his job. The tale of Mr. Bergdahl seems to suggest otherwise about his capture. And while you know my liberal heart bleeds for the poor fucker who stuck up a convenience store because it was all he could figure at the time to feed his kid, and remembering my concerns about the justice and penal systems he will face, the fact remains that he stuck up a convenience store.
And, yeah, sure, I would be perfectly happy, given the opportunity, to walk down to the pen with the keys and let a bunch of those people try to start new lives in the free world, but, you know, the only magic genii that comes when I ru― ... er ... never mind.
But I can imagine no circumstance by which I mignt be found wandering down to Arlington with old field studies in my hand in order to challenge the honors of the fallen. Mr. McCain, it appears, was human under combat stress. I can live with that, and by proxy of his being alive I would imagine so can he.
To wit, God bless it wasn't Klendathu.
____________________
Notes:
Newton-Small, Jay. "Is McCain's War Record Sacrosanct?" Time. 2 July 2008. Content.Time.com. 20 July 2015. http://ti.me/1JdB0NA
Hart, Peter. "McCain's Iraq War 'Advantage'". Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. 1 April 2008. FAIR.org. 20 July 2015. http://bit.ly/1MhcJqT
Gonyea, Don. "Jesting, McCain Sings: 'Bomb, Bomb, Bomb' Iran". Day to Day. 20 April 2007. NPR.org. 20 July 2015. http://n.pr/1Oj95er
Rainwater, Jon. "McCain Joins Bolton, Invites Israel to Bomb Iran". The Huffington Post. 31 March 2015. HuffingtonPost.com. 20 July 2015. http://huff.to/1Lztv3V
Capracus said:
Well, yes, it could ....
You know, my problem with McCain's status as a war hero is only that it sometimes clouds other discussions; it is well enough to worry about the person who came home, because that person is in no wise heroic.
Think of Arlington, though, for a moment. Please.
Think of the Second War.
Did you know that data returned from the field indicated that soldiers fresh out of boot weren't shooting at the enemy? Some ridiculous number just couldn't kill straight off the training wheels. And, certes, we can wonder if we choose, how many of the names given to mourning and memory might have had more days to live and wander to and fro about the Earth had the greenhorns just ... shot ... their ... fucking ... targets.
We can wonder if we choose. But do we really want to go back and question honors as such? Is that really a road we want to go down?
My objection to Sen. McCain's status as a war hero is entirely concerned with those occasions on which we give it too much credit; to wit, there is some strange relationship between his being a war hero↱ and the idea that he is some sort of foreign policy sage↱. You know, the guy who wants to "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran"? We were supposed to write it off as a joke in 2007↱, but it turns out he was kind of serious↱.
In truth, the tale you recount only reiterates a certain sentiment: Of course John McCain wants to go to war.
But I am uncertain whether this attack vector is wise; it might seem well enough in the moment, given the political figures involved, but it's a Pandora's box of worms and crab lice, I promise you. This is not something Americans really want a taste of.
At least, so says me.
To the other, a couple of brief notes: The accusation against Secretary Kerry was never factual. Also, you know, with the penitentiary and Bergdahl analogies, there are functional problems. If we should assert that John McCain did his military job poorly, we are still asserting that he did his job. The tale of Mr. Bergdahl seems to suggest otherwise about his capture. And while you know my liberal heart bleeds for the poor fucker who stuck up a convenience store because it was all he could figure at the time to feed his kid, and remembering my concerns about the justice and penal systems he will face, the fact remains that he stuck up a convenience store.
And, yeah, sure, I would be perfectly happy, given the opportunity, to walk down to the pen with the keys and let a bunch of those people try to start new lives in the free world, but, you know, the only magic genii that comes when I ru― ... er ... never mind.
But I can imagine no circumstance by which I mignt be found wandering down to Arlington with old field studies in my hand in order to challenge the honors of the fallen. Mr. McCain, it appears, was human under combat stress. I can live with that, and by proxy of his being alive I would imagine so can he.
To wit, God bless it wasn't Klendathu.
____________________
Notes:
Newton-Small, Jay. "Is McCain's War Record Sacrosanct?" Time. 2 July 2008. Content.Time.com. 20 July 2015. http://ti.me/1JdB0NA
Hart, Peter. "McCain's Iraq War 'Advantage'". Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. 1 April 2008. FAIR.org. 20 July 2015. http://bit.ly/1MhcJqT
Gonyea, Don. "Jesting, McCain Sings: 'Bomb, Bomb, Bomb' Iran". Day to Day. 20 April 2007. NPR.org. 20 July 2015. http://n.pr/1Oj95er
Rainwater, Jon. "McCain Joins Bolton, Invites Israel to Bomb Iran". The Huffington Post. 31 March 2015. HuffingtonPost.com. 20 July 2015. http://huff.to/1Lztv3V
Dumber Than Rick Perry Is No Way to Go Through Life
I would point out that it really does require special talent to undertake a Stupid Contest with Rick Perry and win.
Okay, there's this old joke that Vince Neil and Ozzy Osbourne had a gross-out contest, so Vince whipped down his leopard-print tights and took a dump on stage, whereupon Ozzy won the contest by eating it. I'm as certain as I can be that's mere legend of ill-conceived humor, but neither did the whole shock and horror of two girls and one cup really make any sense. I mean, for fuck sake, you know? When Gran'ma calls other people shiteaters she doesn't get to pretend to be surprised when she sees the video, you know? Er ... ah ... oh, right. Never mind.
When Governor Oops sounds like the intelligent person in the room ....
I'm pretty sure I've made that joke before; the thing is that it's not so much that Mr. Perry is getting any smarter, though I suppose anything is possible. Rather, I would simply suggest that the Republican anti-intellectualism is simply harvesting its season, and this time 'round it is especially robust stupidfruit.
Or, to consider another context of metaphor, I remember mumbling on in 2013↗ about the Republican farm team, a notion I picked up from FRC's Tony Perkins, who offered hurt Republicans a salve after the 2012 election↗, pointing to such spectacular rising talents as Sen. Marco Rubio, Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sen. Rand Paul, and Gov. Mike Pence.
Such talent, like we have never seen before ....
Anyway, something I mumbled in 2013:
Maybe FOX News is all they have left. The whole show is weird this time, and maybe that's part of the point. The Republicans might not have much faculty for rhetorical diversity these days, but they're still marketing whizbangs. And in that context, it seems worth noting a contrast. To the one, I wonder at the latest iteration of local versus national finding voice in a conservative upstream movement. To the other, the Republican machine, at least, is blind to such petty contradictions. And to hang ourselves up on such questions might well be to miss the point; this is a strange cycle, indeed, but, I don't know, maybe it's a generational thing, but who remembers when the youth pastor would try to convince the kids he was cool, and that it was cool to walk with Christ, and how unnerving that whole you're doing it wrong! fleshcrawl was. I remember having that feeling once when former RNC chair Michael Steel spun his cap ninety degrees to the side and said something about this is how we roll. It was hard to tell whether the party had selected a chairman or a house ... er ... ah ... caricature.
What is happening this cycle is creepy, but in an entirely different way. There has been some talk of diversity, but look at how the candidates are clustered, and the diversity is mostly a matter of what part of the traditional conservative platform to shout.
You know, in 2011-12, we called the GOP nomination contest the best reality television ever. And this time they actually have a reality television star taking part. And I can't really explain his popularity in polls; either Republican voters are finally affirming they have lost their minds, the polling Republicans said was skewed in 2012 but the most reliable method for winnowing their 2016 field is incredibly wrong, or a significant number of otherwise non-participants who would have otherwise skipped the poll hung on because they got to vote for their favorite reality television host, or some such.
Throw a die, play the sevens. I have no idea what to tell you. Jeb and Scott make sense in poll results; the Donald is a phenomenon all his own. That is to say, without Consummate Clown, Serious Clown and Cowardly Clown were pretty much one-two in the polls. Jeb Bush was considered the serious contender; Gov. Scott Walker the loudest and most offensive, and therefore most popular, culture warrior.
In a way the jingo jalope is pretty much everything we might expect; that is to say, we knew there was some sort of change coming from the GOP. At the same time, though, it would be unfair to fault the gobsmacked; only hindsight will tell us what we have witnessed. But there is a marketing advantage to the larger scheme, and the piss-all brilliant irony happening before our eyes is that Donald Trump is sucking up all the attention and leaving other candidates gasping.
And I'll give this much to Rick Perry, he has a better idea to stand up and dare the Donald than Carly Fiorina, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, or Sen. Ted Cruz came up with in hoping to ride Mr. Trump's coattails.
____________________
Notes:
Real Clear Politics. "2016 Republican Presidential Nomination". 19 July 2015. RealClearPolitics.com. 20 July 2015. http://bit.ly/1BAxgP3
I would point out that it really does require special talent to undertake a Stupid Contest with Rick Perry and win.
Okay, there's this old joke that Vince Neil and Ozzy Osbourne had a gross-out contest, so Vince whipped down his leopard-print tights and took a dump on stage, whereupon Ozzy won the contest by eating it. I'm as certain as I can be that's mere legend of ill-conceived humor, but neither did the whole shock and horror of two girls and one cup really make any sense. I mean, for fuck sake, you know? When Gran'ma calls other people shiteaters she doesn't get to pretend to be surprised when she sees the video, you know? Er ... ah ... oh, right. Never mind.
When Governor Oops sounds like the intelligent person in the room ....
I'm pretty sure I've made that joke before; the thing is that it's not so much that Mr. Perry is getting any smarter, though I suppose anything is possible. Rather, I would simply suggest that the Republican anti-intellectualism is simply harvesting its season, and this time 'round it is especially robust stupidfruit.
Or, to consider another context of metaphor, I remember mumbling on in 2013↗ about the Republican farm team, a notion I picked up from FRC's Tony Perkins, who offered hurt Republicans a salve after the 2012 election↗, pointing to such spectacular rising talents as Sen. Marco Rubio, Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sen. Rand Paul, and Gov. Mike Pence.
Such talent, like we have never seen before ....
Anyway, something I mumbled in 2013:
Consider liberalism and leftism in the U.S. One major difference between American leftists and their right-wing archbrethren is that the left is not nearly so well represented by Democrats as the right is by Republicans. Communists and Socialists are not exactly welcome in the Democratic Party, and their votes for Democrats are usually concessions to the American right. Certes, at least some of this is the fault of leftists, whose farm league is, essentially, the whole of the club. But those who hearken back to Ronald Reagan in their view of Barack Obama make a valid point: If Obama is the balance to a Republican icon, then he is a centrist Democrat balancing a Republican whose policies, in the present context, would classify him as a centrist Democrat.
With history rigged to their favor, Republicans have tumbled so far to the right that it does not seem to be a matter of fine-tuning the rhetoric. There is no more a polite way to stick it to rape survivors than there was a polite way for Goldman and Berkman to assassinate Frick. And we see what has become of Anarchism's unyielding voices today; they're a bunch of black-masked, window-smashing idiots who believe in all manner of ludicrous conspiracy theories and offer nothing to the larger political discourse. Then again, they don't have their own cable news network to help them feed the frenzy.
With history rigged to their favor, Republicans have tumbled so far to the right that it does not seem to be a matter of fine-tuning the rhetoric. There is no more a polite way to stick it to rape survivors than there was a polite way for Goldman and Berkman to assassinate Frick. And we see what has become of Anarchism's unyielding voices today; they're a bunch of black-masked, window-smashing idiots who believe in all manner of ludicrous conspiracy theories and offer nothing to the larger political discourse. Then again, they don't have their own cable news network to help them feed the frenzy.
Maybe FOX News is all they have left. The whole show is weird this time, and maybe that's part of the point. The Republicans might not have much faculty for rhetorical diversity these days, but they're still marketing whizbangs. And in that context, it seems worth noting a contrast. To the one, I wonder at the latest iteration of local versus national finding voice in a conservative upstream movement. To the other, the Republican machine, at least, is blind to such petty contradictions. And to hang ourselves up on such questions might well be to miss the point; this is a strange cycle, indeed, but, I don't know, maybe it's a generational thing, but who remembers when the youth pastor would try to convince the kids he was cool, and that it was cool to walk with Christ, and how unnerving that whole you're doing it wrong! fleshcrawl was. I remember having that feeling once when former RNC chair Michael Steel spun his cap ninety degrees to the side and said something about this is how we roll. It was hard to tell whether the party had selected a chairman or a house ... er ... ah ... caricature.
What is happening this cycle is creepy, but in an entirely different way. There has been some talk of diversity, but look at how the candidates are clustered, and the diversity is mostly a matter of what part of the traditional conservative platform to shout.
You know, in 2011-12, we called the GOP nomination contest the best reality television ever. And this time they actually have a reality television star taking part. And I can't really explain his popularity in polls; either Republican voters are finally affirming they have lost their minds, the polling Republicans said was skewed in 2012 but the most reliable method for winnowing their 2016 field is incredibly wrong, or a significant number of otherwise non-participants who would have otherwise skipped the poll hung on because they got to vote for their favorite reality television host, or some such.
Throw a die, play the sevens. I have no idea what to tell you. Jeb and Scott make sense in poll results; the Donald is a phenomenon all his own. That is to say, without Consummate Clown, Serious Clown and Cowardly Clown were pretty much one-two in the polls. Jeb Bush was considered the serious contender; Gov. Scott Walker the loudest and most offensive, and therefore most popular, culture warrior.
In a way the jingo jalope is pretty much everything we might expect; that is to say, we knew there was some sort of change coming from the GOP. At the same time, though, it would be unfair to fault the gobsmacked; only hindsight will tell us what we have witnessed. But there is a marketing advantage to the larger scheme, and the piss-all brilliant irony happening before our eyes is that Donald Trump is sucking up all the attention and leaving other candidates gasping.
And I'll give this much to Rick Perry, he has a better idea to stand up and dare the Donald than Carly Fiorina, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, or Sen. Ted Cruz came up with in hoping to ride Mr. Trump's coattails.
Notes:
Real Clear Politics. "2016 Republican Presidential Nomination". 19 July 2015. RealClearPolitics.com. 20 July 2015. http://bit.ly/1BAxgP3
The Hour of What the Fuck Has Arrived
See, the thing is that I collect images of this, that, and whoever as I go along, and it turns out this is about the same event the most recent Trump photo I picked up came from, and, frankly, I'm kind of annoyed at running out and finding new ones every time the Donald opens his mouth.
Speaking of which, yeah, I suppose it's also true I might as well wander around in a bunny suit, with a sack over my shoulder, asking if Pino is really Pino.
Because, well, the Donald went and opened his mouth, and O! Holy Shit! on High the What the Fuck'ry?
And let take care to observe specifically the fact that we have this description of the event from Byron York↱ of the Washington Times. In other words, he's hardly, say, Steve Benen↱, who, for the record, offers a more detailed transcript. Well, only slightly more detailed:
At this point I also think it's fair to not subject you to yet another picture of the Donald.
Then again, there is a question worth considering. To the one, this was the Family Leadership Summit, so we can expect certain bits about religious faith to loom larger in the discussion. That is to say, we shouldn't be surprised at the detail of York's report describing the reaction to Trump. Sure, going after Sen. John McCain's military service has set off a firestorm of criticism among opponents, pundits, and bloggers, but to botch up Christianity? Now that is a problem.
And this might well be how the GOP deals with its Trump Question. For the rest of us, questions of simple dignity might come to mind, but this is the Republican Party, and you just don't get to botch up Christianity.
____________________
Notes:
York, Byron. "Dissing McCain not Trump's big problem in Iowa". The Washington Examiner. 20 July 2015. WashingtonExaminer.com. 21 July 2015. http://washex.am/1IjwbmT
Benen, Steve. "Trump's religious talk causes unease among social conservatives". msnbc. 21 July 2015. msnbc.com. 21 July 2015. http://on.msnbc.com/1IgtLnh
See, the thing is that I collect images of this, that, and whoever as I go along, and it turns out this is about the same event the most recent Trump photo I picked up came from, and, frankly, I'm kind of annoyed at running out and finding new ones every time the Donald opens his mouth.
Speaking of which, yeah, I suppose it's also true I might as well wander around in a bunny suit, with a sack over my shoulder, asking if Pino is really Pino.
Because, well, the Donald went and opened his mouth, and O! Holy Shit! on High the What the Fuck'ry?
The political world is in an uproar about Donald Trump's attack on John McCain. Disparaging McCain's military record will be a major inflection point in Trump's campaign, some say, the moment when his bubble of popularity begins to deflate. Rival candidates say Trump's remarks disqualify him from serving as commander in chief.
But for the actual voters who were in the room when Trump spoke to the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, Saturday, it's possible Trump's greater sin has nothing to do with McCain. Instead, Trump's casual and disengaged characterization of religious faith may have made a far worse impression on the mostly evangelical conservatives who came to hear Trump and other Republican hopefuls speak.
If a candidate wants to make a good impression on religious voters in Iowa, he probably should not offer the answer Trump gave when moderator Frank Luntz asked whether Trump had ever asked God for forgiveness. "I am not sure I have," Trump said. "I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so. I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."
A candidate who seeks to make a good impression should also probably refrain from describing Holy Communion in the way Trump did: "When I drink my little wine — which is about the only wine I drink — and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed. I think in terms of 'let's go on and let's make it right.'"
But for the actual voters who were in the room when Trump spoke to the Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, Saturday, it's possible Trump's greater sin has nothing to do with McCain. Instead, Trump's casual and disengaged characterization of religious faith may have made a far worse impression on the mostly evangelical conservatives who came to hear Trump and other Republican hopefuls speak.
If a candidate wants to make a good impression on religious voters in Iowa, he probably should not offer the answer Trump gave when moderator Frank Luntz asked whether Trump had ever asked God for forgiveness. "I am not sure I have," Trump said. "I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so. I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."
A candidate who seeks to make a good impression should also probably refrain from describing Holy Communion in the way Trump did: "When I drink my little wine — which is about the only wine I drink — and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed. I think in terms of 'let's go on and let's make it right.'"
And let take care to observe specifically the fact that we have this description of the event from Byron York↱ of the Washington Times. In other words, he's hardly, say, Steve Benen↱, who, for the record, offers a more detailed transcript. Well, only slightly more detailed:
"We I take, when we go, and church and when I drink my little wine – which is about the only wine I drink – and have my little cracker, I guess that's a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed, OK? But, you know, to me that's important, I do that, but in terms of officially, I could say, 'Absolutely!' and everybody, I don't think in terms of that. I think in terms of, let's go on and let's make it right."
At this point I also think it's fair to not subject you to yet another picture of the Donald.
Then again, there is a question worth considering. To the one, this was the Family Leadership Summit, so we can expect certain bits about religious faith to loom larger in the discussion. That is to say, we shouldn't be surprised at the detail of York's report describing the reaction to Trump. Sure, going after Sen. John McCain's military service has set off a firestorm of criticism among opponents, pundits, and bloggers, but to botch up Christianity? Now that is a problem.
A senior Iowa Republican who was in the room, sitting with a group of grassroots activists as Trump spoke, was dumbfounded by the candidate's views of religion. "While there were audible groans in the crowd when Trump questioned whether McCain was a war hero," the senior Republican said via email, "it was Trump's inability to articulate any coherent relationship with God or demonstrate the role faith plays in his life that really sucked the oxygen out of the room."
The senior Republican continued: "Milling around talking to activists in the hallways/lobby after Trump's speech, THAT is what those Iowa conservatives were discussing, not the McCain comment."
New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Alan Rappeport noticed the same thing: "It was these comments, not his attack on Mr. McCain, that prompted the most muttering and unease in the audience."
Attendees told the Times that Trump's casual use of the words "damn" and "hell" made a bad impression. "I was turned off at the very start because I didn't like his language," one woman who had been considering supporting Trump told the paper. Admitting he never asks God's forgiveness didn't help. "He sounds like he isn't really a born-again Christian," the woman added.
The senior Republican continued: "Milling around talking to activists in the hallways/lobby after Trump's speech, THAT is what those Iowa conservatives were discussing, not the McCain comment."
New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Alan Rappeport noticed the same thing: "It was these comments, not his attack on Mr. McCain, that prompted the most muttering and unease in the audience."
Attendees told the Times that Trump's casual use of the words "damn" and "hell" made a bad impression. "I was turned off at the very start because I didn't like his language," one woman who had been considering supporting Trump told the paper. Admitting he never asks God's forgiveness didn't help. "He sounds like he isn't really a born-again Christian," the woman added.
And this might well be how the GOP deals with its Trump Question. For the rest of us, questions of simple dignity might come to mind, but this is the Republican Party, and you just don't get to botch up Christianity.
____________________
Notes:
York, Byron. "Dissing McCain not Trump's big problem in Iowa". The Washington Examiner. 20 July 2015. WashingtonExaminer.com. 21 July 2015. http://washex.am/1IjwbmT
Benen, Steve. "Trump's religious talk causes unease among social conservatives". msnbc. 21 July 2015. msnbc.com. 21 July 2015. http://on.msnbc.com/1IgtLnh
I just heard Perry accuse Trump of demagoguery. I had to smile. Perry should pay attention to some of the things he has said. Perry accusing Trump of demagoguery, well, there really isn't a better example of the pot calling the kettle black. Someone should rename the Republican Party to Demagogues R Us.
One of my favorite blogs on Trump: "The Poe's Law Candidate."
Y'know, Mitt Romney was happy to be endorsed by Trump. When Trump was helping to crank the Birther manure spreader, rag on Mexicans and promote border walls, play the chickenhawk trombone every time he got within photo op of something military, "question" basic science on the proper issues, he was welcome in the GOP.
The guys who put the modern Republican Party in power did it by setting these guys in motion, these Trumps and Bachmanns and Gomerts and Walkers and Brownbacks and Romneys and Palins - and the Limbaughs and Becks and Hannitys and so forth.
But they aren't windup toys - they don't just run down and quit making noise on their own. It's one thing to let the crazies take over the stage, it's another entirely to get them back into the prop room.
Y'know, Mitt Romney was happy to be endorsed by Trump. When Trump was helping to crank the Birther manure spreader, rag on Mexicans and promote border walls, play the chickenhawk trombone every time he got within photo op of something military, "question" basic science on the proper issues, he was welcome in the GOP.
The guys who put the modern Republican Party in power did it by setting these guys in motion, these Trumps and Bachmanns and Gomerts and Walkers and Brownbacks and Romneys and Palins - and the Limbaughs and Becks and Hannitys and so forth.
But they aren't windup toys - they don't just run down and quit making noise on their own. It's one thing to let the crazies take over the stage, it's another entirely to get them back into the prop room.
Last edited:
Political pundits for some time now have been predicting Trump will flame out and I think most still believe Trump will not be the Republican nominee. Last week pundits predicted his McCain comments would end his dominance in polling, but it hasn't. Instead of loosing grown, Trump is gaining ground in the polling. I think Trump has a very good shot at becoming the Republican nominee and for one simple reason, Trump enjoys the support of Republican entertainers, and Republican entertainers drive party policy. For decades Rush Limbaugh has been described as the de facto Republican Party leader, and it's true. Trump is by profession an entertainer. It's what he does. He entertains far better than he runs his companies. So I think it highly likely Trump will be the Republican nominee.
Last edited:
Trump/Bachmann - works for me.
They both have sterling reputations (among the Republican base) as business experts and watchdogs of the taxpayer's wallet, Bachmann gets what the Republican war room imagines to be the women's vote, and covers Trumps ass when the question of religion and faith comes up.
Only problem is Trump would have to quit the gravy train at Fox and undertake at least some minimal effort at actual comprehension of issues - a pay cut, for boring work. Reading and shit like that, possibly even books.
They both have sterling reputations (among the Republican base) as business experts and watchdogs of the taxpayer's wallet, Bachmann gets what the Republican war room imagines to be the women's vote, and covers Trumps ass when the question of religion and faith comes up.
Only problem is Trump would have to quit the gravy train at Fox and undertake at least some minimal effort at actual comprehension of issues - a pay cut, for boring work. Reading and shit like that, possibly even books.
Last edited:
Pay cut? That depends on how well his children run his business. If they are even marginally competent, he should make more money. Trump has quit the Fox gravy train as have all Republican candidates. Most, if not all, of occupants of the Republican clown car have worked for Fox News in the past and will probably work for Fox again after the primaries are over. It's what Republican presidential candidates do when not running for POTUS.
