CDZ Has anyone heard Donald Trump say anything besides what's wrong with everyone else but him?

[320 Years of History]

Yet another example of Mr. Trump's refusal to take on issues from a rational and/or substantive stance came before us today. The National Review issued a special edition to specifically address the lunacy of Mr. Trump's ideas and what the writers, along with the magazine's publisher, see as the risks associated with a Trump Presidency.

And what was Mr. Trump's reply? "The National Review is a dying magazine." So friggin' what!!!

Dying or not, why the heck doesn't Mr. Trump defend his position substantively rather than merely attacking the magazine? I haven't even gotten a chance to read the articles in it, but I don't have to read them to know that the magazine's life expectancy has nothing at all to do with the merit, or lack thereof, Mr. Trump's proposals have.

Just a few minutes ago, Don Lemon interviewed two of the folks in the Republican party who oppose Mr. Trump, Michael Mukasey (Bush Admin. Atty General) and Hugh Hewitt (host of the Hugh Hewitt Show). If CNN opts to post the video of those interviews, they are well worth watching.

Mr. Mukasey, for example, explains the ridiculousness of Mr. Trump's proposal to round up and ship home some 11 million illegal aliens, presumably because it's not dawned on Mr. Trump just how ridiculous that proposal is. What makes it just silly? Well, for one thing, said Mukasey, were we to use every law enforcement person employed in the U.S. today to do nothing -- that's not one bit of other types of law enforcement -- but locate and apprehend illegal aliens, it'd take two years to to round up and ship off the existing 11 million illegal aliens.

Now, Mr. Mukasey's remark may or may not be factually accurate, but it's a claim of substance. Mr. Trump can easily put it "out to pasture" by showing that there are flaws in the rational Mr. Mukasey used to make it. Attacking Mr. Mukasey or someone/something else is hardly a substantive way to to do so. The smart folks in the Republican party realize this, and while surely many of them have no objection to attacking as a tactic for winning, they nonetheless know one's ideas and proposals must nonetheless have underlying merit, and Mr. Trump's either don't, or he's yet to show how they do. Smart folks -- conservative or not -- can see that.

 

[S.J.]

Mr. Mukasey, for example, explains the ridiculousness of Mr. Trump's proposal to round up and ship home some 11 million illegal aliens, presumably because it's not dawned on Mr. Trump just how ridiculous that proposal is. What makes it just silly? Well, for one thing, said Mukasey, were we to use every law enforcement person employed in the U.S. today to do nothing -- that's not one bit of other types of law enforcement -- but locate and apprehend illegal aliens, it'd take two years to to round up and ship off the existing 11 million illegal aliens.

It won't be 11 million. Once he cuts off their welfare, most of them will leave on their own.

 

[Kalki]

"Now, to address the overwhelming amount of undocumented migrants in the U.S, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) launched Operation Wetback in June 1954, as a way to repatriate illegal laborers back to Mexico. The illegal workers who came over to the states at the initial start of the program were not the only ones affected by this operation, there were also massive groups of workers who felt the need to extend their stay in the U.S well after their labor contracts were terminated.[2] In the first year, over a million Mexicans were sent back to Mexico; 3.8 million were repatriated when the operation was all set and done." From: wikipedia under the Bracero program

The Bracero Program - Rural Migration News | Migration Dialogue

Texas and the Bracero Program, 1942-1947 on JSTOR


Michael Mukasey is a relative of Howard Zinn and Peter Sutherland.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Mr. Trump has now surpassed Ambien for putting me to sleep! It almost seems as though he entered a wager with one of his rich friends, saying "I'll bet you $10M that average Americans are so gullible that I can win the Presidency on nothing but attacks and innuendo. I can do it by being so outrageous that the press will cover everything I say, and having no substantive, detailed policy platform whatsoever and instead just attacking ."

Everytime I turn on the news and hear a clip of what Mr. Trump is saying that day, it consists of his:

• pontificating on what's wrong with his competitors,
• asking questions for which he himself hasn't articulated a comprehensive answer,
• asking rhetorical questions to cast doubt on others and keep them on the defensive,
• making unsubstantiated claims, and
• making empty promises.

The man just goes out of his way to say anything he can that will create problems for his opponents. It doesn't even in his mind need to be true.

Some examples:

• The American Dream is dead. If I get elected, I will bring it back and make it bigger, better and stronger then ever before.
  
  I got news for you, Mr. Trump, if it is indeed dead and that's what you do, it's called changing the American Dream, not resurrecting it.
  
  Of course, whether it's dead or not to begin with is highly questionable. Tell that to the thousands of recent college grads who are now beginning great careers and who came from humble beginnings, humble enough that their professional lives are not beginning with $5K or $10K+ in savings before their first day at work. Tell that to the thousands of immigrants who come or came to the U.S. with literally nothing or near nothing.
• "Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem."
  
  In the space of a week, Trump went from "some people say this might be a problem" to "Ted Cruz is going to sink the Republican ship if he gets the nomination!!!!"
  
  But what did any of that do to tell me whether Mr. Trump is going to be a good President? Are people really vote for Mr. Trump because he's the "best of the worst?" I recall when "Best of the Wurst" was a catchy slogan for a story about a hotdog stand, but for a politician to be understood that way? Really?
• About John Kasich:
  "This is the man that was a managing general partner at Lehman Brothers, when it when down the tubes, and almost took every one of us with us, including Ben and myself. Because I was there, and I watched what happened, and Lehman Brothers started it all. He was on the board, and he was a managing general partner."
  
  Kasich was indeed a Lehman Brothers employee leading up to the 2008 financial collapse, but he wasn't on the board.
• About George W. Bush:
  “You mean George Bush sends our soldiers into combat, they are severely wounded, and then he wants $120,000 to make a boring speech to them?” asked Trump on July 9, after reports the former president charged a vets group for a speech. “Bush didn’t have the IQ [to be president],” he added on June 16.
  
  I didn't even like George Bush, but come on....That I agree in principle with Mr. Trump about Mr. Bush's IQ still doesn't tell me a damn thing of note about Mr. Trump and what he'd do as President.

I'm sorry, but I really don't want four years of innuendo, misrepresentations of simple facts from a President, and "he said she said" between the U.S. President and his foreign counterparts, friend and foe. Mr. Trump just wants to win the Presidency for the sake of winning it. The man is basically proving what I've long felt to be so: a huge share of Americans are either ignorant, stupid, or both.

The Donald doesn't need to say anything else, because he's correct, the others are Cuckservatives crippled with Political Correctness.

Go Trump!

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Mr. Mukasey, for example, explains the ridiculousness of Mr. Trump's proposal to round up and ship home some 11 million illegal aliens, presumably because it's not dawned on Mr. Trump just how ridiculous that proposal is. What makes it just silly? Well, for one thing, said Mukasey, were we to use every law enforcement person employed in the U.S. today to do nothing -- that's not one bit of other types of law enforcement -- but locate and apprehend illegal aliens, it'd take two years to to round up and ship off the existing 11 million illegal aliens.

It won't be 11 million. Once he cuts off their welfare, most of them will leave on their own.

What if they don't? What if they begin rioting? 11 million on the loose, rioting, stealing etc.

 

[Kalki]

"The Immigration Act of 1924, or Johnson–Reed Act, including the National Origins Act, and Asian Exclusion Act (Pub.L. 68–139, 43 Stat. 153, enacted May 26, 1924), was a United States federal law that limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, down from the 3% cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921, according to the Census of 1890. It superseded the 1921 Emergency Quota Act. The law was primarily aimed at further restricting immigration of Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans.[1] In addition, it severely restricted the immigration of Africans and outright banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians. According to the U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian the purpose of the act was "to preserve the ideal of American homogeneity". From wikipedia under Immigration Act of 1924

There were other acts like this as well. Congress has the power to naturalize and regulate immigration, the president does not have the authority, but certain ones have violated the Constitution by granting amnesty to illegal aliens in America, in the past. Amnesty is illegal by circumventing the immigration laws.

U.S. Constitution:

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power [...] To establish a uniform rule of naturalization...

If anyone is in America, please study history and the Constitution as a civic duty.

Certain liars in the news media and elsewhere, have stated that the 14th amendment applies to illegal aliens, however:

"A 2010 Congressional Research Service report, however, observed that, though it could be argued that Congress has no power to define “subject to the jurisdiction” and the terms of citizenship in a manner contrary to the Supreme Court’s understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment as expressed in Wong Kim Ark and Elk, since Congress does have broad power to pass necessary and proper legislation to regulate immigration and naturalization under the Constitution, Art. I, § 8, cls. 4 & 18 of the constitution Congress arguably has the power to define “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” for the purpose of regulating immigration." From wikipedia

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/147254.pdf

Michael Mukasey is also a relative of Emanuel Celler and Jacob Javitz of the Immigration Act of 1965.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Mr. Trump has now surpassed Ambien for putting me to sleep! It almost seems as though he entered a wager with one of his rich friends, saying "I'll bet you $10M that average Americans are so gullible that I can win the Presidency on nothing but attacks and innuendo. I can do it by being so outrageous that the press will cover everything I say, and having no substantive, detailed policy platform whatsoever and instead just attacking ."

Everytime I turn on the news and hear a clip of what Mr. Trump is saying that day, it consists of his:

• pontificating on what's wrong with his competitors,
• asking questions for which he himself hasn't articulated a comprehensive answer,
• asking rhetorical questions to cast doubt on others and keep them on the defensive,
• making unsubstantiated claims, and
• making empty promises.

The man just goes out of his way to say anything he can that will create problems for his opponents. It doesn't even in his mind need to be true.

Some examples:

• The American Dream is dead. If I get elected, I will bring it back and make it bigger, better and stronger then ever before.
  
  I got news for you, Mr. Trump, if it is indeed dead and that's what you do, it's called changing the American Dream, not resurrecting it.
  
  Of course, whether it's dead or not to begin with is highly questionable. Tell that to the thousands of recent college grads who are now beginning great careers and who came from humble beginnings, humble enough that their professional lives are not beginning with $5K or $10K+ in savings before their first day at work. Tell that to the thousands of immigrants who come or came to the U.S. with literally nothing or near nothing.
• "Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem."
  
  In the space of a week, Trump went from "some people say this might be a problem" to "Ted Cruz is going to sink the Republican ship if he gets the nomination!!!!"
  
  But what did any of that do to tell me whether Mr. Trump is going to be a good President? Are people really vote for Mr. Trump because he's the "best of the worst?" I recall when "Best of the Wurst" was a catchy slogan for a story about a hotdog stand, but for a politician to be understood that way? Really?
• About John Kasich:
  "This is the man that was a managing general partner at Lehman Brothers, when it when down the tubes, and almost took every one of us with us, including Ben and myself. Because I was there, and I watched what happened, and Lehman Brothers started it all. He was on the board, and he was a managing general partner."
  
  Kasich was indeed a Lehman Brothers employee leading up to the 2008 financial collapse, but he wasn't on the board.
• About George W. Bush:
  “You mean George Bush sends our soldiers into combat, they are severely wounded, and then he wants $120,000 to make a boring speech to them?” asked Trump on July 9, after reports the former president charged a vets group for a speech. “Bush didn’t have the IQ [to be president],” he added on June 16.
  
  I didn't even like George Bush, but come on....That I agree in principle with Mr. Trump about Mr. Bush's IQ still doesn't tell me a damn thing of note about Mr. Trump and what he'd do as President.

I'm sorry, but I really don't want four years of innuendo, misrepresentations of simple facts from a President, and "he said she said" between the U.S. President and his foreign counterparts, friend and foe. Mr. Trump just wants to win the Presidency for the sake of winning it. The man is basically proving what I've long felt to be so: a huge share of Americans are either ignorant, stupid, or both.

The American dream is fine, the country is fine, we have just been slowly climbing out of the Bush Great Recession which is still a drag on the economy. Bush and the Republicans so damaged the economy that it has to change to something new and that takes alot of time, which it is doing.

Trump is a blowhard like most conservative politicians. Their message is always "the sky is falling and I'm the only guy with an umbrella".

Another snake-oil salesman.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

"The Immigration Act of 1924, or Johnson–Reed Act, including the National Origins Act, and Asian Exclusion Act (Pub.L. 68–139, 43 Stat. 153, enacted May 26, 1924), was a United States federal law that limited the annual number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, down from the 3% cap set by the Immigration Restriction Act of 1921, according to the Census of 1890. It superseded the 1921 Emergency Quota Act. The law was primarily aimed at further restricting immigration of Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans.[1] In addition, it severely restricted the immigration of Africans and outright banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians. According to the U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian the purpose of the act was "to preserve the ideal of American homogeneity". From wikipedia under Immigration Act of 1924

There were other acts like this as well. Congress has the power to naturalize and regulate immigration, the president does not have the authority, but certain ones have violated the Constitution by granting amnesty to illegal aliens in America, in the past. Amnesty is illegal by circumventing the immigration laws.

U.S. Constitution:

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power [...] To establish a uniform rule of naturalization...

If anyone is in America, please study history and the Constitution as a civic duty.

Certain liars in the news media and elsewhere, have stated that the 14th amendment applies to illegal aliens, however:

"A 2010 Congressional Research Service report, however, observed that, though it could be argued that Congress has no power to define “subject to the jurisdiction” and the terms of citizenship in a manner contrary to the Supreme Court’s understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment as expressed in Wong Kim Ark and Elk, since Congress does have broad power to pass necessary and proper legislation to regulate immigration and naturalization under the Constitution, Art. I, § 8, cls. 4 & 18 of the constitution Congress arguably has the power to define “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” for the purpose of regulating immigration." From wikipedia

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/147254.pdf

Michael Mukasey is also a relative of Emanuel Celler and Jacob Javitz of the Immigration Act of 1965.

Yes I posted the other day that the Hart-Celler Act should be repealed.

 

[Gracie]

He is a narcissist. Took me awhile to admit it to myself that he is.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

He is a narcissist. Took me awhile to admit it to myself that he is.

So is Obama though.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

"Now, to address the overwhelming amount of undocumented migrants in the U.S, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) launched Operation Wetback in June 1954, as a way to repatriate illegal laborers back to Mexico. The illegal workers who came over to the states at the initial start of the program were not the only ones affected by this operation, there were also massive groups of workers who felt the need to extend their stay in the U.S well after their labor contracts were terminated.[2] In the first year, over a million Mexicans were sent back to Mexico; 3.8 million were repatriated when the operation was all set and done." From: wikipedia under the Bracero program

The Bracero Program - Rural Migration News | Migration Dialogue

Texas and the Bracero Program, 1942-1947 on JSTOR


Michael Mukasey is a relative of Howard Zinn and Peter Sutherland.

I hate Peter Sutherland as much as I hate George Soros, they are both evil POS.

 

[Gracie]

The thread is about Trump. Trump is narcissistic.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

The thread is about Trump. Trump is narcissistic.

I know and I know The Donald is a narcissist.

 

[Kalki]

It actually doesn't matter who gets elected. They are all puppets of International Finance and they will be assassinated if they do not serve the will of International Finance.

 

[2aguy]

Mr. Trump has now surpassed Ambien for putting me to sleep! It almost seems as though he entered a wager with one of his rich friends, saying "I'll bet you $10M that average Americans are so gullible that I can win the Presidency on nothing but attacks and innuendo. I can do it by being so outrageous that the press will cover everything I say, and having no substantive, detailed policy platform whatsoever and instead just attacking ."

Everytime I turn on the news and hear a clip of what Mr. Trump is saying that day, it consists of his:

• pontificating on what's wrong with his competitors,
• asking questions for which he himself hasn't articulated a comprehensive answer,
• asking rhetorical questions to cast doubt on others and keep them on the defensive,
• making unsubstantiated claims, and
• making empty promises.

The man just goes out of his way to say anything he can that will create problems for his opponents. It doesn't even in his mind need to be true.

Some examples:

• The American Dream is dead. If I get elected, I will bring it back and make it bigger, better and stronger then ever before.
  
  I got news for you, Mr. Trump, if it is indeed dead and that's what you do, it's called changing the American Dream, not resurrecting it.
  
  Of course, whether it's dead or not to begin with is highly questionable. Tell that to the thousands of recent college grads who are now beginning great careers and who came from humble beginnings, humble enough that their professional lives are not beginning with $5K or $10K+ in savings before their first day at work. Tell that to the thousands of immigrants who come or came to the U.S. with literally nothing or near nothing.
• "Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem."
  
  In the space of a week, Trump went from "some people say this might be a problem" to "Ted Cruz is going to sink the Republican ship if he gets the nomination!!!!"
  
  But what did any of that do to tell me whether Mr. Trump is going to be a good President? Are people really vote for Mr. Trump because he's the "best of the worst?" I recall when "Best of the Wurst" was a catchy slogan for a story about a hotdog stand, but for a politician to be understood that way? Really?
• About John Kasich:
  "This is the man that was a managing general partner at Lehman Brothers, when it when down the tubes, and almost took every one of us with us, including Ben and myself. Because I was there, and I watched what happened, and Lehman Brothers started it all. He was on the board, and he was a managing general partner."
  
  Kasich was indeed a Lehman Brothers employee leading up to the 2008 financial collapse, but he wasn't on the board.
• About George W. Bush:
  “You mean George Bush sends our soldiers into combat, they are severely wounded, and then he wants $120,000 to make a boring speech to them?” asked Trump on July 9, after reports the former president charged a vets group for a speech. “Bush didn’t have the IQ [to be president],” he added on June 16.
  
  I didn't even like George Bush, but come on....That I agree in principle with Mr. Trump about Mr. Bush's IQ still doesn't tell me a damn thing of note about Mr. Trump and what he'd do as President.

I'm sorry, but I really don't want four years of innuendo, misrepresentations of simple facts from a President, and "he said she said" between the U.S. President and his foreign counterparts, friend and foe. Mr. Trump just wants to win the Presidency for the sake of winning it. The man is basically proving what I've long felt to be so: a huge share of Americans are either ignorant, stupid, or both.

Yes....he will build a border wall to stop illegal immigration and create a proess to allow previous illegal aliens to come back into the country legally....

He is going to rebuild the military and take care of our veterans.

He is going to protect the Second Amendment.

He is going to deal with Iran.

He is going to create a tarrif if China doesn't give concessions on trade.

He is going to stop refugees from coming into the country....and the important part that you guys ignore....Until the government gets it's act together and can properly vet them....

You really need to pay attention to what he actually says and not what those who hate him say he says.......be an individual...think for yourself......

 

[2aguy]

The thread is about Trump. Trump is narcissistic.

I know and I know The Donald is a narcissist.

All politicians at that level are narcissists....they wouldn't be where they are if they weren't....at least Trump has actually achieved real things in his life....most of his competition has spent their lives living off of the taxpayers or using their government job to get big paying private sector jobs.....

And for the record...I am voting to Ted Cruz....

 

[Two Thumbs]

• pontificating on what's wrong with his competitors,
• asking questions for which he himself hasn't articulated a comprehensive answer,
• asking rhetorical questions to cast doubt on others and keep them on the defensive,
• making unsubstantiated claims, and
• making empty promises.

is there a pol that does all this on everything?

no

so this is just bitching about trump b/c he out does whoever you support

 

[Gracie]

He is too crass to be POTUS.

 

[Kalki]

Americans are crass, and they love vaishyas. He is perfect for the puppet position. I would support him if he promises to start Operation Wetback the 2nd, and advocate to repeal the Immigration Act of 1965. Then, I will cross my fingers that he doesn't start a war in the Middle East with Iran, that Israel and dual-Israeli citizens have been pushing for 25 years, see, e.g., the PNAC.

Iran has enough problems: Operation Ajax, then if that wasn't enough the CIA sold Saddam Hussein chemical weapons to use on the Persians in the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s. That is how they knew he had chemical weapons, because they sold them to Saddam. So, Saddam wrote a 'Letter to the American People', when he realized he was manipulated and in danger.

 

[320 Years of History]

He is a narcissist. Took me awhile to admit it to myself that he is.

So is Obama though.

Why you introduced a comparative I do not understand.....Whether Mr. Obama is or is not is irrelevant to whether Mr. Trump is or is not. In assessing Mr. Trump's strengths and weaknesses, Mr. Obama's ostensible narcissism, Mr. Obama's weakness, has no relevance.