LOL You forgot sock puppet. You make some good points, but then spoil them with your poor reading comprehension skills. You completely misunderstood everything I wrote.
My reading skills are just fine. It's your bad writing and dissembling that is poor, actually; seguing into specific issues from a general premise and then making up semantic hubris isn't really that impressive, especially when trying to use length and introducing other issues without addressing what was said by people you're supposed to be quoting.
The moral authority I referred to is the constitution, and I wasn't claiming it for myself, I was saying that Republican politicians, like Paul Ryan, are faced with the embarrassing conflict of either embracing Mr Trump or the constitution, but not both. What good will it do them to retain all the moral authority and conservative principles if Mr. Trump retains the voters?
Ah, well, I didn't know you are a Supreme Court justice, and get to determine what is or isn't 'constitutional' all on your own. My bad.
I was claiming no moral authority for myself. I'm not even a Republican, let alone a member of the Republican establishment. The subject of this thread is the threat to Republican power and identity posed by Mr. Trump. I'm sure you must be aware of the response to Mr. Trump's proposal about banning Muslims, both within and without the party. Reince Preibus and William Kristol don't care what you think about it, and what I think about it is likewise irrelevant to the subject at hand, which is what the Republican powers that be thought about it.
Obviously a substantial segment of GOP voters disagree, and don't give a rat's ass about Ryan's or any other Establishment GOP hack thinks, either, which is why Trump is the likely nominee barring some late 'Gotcha Moment'; they certainly can't make any overt attempts at derailing his nomination with rules chicanery at this point, not without cratering their turnout in November. Trump matters far more than Ryan or the others, obviously, and they are already kissing his ass; they have little choice in the matter.
Just how far can they bend over backwards to kiss Trump's ass, and still retain any semblance of credibility? Christie, Perry, Jindal, have all proven that they'd rather embrace Trump than slip into oblivion, but Ryan is another matter. He's in power. He's got something to lose. Perry doesn't, nor Jindal nor Christie. None of them will ever hold elected office again.
They have no semblance of credibility now with most of their base, which is why Trump is winning the primaries in the first place, so the above is just pointless editorializing; the new voters Trump brings in are the 'new' base. Ryan isn't the big power any more, so why care much about his opinions? Same for the MSM and the other propaganda outlets; the more they bashed, the more votes he got.
It's hilarious, and being the delusional sociopaths they are, they still don't know what hit them, so convinced they are of their own importance and superiority. So, they just pronounce all the Trump voters as 'low information', 'racists', ad nauseam, when it's immediately obvious who the 'low information' types are, which is themselves, not Trump voters. They're getting the middle finger salute right along with the 'GOP 'establishment', from people who no longer assign any credibility to their rackets any more, and justifiably so.
I never suggested that you did. Again, you are not a Republican establishment figure (AFAIK). You are not part of the equation.
I'm not a Republican at all, I'm an LBJ/Moynihan Liberal, and since you think 'nobody else matters' why bother starting a thread on it? You just want a soapbox, not a discussion. We already see that.
Banning all Muslims is unconstitutional, as well as insane and likely to cause a thousand times more harm than good.
He said it would be a temporary ban on travel into the U.S. until serious screening and security procedures can be implemented, but do continue to make hysterical misrepresentations of what he said. And, it isn't 'unconstitutional', it's common sense to bar people from states that known terrorist havens from entering the country, despite your hand-wringing proclamations. Islam is a violent political cult, and that feature is the most relevant, not their fake 'religious' coating the put around themselves; whether or not some hippies and credulous goofs think otherwise is irrelevant; we've restricted immigration before, and didn't suffer from it, quite the opposite.
We ban all kinds of undesirables all the time; do you also think we shouldn't ban Nazis, cus like it might 'make them mad n stuff'? Offend some Germans or something? Here's a choice quote of somebody you may have heard of, maybe not:
Every society has a right to fix the fundamental principles of its association, and to say to all individuals, that if they contemplate pursuits beyond the limits of these principles and involving dangers which the society chooses to avoid, they must go somewhere else for their exercise; that we want no citizens, and still less ephemeral and pseudo-citizens, on such terms. We may exclude them from our territory, as we do persons infected with disease.
Thomas Jefferson to William H. Crawford, 1816
Throwing out 11 million illegals is simply logistically and morally impossible. Again, not in my opinion, but in the clearly stated opinions of the Republican establishment, who responded to Mr. Trump's proposals in exactly the manner I described. Get it? Not me, not you, but them. That's the subject of this thread, the threat to the Republican brand and power. Is it real or not? Thomas Friedman is of the opinion that if Trump brings down the Republican's house he will be doing God's work, but Mr. Friedman is not a conservative, is he?
Actually it would easy to get rid of a substantial number of them, they would self-deport, not to mention it would slow down drastically those that are still coming in. Of course if you're one of those who expect some sort of instant gratification, claiming it would all be a 'failure' if all 20 million plus didn't leave by noon tomorrow, well that's just silly; they didn't all come in overnight, and it will take a few years. So what? It's like claiming we should just legalize rape and murder, cuz obviously the laws we have haven't stopped that 100%, i.e. false 'logic'. And again, Trump, or more accurately his voter base, has the main power now, not Ryan or the 'Establishment', get it? I already addressed how it can be done, but you chose to not address that, just deslare it all 'insane n stuff'. Once again ...
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the other labor racketeering cliques love to hear all that, for obvious reasons, but it's an easy problem to fix, by just enforcing laws already on the books and start arresting the employers and sending them to prison, prosecuting them under RICO statues, etc., and the majority of the problem goes away all by itself.
Yeah? And are you so naive as to believe that this will become US policy? We, of course, have laws on the books against this kind of illegal hiring, but we don't enforce them, not Dems and not Reps. It's a matter of corruption, not ideology. You are correct that we could fix this problem, but we lack the will to face the blowback. Meanwhile, Trump is forcing the hand of the Party apparatchiks
So in other words, just bend over for the Man, cuz 'corruption'. So why bother if laws and politicians are so pointless, then? Why have laws at all if at some point some 'corruption' will happen?
I will ignore the rest as you were indulging in a typical hyper-partisan meltdown, completely irrelevant to the subject at hand. The subject at hand is the reformation of the Republican party.
Nobody is having a 'hyper-partisan meltdown', except you, and you keep shifting the subject around because you can't really address it directly, hence to bombard with us with assorted 'proclamations' and rhetoric.
This is a subject that's difficult to avoid, except here, of course. In the lame-stream media they're all a twitter about it. Here, no one is interested. Perhaps it's a tempest in a teapot. Perhaps it will all go as smoothly as the most deranged Trump surrogate tells us it will. I have yet to hear a convincing argument that it will go that way, though.
Lots of people are interested; they're just not interested in playing the endless 'fallacy of many questions' game over and over again with people who proclaim themselves right and everybody else wrong for not agreeing with their hubris, that's all.
If you think things never change, it's all, like' futile' to do anything, cuz 'corruption n stuff', then why bother with these threads in the first place? Just follow this sage advice, from a scholar who dies understand the differences between politics, history, and hypocritical evangelizing for some 'cause' or other, and neurotic sniveling:
As for Trump, there is really no way on Earth he could be worse than what has been elected the last 40 years, so that ridiculous meme just spin as well. Stop reading hack astro-turfing sites like Daily Kos and Paint Huffer's Post for your 'daily 'talking points', and you might get better results rather than just throwing out non-responses and parroting non-points. You're not really 'discussing' anything; whether you realize it or not, you're just typing out the usual 'talking points' determined by your own selective biases.
