Is It Just Me?

[Bmichael]

As should be obvious by now, some of my views and opinions (but not all) of Donald McRonald, are generally formulated by information published by left wing, liberal publications and think tanks.

 

I am aware, that while there is much factual truth to this information, there is also a high dosage of the abominable “spin” that is prevalent on both sides.

 

For example, comments made by the candidate are frequently accompanied by unflattering photographic “frame grabs “– wild eyed, angry looking pics that could depict him in negative ways – even if he was perhaps saying nice things about Mother Teresa. (Like that would happen)

 

This is the kind of stuff that is prevalent in supermarket tabloids and I cringe every time I see it in otherwise respectable publications – liberal or conservative.

 

And that, Mr. McRonald is the only concession I’ll ever offer  you.

 

What’s interesting to me is that while liberal thought on the candidate is harsh…a check of the conservative viewpoints can be even harsher.

 

I recently logged on to The National Review and found the following article.

 

It was published in January of this year, and I suspect that the opinions expressed are still the same, some seven months later, and may even be more damning, in light of the candidate’s continuously, spewed BS.

 

So I’m adding it here…not for any particular enjoyment (rolls eyes)…but because the candidate’s constant whining about being misunderstood and misinterpreted by the liberal press, is of course,  more stupidity.

 

(Sorry about the lack of breaks, you can find the original text at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservat...)

 

Published by the Editors - The National Review- Jan. 21, 2016 – 10:00 pm

 

“Donald Trump leads the polls nationally and in most states in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. There are understandable reasons for his eminence, and he has shown impressive gut-level skill as a campaigner. But he is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones. Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy. (He and Bernie Sanders have shared more than funky outer-borough accents.) Since declaring his candidacy he has taken a more conservative line, yet there are great gaping holes in it. His signature issue is concern over immigration — from Latin America but also, after Paris and San Bernardino, from the Middle East. He has exploited the yawning gap between elite opinion in both parties and the public on the issue, and feasted on the discontent over a government that can’t be bothered to enforce its own laws no matter how many times it says it will (President Obama has dispensed even with the pretense). But even on immigration, Trump often makes no sense and can’t be relied upon. A few short years ago, he was criticizing Mitt Romney for having the temerity to propose “self-deportation,” or the entirely reasonable policy of reducing the illegal population through attrition while enforcing the nation’s laws. Now, Trump is a hawk’s hawk. He pledges to build a wall along the southern border and to make Mexico pay for it. We need more fencing at the border, but the promise to make Mexico pay for it is silly bluster. Trump says he will put a big door in his beautiful wall, an implicit endorsement of the dismayingly conventional view that current levels of legal immigration are fine. Trump seems unaware that a major contribution of his own written immigration plan is to question the economic impact of legal immigration and to call for reform of the H-1B–visa program. Indeed, in one Republican debate he clearly had no idea what’s in that plan and advocated increased legal immigration, which is completely at odds with it. These are not the meanderings of someone with well-informed, deeply held views on the topic. As for illegal immigration, Trump pledges to deport the 11 million illegals here in the United States, a herculean administrative and logistical task beyond the capacity of the federal government. Trump piles on the absurdity by saying he would re-import many of the illegal immigrants once they had been deported, which makes his policy a poorly disguised amnesty (and a version of a similarly idiotic idea that appeared in one of Washington’s periodic “comprehensive” immigration reforms). This plan wouldn’t survive its first contact with reality. RELATED: Conservatives Should Ask: ‘Does Trump Walk with Us?’ On foreign policy, Trump is a nationalist at sea. Sometimes he wants to let Russia fight ISIS, and at others he wants to “bomb the sh**” out of it. He is fixated on stealing Iraq’s oil and casually suggested a few weeks ago a war crime — killing terrorists’ families — as a tactic in the war on terror. For someone who wants to project strength, he has an astonishing weakness for flattery, falling for Vladimir Putin after a few coquettish bats of the eyelashes from the Russian thug. All in all, Trump knows approximately as much about national security as he does about the nuclear triad — which is to say, almost nothing. Indeed, Trump’s politics are those of an averagely well-informed businessman: Washington is full of problems; I am a problem-solver; let me at them. But if you have no familiarity with the relevant details and the levers of power, and no clear principles to guide you, you will, like most tenderfeet, get rolled. Especially if you are, at least by all outward indications, the most poll-obsessed politician in all of American history. Trump has shown no interest in limiting government, in reforming entitlements, or in the Constitution. He floats the idea of massive new taxes on imported goods and threatens to retaliate against companies that do too much manufacturing overseas for his taste. His obsession is with “winning,” regardless of the means — a spirit that is anathema to the ordered liberty that conservatives hold dear and that depends for its preservation on limits on government power. The Tea Party represented a revival of an understanding of American greatness in these terms, an understanding to which Trump is tone-deaf at best and implicitly hostile at worst. He appears to believe that the administrative state merely needs a new master, rather than a new dispensation that cuts it down to size and curtails its power. Share article on Facebook share Tweet article tweet It is unpopular to say in the year of the “outsider,” but it is not a recommendation that Trump has never held public office. Since 1984, when Jesse Jackson ran for president with no credential other than a great flow of words, both parties have been infested by candidates who have treated the presidency as an entry-level position. They are the excrescences of instant-hit media culture. The burdens and intricacies of leadership are special; experience in other fields is not transferable. That is why all American presidents have been politicians, or generals. Any candidate can promise the moon. But politicians have records of success, failure, or plain backsliding by which their promises may be judged. Trump can try to make his blankness a virtue by calling it a kind of innocence. But he is like a man with no credit history applying for a mortgage — or, in this case, applying to manage a $3.8 trillion budget and the most fearsome military on earth. RELATED: When Conservatives Needed Allies, Donald Trump Sided with Obama Trump’s record as a businessman is hardly a recommendation for the highest office in the land. For all his success, Trump inherited a real-estate fortune from his father. Few of us will ever have the experience, as Trump did, of having Daddy-O bail out our struggling enterprise with an illegal loan in the form of casino chips. Trump’s primary work long ago became less about building anything than about branding himself and tending to his celebrity through a variety of entertainment ventures, from WWE to his reality-TV show, The Apprentice. His business record reflects the often dubious norms of the milieu: using eminent domain to condemn the property of others; buying the good graces of politicians — including many Democrats — with donations. Get Free Exclusive NR Content Trump has gotten far in the GOP race on a brash manner, buffed over decades in New York tabloid culture. His refusal to back down from any gaffe, no matter how grotesque, suggests a healthy impertinence in the face of postmodern PC (although the insults he hurls at anyone who crosses him also speak to a pettiness and lack of basic civility). His promise to make America great again recalls the populism of Andrew Jackson. But Jackson was an actual warrior; and President Jackson made many mistakes. Without Jackson’s scars, what is Trump’s rhetoric but show and strut? If Trump were to become the president, the Republican nominee, or even a failed candidate with strong conservative support, what would that say about conservatives? The movement that ground down the Soviet Union and took the shine, at least temporarily, off socialism would have fallen in behind a huckster. The movement concerned with such “permanent things” as constitutional government, marriage, and the right to life would have become a claque for a Twitter feed. More Donald Trump Trickle Down: Trump's Failure Hurting Republicans Down Ballot The Ideologies of Islamism and Communism Aren't That Different Trump’s the Wrong Man to Attack the Media Trump nevertheless offers a valuable warning for the Republican party. If responsible men irresponsibly ignore an issue as important as immigration, it will be taken up by the reckless. If they cannot explain their Beltway maneuvers — worse, if their maneuvering is indefensible — they will be rejected by their own voters. If they cannot advance a compelling working-class agenda, the legitimate anxieties and discontents of blue-collar voters will be exploited by demagogues. We sympathize with many of the complaints of Trump supporters about the GOP, but that doesn’t make the mogul any less flawed a vessel for them. Some conservatives have made it their business to make excuses for Trump and duly get pats on the head from him. Count us out. Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.”

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430137/donald-trump-conservat...

 

[Marilyn]

Thanks for this! In my household we are convinced he doesn't want the job and is deliberately self-sabotaging ....

[Carol T]

So nice to see you, Marilyn!  How are you feeling?  Head on over to Twitbook for lots more on the Donald.

[Carol T]

I don't know what to say to preface this, so I'll just post it.

http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/08/night-that-obama-and-hillary-founde...

[Bmichael]

Heh...heh...heh...knew it, knew it, knew it!

[Carol T]

http://www.bustle.com/articles/145859-these-donald-drumpf-conspirac...

[Carol T]

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/donald-trump-and-the-cen...

Notice that this was written two years ago.

[Carol T]

This article details all the many racist things he has done/said over decades.

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racism-history

[Carol T]

I'm sure that you've all seen/heard this by now.  The question is: is this the October surprise, or is there something worse (on either side) yet to come?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extre...

[Bmichael]

I'm hoping it's finished...this is beyond words.

What is worse than the tape and his behavior, is the response to his indefensible transgression... an insincere apology...and a threat to attack Bill Clinton's infidelity.

Was it Marilyn who predicted that he would self destruct before the election?

[Westerly_2]

I think it must have been Marilyn. I heard that Bill Clinton had encouraged his friend Trump to join the race, back at the beginning.(not that he needed much encouragement).  Hmm, do I sense a strategy?

[Bmichael]

heh...heh...heh...

[Bmichael]

Carol…looks like you’re right…there is more…but as much as I am anti Donald McRonald…this doesn’t sound right…feels contrived – including how quickly Clinton jumped on it.