January 20, 2016

Now, I think I know where Donald Trump got his speech-making style — from Sarah Palin.

I finally got around to watching the speech Sarah Palin gave yesterday, endorsing Donald Trump. I first saw it in the form of a BuzzFeedNess piece titled "So, Uh, Here’s The Full Text Of Sarah Palin’s Bizarre Trump Speech," which made me think she was inarticulate, saying "uh" a lot and going off on weird tangents. But a simple search of the text — the text transcribed without pity — shows she only said "uh" once other than the time she deployed a string of "uh"s for comic effect, saying that the GOP establishment "is wailing, 'well, Trump and his, uh, uh, uh, Trumpeters, they’re not conservative enough.'" That one "uh" comes near the one "um":
What he’s been able to accomplish, with his um, it’s kind of this quiet generosity. Yeah, maybe his largess kind of, I don’t know, some would say gets in the way of that quiet generosity, and, uh, his compassion....
Maybe "compassion" is a hard word for righties to say. Just yesterday, right here on this blog, we voted on whether "compassion" (along with "social justice") was a left-wing brand. Or maybe "compassion" is just too Bush-y. Remember "compassionate conservativism"?
In June, 1986, [historian and presidential advisor Doug] Wead wrote an article for the Christian Herald, describing then-vice-president George H. W. Bush, to whom he served as an aide, as a “compassionate conservative.” According to journalist Jacob Weisberg, George W. Bush, George H. W. Bush's son, first picked up the term "compassionate conservative" from Wead, in 1987.

In 1992, when Doug Wead ran for U.S. Representative from Arizona, he wrote a campaign book entitled Time for a Change. The first chapter was called “The Compassionate Conservative” and outlined Wead’s philosophy that the masses didn’t care if Republican policies worked if the attitude and purpose behind the policies were uncaring....

Nicholas Lemann, writing in New Yorker magazine in 2015, wrote that George W. Bush's "description of himself, in the 2000 campaign, as a 'compassionate conservative" was brilliantly vague—liberals heard it as 'I'm not all that conservative,' and conservatives heard it as 'I'm deeply religious.' It was about him as a person, not a program."....
But back to the Palin speech. I listened to it, which makes a different impression from reading. What struck me was how similar it was to the way Trump speaks — short, punchy statements. It's rousing, rallying. It feels nervy and brave. Sarah is at her best in this milieu. Whether you'd trust her to be President is an entirely different matter, but speaking to a crowd, she is brilliant. So she is simply wonderful speaking on behalf of someone else, as she was in the early days of the 2008 campaign, before the McCain people reined her in.

Speaking for Trump, not as Trump's running mate, she's able to be herself, let her Palinosity flow, and it's great stuff. Its similarity to the way Trump speaks creates an uncanny dynamic. And Trump is not like McCain. He's not going to seem dull or stodgy by comparison to Palin. He doesn't need to worry about her star power. He's already established his star power.

Seeing her next to him, I can tell it's a shared style. It's not just something only one person can do. Two are doing it. That gives hope to others. But what are the elements of that style? How could somebody else learn to do it?

Now, I just want to quote 2 things Palin said that jumped out at me. Maybe these can be studied in an effort to discern the elements of the style. First:
The permanent political class has been doing the bidding of their campaign donor class, and that’s why you see that the borders are kept open. For them, for their cheap labor that they want to come in. That’s why they’ve been bloating budgets. It’s for crony capitalists to be able suck off of them. It’s why we see these lousy trade deals that gut our industry for special interests elsewhere. 
That's great form and substance. Look at the vivid words: "bloating," "suck off," "lousy," "gut." I know the "suck off" — "suck off of" — refers to breastfeeding, but on an emotional level where the concrete images swirl together, that crony capitalist she's talking about looks a louse-ridden man with bloated gut getting a blow job.

Second:
[H]e’s got the guts to wear the issues that need to be spoken about and debate on his sleeve, where the rest of some of these establishment candidates, they just wanted to duck and hide. They didn’t want to talk about these issue until he brought 'em up. In fact, they’ve been wearing a, this, political correctness kind of like a suicide vest.
Wearing political correctness like a suicide vest. You don't really have enough time to think through the analogy, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but jeez, take off that vest, it's a suicide vest! Trump "wear[s] the issues" — the right issues! What are you wearing? Better wear the right thing! But you don't have time to analyze that. You just feel it as she's off and running to more short sentences...
And enough is enough. These issues that Donald Trump talks about had to be debated. And he brought them to the forefront. And that’s why we are where we are today with good discussion. A good, heated, and very competitive primary is where we are. And now though, to be lectured that, “Well, you guys are all sounding kind of angry,” is what we’re hearing from the establishment. Doggone right we’re angry! Justifiably so! Yes! You know, they stomp on our neck, and then they tell us, “Just chill, okay just relax.” Well, look, we are mad, and we’ve been had. They need to get used to it.
We are mad, and we’ve been had. They need to get used to it.

Yeah, get used to it. Get used to political speech that's not tame and calculated but emotive and in-the-minute, with enough substance showing through along the way that you never lose the sense that it's about real issues. You think that's "bizarre," BuzzFeed? Get up to speed. This is what America sounds like.

200 comments:

rhhardin said...

Palin is awful speaking to a crowd. She assumes they're idiots.

There's none of Trump's self-deprecation.

"Greatest God ever!"

mccullough said...

Pretty good speech. Nothing she said hurts Ted Cruz, who she also has supported in the past since he is not an establishment schill either.

Jeb is the establishment candidate and Rubio is the backup. Rubio knows he can make good money off the establishment and he's tired of not being rich. Jeb is already rich from his connections. Rubio is like the Clintons. Politics is his inroad to wealth.

Hagar said...

As I said on the post below, I think Trump's writers wrote this for her, or strongly influenced it, and it a little over the top and not quite her style.

MathMom said...

I am a fan of Palin, but that said, didn't think this was her best speech.

Also, I'm disappointed in her backing of Trump. I'll vote for Cruz in the Texas primary. But if Trump gets the nomination, I'll vote for him. He certainly has the attributes she says she will fight for in a candidate - those who are proud to be American, and those who will fight. I think Trump has shown these qualities in ample measure.

garage mahal said...

Palin's "speech" was the worst thing I've ever witnessed. I can only she was drunk off her ass.

rhhardin said...

Imus's Lou Ruffino after hearing the first Palin cut, "That's it. Trump is doomed."

Limited blogger said...

I am so glad the voting is going to start soon. This 'stumping' has worn me out.

rhhardin said...

Dierdre Imus said Palin has an annoying voice.

Michael said...

The Financial Times. The New York Times. The Wall Street Journal. The Washington Post. Der Spiegel. The Telegraph. The Guardian. The Boston Globe. The Los Angeles Times. The St. Louis Post Dispatch. The Memphis Commercial Appeal. The Times of London.

Those are the papers I read every morning, Katie. You?


Nonapod said...

This campaign has been and continues to be all about emotional antiestablishment rabble rousing. Anger, frustration, and joy...whether it's focused, coherent, or logical is irrelevant to the large group of people who support Trump, Cruz, and even Sanders. We're mad as hell and we're not gonna take it anymore.

Michael said...

Most of the tsking at Palin is a failure to understand what she is doing, plus simple snobbery.

carrie said...

So using "uh" makes you inarticulate? You should read Barbara Olson's book "Final Days" about the Clinton. It includes an excerpt from a speech or interview with Hillary where Hillary says "uh" or "um" A LOT. I don't know what Hillary did to stop doing it, but it must have taken a lot of work even though Barbara Olson was the only person I ever recall drawing attention to Hillary's speech patterns.

machine said...

I'm just surprised she didn't quit halfway through...

Michael K said...

"before the McCain people reined her in."

No, they hammered her into their own mold and then shoved her into a box. I still remember that she and her husband wanted to campaign in Michigan which the McCain people had given up on. Michigan subsequently elected a GOP governor.

If garage hated her speech it must have been pretty good.

The GOP establishment, which National Review has now joined, hate her almost as much as Democrats do.

When NRO fired Derbyshire for saying some of the things Trump is saying, they outed themselves.

Michael K said...

"Blogger machine said...
I'm just surprised she didn't quit halfway through..."

A left wing "tell" if I ever heard one.

aritai said...

Supreme court Justice Palin. I like it. Has a nice ring. Title III to boot. No previous decisions save pardons and judicial appointments (and firings) to complain about or derail the nomination. No Borking possible here. To say nothing of it's time for non-lawyers on that court, perhaps half of them. Smart to pick a Maggie Thatcher type who will kick your teeth in if you're not polite as well as limit the distractions for the boss. Shades of Warren Buffett. A complete chromosome set can only help. pTb is looking more like a natural born politician every day. I wonder why Cruz didn't meet her price first? Or for that matter the other candidates. It's not like she was invisible. The knives are already out for her children so that won't be a problem. Art of the deal. Wasn't it Patton said "D@mn you Rommel, I read your book."? This popcorn is tasting better every day. Butter plus coconut oil plus a heavy sprinkling of parmesan, please.

Birkel said...

"garage mahal" wrote "I can only she was drunk off her ass" without any hint of irony whatsoever.

Middle school football heroes hardest hit.

jr565 said...

"The permanent political class has been doing the bidding of their campaign donor class, and that’s why you see that the borders are kept open. For them, for their cheap labor that they want to come in. That’s why they’ve been bloating budgets. It’s for crony capitalists to be able suck off of them. It’s why we see these lousy trade deals that gut our industry for special interests elsewhere."


And one of the biggest of those crony capitalists who used cheap labor was some guy named DONALD TRUMP.

Steven said...

I think the "uh" was just being used in the same way that people will say "Um, no" in comments. It was a way to indicate that the writer was stunned by the weirdness of the speech.

Fernandinande said...

"Kyle" is such an Onion name.

garage mahal said...
I can only she was drunk off her ass.


I, too, leave out words when I post drunk.

Ann Althouse said...

"Imus's Lou Ruffino after hearing the first Palin cut, "That's it. Trump is doomed.""

If I had a million dollars for every time some media bullshitter announced that something is finally dooming Trump, I'd be a billionaire.

jr565 said...

For example, Sarah:
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-companies-sought-visas-to-import-at-least-1100-workers-2015-7

Trump sought out cheap labor to build hotel. if you actually have a problem with to why are you cheering him on. And if you don't. Why are you using it as a talking point? This is the guy who, while you were fighting to keep repubs honest was pumping money into Rahm Emmanuels campaign. And Nancy Pelosi's.

RiverRat said...

The man truly is insane! A double dose of populism. The Barnum and Palin Circus and Carnival come to town.

Admittedly they're exceptional Carneys and snake oil salesmen and many are being proven to be to be their rubes and marks.

Ann Althouse said...

"Dierdre Imus said Palin has an annoying voice."

One more exhibit in the endless trial of the question whether women hate women.

eric said...

I'm glad to see Sarah Palin back in the limelight. Her mama grizzly attitude drives people like machine and garage crazy. I wish she were endorsing Ted Cruz, but I'll take Trump. It's better than Rubio, Kasich or Bush.

One of these days, Trump should host a rally with Sarah Palin and Kanye West as speakers. That'd make heads explode.

garage mahal said...

"garage hated her speech it must have been pretty good."

Palin is a complete idiot. It's not anymore complicated than that. How could you listen to that endorsement and conclude otherwise? Cringeworthy, embarrassing word salad. And that nails-on-chalkboard voice.

Paul Snively said...

This basically puts two strands of populism together: the social populists who like what Trump has to say about immigration and foreign policy, and the economic populists who like what Palin has to say about crony capitalism. It helps address the "wait, isn't Trump a yyyyyyyyuge crony capitalist by his own admission?" by giving Trump "he just responded to incentives; he's not claiming the incentives are good" cover, as well as "if it's good enough for Sarah" cover.

There's also some interesting east-coast/west-coast populism dynamic marriage here that seems significant, but I can't quite put my finger on. At least not yet.

But yeah, I get the impression a lot of people who think "Trump is a New York crony capitalist" underestimate the extent to which that isn't core to his identity, but just a function of his circumstances.

jr565 said...

The Donald had this to say about Obamacare:
"We have a disaster called the big lie: Obamacare,” Trump declared. “I would repeal and replace the big lie, Obamacare.”

Replace with what? Oh, socialized medicine. But lets ignore that.
How did we get Obamacare?
Well lets remember that at the time Trump was a registered DEMOCRAT. He pumped all the funds into the campaigns of the people who wanted Obamcare passed:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-donald-trump-helped-democrats-pass-obamacare/2015/06/22/002f4c7c-18ea-11e5-ab92-c75ae6ab94b5_story.html

Trump helped Sharon Angle LOSE to Rahm Emmanuel. He donated all the money to HIS campaign AFTER obamacare was passed.
Who was the architect of Obamacare? Ezekial Emmanuel. And his brother Rahm.
So, its quite funny that Trump is now blasting Obamacare.

And that Palin is supporting him.

Trump had this to say:
“So, what am I going to do, contribute to Republicans?” “I mean, one thing I’m not stupid. Am I going to contribute to a Republican for my whole life when they get, they run against some Democrat. And the most they can get is one percent of the vote?”

Ok, so lets cut him some slack here. Hes a New Yorker, NYers dont traditionally elect republicans (except for Bloomberg, Pataki, Giuliani etc). But, its quite plain that UNTIL HE DECIDED TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT, he had no problem donating to democrats to get democratic programs passed.

Now you know what Cruz was talking about when he referred to NY values. Of course Trump took umbrage, but that's because he is not a republican.



exhelodrvr1 said...

garage,
"Palin is a complete idiot"

Compare what she said during the 2008 campaign to what Obama said, and see who was more accurate.

cubanbob said...

Ann Althouse said...
"Imus's Lou Ruffino after hearing the first Palin cut, "That's it. Trump is doomed.""

If I had a million dollars for every time some media bullshitter announced that something is finally dooming Trump, I'd be a billionaire.

1/20/16, 9:58 AM"

I can be had for much less. I'll happily take a grand instead and settle for being a centimillionaire.

CWJ said...

Althouse wrote -

"Maybe "compassion" is a hard word for righties to say."

Ha ha. I know you're tying this to the speech. Perhaps trying a little bit too hard. I went back to check your question and the comment thread it generated. Seems to me "compassion" was far less of a problem for your commenters than was pairing it with "social justice."

cubanbob said...

RiverRat said...
The man truly is insane! A double dose of populism. The Barnum and Palin Circus and Carnival come to town.

Admittedly they're exceptional Carneys and snake oil salesmen and many are being proven to be to be their rubes and marks.

1/20/16, 9:59 AM"

Let me hazard a guess: someone as astute and brilliant as you in detecting a con is going to vote for Hillary! Or is getting The Bern.

Chuck said...

I do not get you, Professor Althouse.

You don't talk to Meade the way that Trump and Palin talk. If you find that manner of speaking, it isn't because you like or respect the content; it is because you, as an academic Brahmin, find it fascinating how such manner of speaking impacts on the Great Unwashed.

Let me say something about political speeches. There is absolutely no reason they have to be dumb to be good. Dr. King wrote great speeches, that resonated. So did Churchill. Barack Obama -- when he had Jon Favreau as his speechwriter -- delivered magnificent speeches. I didn't accept any of what Obama was saying, of course. But they were wonderfully written speeches to marvel at.

Trump isn't latching onto any plain-spoken brilliance. He's just pushing the envelope in surprising ways, on plain-spoken obnoxiousness.

Livermoron said...

So people who support open borders are mad when those 'undocumented workers' actually get jobs? Or are you only mad when they get jobs from Republicans?

dustbunny said...

I can see Trump using Palin to peel off enoughCruz supportersto win Iowa. it seems like the kind of cynical move old Joe Kennedy would have embraced. But if it isn't cynical and Trump really admires Palin enough to seriously consider her for a post in his administration, then I think this will boomerang on him.
I am somewhat intrigued that Althouse is looking at Palin not as a joke but as an interesting character. I'm beginning to feel we are all mice in an experiment the Professor is running.

Chuck said...

"...if you find that manner of speaking admirable..." is what I intended to write. Sorry for the typo.

cubanbob said...

garage mahal said...
"garage hated her speech it must have been pretty good."

Palin is a complete idiot. It's not anymore complicated than that. How could you listen to that endorsement and conclude otherwise? Cringeworthy, embarrassing word salad. And that nails-on-chalkboard voice.

1/20/16, 10:13 AM"

You should team up with Amanda and do a comedy act for this blog. The only question would be who would take the role of the straight man?

Hillary! For prison! 2016. Now there is a candidate the brilliant set can vote for.

jr565 said...

exhelodrv wrote:|
"ompare what she said during the 2008 campaign to what Obama said, and see who was more accurate."

Compare Palin in 2008 to Palin today and see who is more accurate. Yes, lets compare her stances in 2008 to now. She may have been right then, but is she right now?

jr565 said...

Paul snively wrote:
But yeah, I get the impression a lot of people who think "Trump is a New York crony capitalist" underestimate the extent to which that isn't core to his identity, but just a function of his circumstances.

And maybe his "Tough on immigration stance" is similarly just a function of his circumstances. Maybe, Palins limited govt stance was similarly just a function of her circumstances.

Not sure those are ringing endorsements. But I dont expect Trump supporters to delve too deeply into why they support him.

cubanbob said...

Blogger CWJ said...
Althouse wrote -

"Maybe "compassion" is a hard word for righties to say."

Righties know the difference between compulsion and compassion. Paying taxes to support other people tends to drive the lesson home.

Gusty Winds said...

It's like having Superman and Wonder Woman on the same stage sticking it to the establishment.

jr565 said...

If you donate money to put Tea Partiers in office I'd consider you a Tea Partier. If you put money into campaigns that put democrats in office so they can pass Obamacare, what should I consider you?
If a republican said he was a tea partier but put all his money into democratic coffers, would they think he was a tea partier or would they see through the ruse?

If you are a Tea partier and you endorse a person who funded the people who put Obamacare into place, and that person THEN says we need to do away with Obamacare and replace it with universal care and you don't immediately run away screaming, should I still consider you a Tea Partier?

jr565 said...

Gusty Winds wrote:
It's like having Superman and Wonder Woman on the same stage sticking it to the establishment

No its more like Lex Luthor and Evil Supergirl.

ObeliskToucher said...

"Look at the vivid words: "bloating," "suck off," "lousy," "gut." I know the "suck off" — "suck off of" — refers to breastfeeding, but on an emotional level where the concrete images swirl together, that crony capitalist she's talking about looks a louse-ridden man with bloated gut getting a blow job."

Or this might (more likely) be referencing a blood-sucking, disease-carrying parasite/pest like the mosquito, vampire bat, or an actual vampire (in descending order of likelihood).

Hagar said...

Palin's style usually is more convoluted and she has her own way with words, but if you take the trouble to sort out what she actually said, she was right on target, or at least a lot closer than those who ridicule her "ignorant" statements.
Remember her visit in Boston? The MSM was all over her for not knowing "The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere," but that is a poem by Longfellow, not history, and Palin had the history right in her own way.

There is a bit of similarity to Trump in that what they actually say is not what the MSM hear, or pretend to hear, and certainly is not what they report, but Trump's language is much more indistinct than Palin's. A negotiator, he hardly ever makes a statement so positive that he could not back off from it, if needed. That has improved somewhat as his campaign has taken hold and now looks to be very real, which I do not know if he had really expected when he started it.
However, I think he is really genuinely unhappy over what this administration has done to this country and wants to repair the damage and set it straight.

jr565 said...

From the evil Supergirl story line:
"With an upgraded, multi-colored kryptonite battle suit, Lex Luthor utilized the Black Kryptonite energy to corrupt Supergirl and turn her to his cause. But instead of corrupting her, he ended up creating an alternate, darker version of Supergirl. Believing she was sent to earth to kill Superman, Supergirl 2.0 went on a rampage, taking out anyone who stood in her way. Possessing all the powers the good Supergirl has, it took everything the Justice League had to stop her. She managed to take out Black Canary, Hawkman, and the Flash before facing off against the Big 3. It wasn’t until Wonder Woman caught both versions of SG in her lasso, merging them back into one, that her destructive reign ended."

Sounds about right.

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rhhardin said...

"Dierdre Imus said Palin has an annoying voice."

One more exhibit in the endless trial of the question whether women hate women.


The humor, perhaps lost if you don't follow Imus, is that Dierdre has the most annoying voice. She's always shouting about her mother jones diet and vaccination necessities.

Thurber noticed the hatred of women by women thing, though.

``Another spectacle that depresses the male and makes him fear women, and therefore hate them, is that of a woman looking another woman up and down, to see what she is wearing. The cold, flat look that comes into a woman's eyes when she does this, the swift coarsening of her countenance, and the immedaite evaporation from it of all humane quality make the male shudder. He is likely to go into his stateroom or his den or his private office and lock himself in for hours. I know one man who surprised that look in his wife's eyes and never afterward would let her come near him. If she started toward him, he would dodge behind a table or a sofa, as if he were engaging in some unholy game of tag. That look, I believe, is one reason men disappear, and turn up in Tahiti or the Arctic or the United States Navy.''

- "The Case against Women"

Hagar said...

Incidentally, jr, Trump is real estate developer, not a contractor.

jr565 said...

If your choice is Sharon Angle or Harry Reid, and your money goes to Harry Reid, you are neither a tea partier OR a republican. The money that went to Harry Reid was Trumps.
Why are Tea Partiers thinking they are sticking it to the system. Trump was the guy financing your enemies.
Idiots.

jr565 said...

Note I'm merely commenting on Tea Partiers who are now Trump supporters. If you were never for the Tea Party but are now for Trump then more power to you.

Oso Negro said...

jr - Get a clue - Tea Party does not = Trump

Kirby Olson said...

He's far simpler than Palin. I think that's part of his popularity. His sentences are incredibly easy to understand. He doesn't hedge his speech, and it's usually one noun and one verb, and just a bit slangy and comical. Asked if he ever cries:

"I don't go around crying all the time."

AllenS said...

I'm picturing jr frothing at the mouth.

jr565 said...

Sharron Angle is the Tea Partier taking on the establishment Repubs. The Tea Party hates the establishment repubs for being for big govt. Yet when she was taking on the democrat Trump was paying for Reids campaign.
Do Trumpettes not have a problem with that? Should he not have answer why a) he wasnt supporting the Tea Party candidate agasint the dem and b) why he would donate money to Harry Reid's campaign? and c) if you are a Tea Partier, why would you be so made if establishment republicans would go against Sharon Angle when your presidential nominee did so too?
I'd think that would align you with establishment repubicans AND democrats.

I can't unknow that Trump was a democrat only a few years ago, and contributed heavily to all the campaigns of the people that brought us Obamacare. I just dont get why its suddenly a good idea to make that same guy the head of the party or the guy that will carry the republican banner.

jr565 said...

Oso Negro wrote:
jr - Get a clue - Tea Party does not = Trump

BUt Sarah Palin was Tea Party. And she just endorsed Trump. That's what we're talking about because she just did so.
And, I did make that distinction because I realize not every tea partier is going for Trump. A lot of them are though. Some of the same people on these boards who were prevoiusly railing against obama and the establishment repubs for backing big govt and not standing by principles are now backing Trump.

jr565 said...

AllenS wrote:
I'm picturing jr frothing at the mouth.

And I'm picturing you drooling saying "My brain hurts!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evlrs5Bi_6E) when asked to address inconsistencies in supporting Trump. What you picture as me frothing at the mouth is me simply pointing out that Trump said x, y, and z. and that such statements are really problematic.
I notice you dont' tell me I'm wrong since I use his actual quotes. You just dont want anyone to address it because, maybe, its uncomfortable to be told you are supporting a big govt democrat.
I opposed Obama because he was a big govt socialist. Its not better just because the guy who is professing it is playing a republican this week.

Brando said...

"BUt Sarah Palin was Tea Party. And she just endorsed Trump."

Sarah Palin was not so much "tea party" as she was pure attention-grabbing opportunism. She is part of a new breed of "conservative" that is really more about cashing in and making a name than accomplishing anything. In that sense, it is perfectly understandable she would back Trump, who has more in common with her than anyone else.

Ted Cruz's mistake was trying too much to be a consistent, true believer. When was Sarah Palin ever about that? That's not her style.

This is shaping up to be the biggest election about nothing. We're in for a fun four years after this.

Matt said...

Both Trump and Palin use short, choppy phrases and sentences. Trump sometimes uses short phrases without ever completing a sentence. Palin seems to complete her sentences, eventually.

If you read trial or deposition transcripts, this is how many people speak. It's kind of how Obama speaks in his press conferences, although Obama seems to be a little more long-winded than Trump or Palin.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"suck off of" — refers to breastfeeding, but on an emotional level where the concrete images swirl together, that crony capitalist she's talking about looks a louse-ridden man with bloated gut getting a blow job.

I disagree, I think the suck off of phrase evokes a vampire or leach image. The crony capitalist is a leach on the body public.

AllenS said...

When in Rome, do as the Romans

Remember that line, jr? Perhaps as a businessman, Trump who lives in NYC, thought that if he didn't identify with the "powers that be" (which means the Democrats that run NYC), he wouldn't get much accomplished. He's not stupid, and knows which people to be nice to. Now that he's made his money, maybe he doesn't have to act like that anymore.

jr565 said...

AllenS wrote:
Remember that line, jr? Perhaps as a businessman, Trump who lives in NYC, thought that if he didn't identify with the "powers that be" (which means the Democrats that run NYC), he wouldn't get much accomplished

Harry Reid is not in NY; why donate to his campaign?

jr565 said...

"Now that he's made his money, maybe he doesn't have to act like that anymore."

He had plenty of money. THe difference is he is running for president now as a republican. So doesn't have to act like a democrat any more. So now he's acting like a republican.

jr565 said...

Here's what he said in 2004:
he told CNN that he simply didn't see himself as a Republican.

"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," Trump told Wolf Blitzer at the time. "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans."

interesting. THat explains why he put money into the coffers of democrats when Obama took control. And then went on to pass Obamacare.
Which he now says is an abomination. But he wants to replace with universal health care.
In what way is he a republican?

machine said...

"her mama grizzly attitude drives people like machine and garage crazy."

actually, I wish she would run for President.

every time she gets attention, another anti-gop voter is born.

and btw, she does not have a true grizzly attitude...grizzlies finish the job.

traditionalguy said...

Captain Trump stood aside and let Sgt. Major Palin be his equal on that podium.

That's what most Talking Heads noted, saying that he was marginalized by her and was helpless. Such nonsense.

Trump treated Palin as the fighting heroine of the GOP wars that she has been. I am surprised that he did not pin a medal on her.

Good job, Mr Trump. That is a leader in action. And Palin knows a real leader from the usual pols telling you whatever you want to hear. Therefore she dumped Cruz and joined up with The Donald.

jr565 said...

He also gave money to Rahm Emmanuel so he could become mayor of Chicago. How did that work out?
That is giving money to a specific campaign. Shouldnt he have to answer for why?

If I gave money to Obama's campaign and then ran as a Tea Partier you might say "Huh?"
The Kock brothers give to causes they believe in, wich are generally libertarian. Soros gives to causes he believes in which are leftist. Trump tries to elect democrat mayors in chicago, because... HE IS A DEMOCRAT.

jr565 said...

"Trump treated Palin as the fighting heroine of the GOP wars that she has been. I am surprised that he did not pin a medal on her.

Good job, Mr Trump. That is a leader in action. And Palin knows a real leader from the usual pols telling you whatever you want to hear. Therefore she dumped Cruz and joined up with The Donald."

THis is SO stupid. So lets not look at what either of them profess to stand for. Lets instead say he's a great leader because HE LETS THE PERSON WHO WILL ENDORSE HIM STAND UP AND ENDORSE HIM. Which leader doesn't do that?
I"m sure when someone endorsed Obama he stood on the side and let that person talk. Since after all, its an endorsement for HIM. I'm not aware of anyone who gets an endorsement but then jumps up in the middle of it and interrupts the person who is praising them or doesn't let them speak on the stage.
Who has EVER done that?

M Jordan said...

Garage mahal says Sarah Palin is a complete moron. How can a person be a complete moron who once lived in a governor's mansion?

Answer: from the vantage point of garage living, everyone is a complete moron. The Beatles nailed it with "Fool On the Hill."

RLB_IV said...

“Harry Reid is not in NY; why donate to his campaign?”

Trump has vested interests in Las Vegas.

cubanbob said...

RLB_IV said...
“Harry Reid is not in NY; why donate to his campaign?”

Trump has vested interests in Las Vegas.

1/20/16, 12:14 PM"

Astute observation. Sometimes the obvious goes unnoticed. I have had my reservations about Trump not be able to get a gaming license in Nevada, the thought being maybe he just wasn't quite clean enough then you reminded me that Senator Geary a/k/a Harry Reid is the senior Senator from Las Vegas so now I'm wondering if Trump wasn't successful in negotiating a deal with Senator Geary M(Mafia) Las Vegas.

RLB_IV said...

“He also gave money to Rahm Emmanuel so he could become mayor of Chicago.”
Trump has vested interests in Chicago. It’s really very simple developers grease the palms of politicians because it’s good business. Whoever is elected president will not have much of an effect on my life so I really don’t have a dog in this fight.

For now I’m just enjoying the show with all the exploding heads and
the turbid angst.

jr565 said...

Palin asked that Rahm Emmanuel be fired as chief of staff in 2008 for comments he made about retarded people (and because she despised him considering he was in the inner Obama circle pushing Obama's agenda)

Rahm then went on to help push Obamacare with his brother. AFTER this he left the white house and decided to run for mayor. who was one of his bigger contributors? Donald Trump.

Even Bernie Sanders is distancing himself from Rahm at this point since he is such a corrupt politician. And he just so happens to have down played a police shooting of an unarmed black suspect, so that he could get reelected.

Rahm is there in part because Trump helped put him there. If Trump was so offended at Obamacare why would he REWARD Rahm with money so he could spread his campaign to the streets of chicago?

Does that really strike you as someone who is remotely a conservative? You passed Obamacare. But let me fund your campaign, in a town I dont live in, over other candidates so you can be mayor. Hmmmm... doesn't pass the smell test.

I'd like hear Palin adddress the fact that Trump donated 50,000 grand to the Rahm emmanuel campaign AFTER obamcare passed and after he left the white house. And why she's endorsing that guy, over the guy who stood with her when she attacked Obamacare.

AllenS said...

I like what Trump is saying. Nothing more than that. If he was running as a Democrat, I would vote for him.

Kieth Nissen said...

I am surprised to read the text of Palin's speech and find that, yes, it does make an political points. Listening to her was entirely different; the words sounded shrill, her delivery was overwrought and rushed. I thought Trump looked mildly embarrassed.

jr565 said...

RLBIV wrote:
“He also gave money to Rahm Emmanuel so he could become mayor of Chicago.”
Trump has vested interests in Chicago. It’s really very simple developers grease the palms of politicians because it’s good business. Whoever is elected president will not have much of an effect on my life so I really don’t have a dog in this fight.

And yet the establishment repubs are corrupt and must be fought against because they allow govt to grow and allow democrats to have their way.
Well, maybe they too are just having their palms greased. That's the cost of doing business. So why then hold them to account if they are doing the democrats bidding?

jr565 said...

AllenS wrote:
I like what Trump is saying. Nothing more than that. If he was running as a Democrat, I would vote for him.

what specifically do you like?

AllenS said...

jr, have you ever tried to put up a new building? Around here (WI), you have to get a Land Use Permit from the county first ($150), then you need a building permit from someone else ($50) before you start. Try and tell one of then to get fucked because you believe in smaller government and see where it gets you.

eric said...

Blogger jr565 said..

what specifically do you like?


You didn't ask me but I'll answer anyway.

I like how he kicks PC BS in the nuts. Like when he says he will make America great and mocks Obama for his apology tours. Trump is a proud America . I like how he says we will be saying Christmas again.

I like his immigration proposals. I like how is the opposite of almost everyone else. They come from the, yeah, Amnesty, but also enforcement mindset. Whereas for Trump, its enforcement and Amnesty? Oh, maybe, but only after they've been deported. Har!

I like that he will reverse Obama's healthcare plan that is hurting a lot of people. I don't care too much about his socialized medicine, because he won't be writing the law, just signing it. And since he won't veto a repeal, I'm glad.

I like his tax proposals. I don't like his one time tax on the rich stuff, but I don't see that as ever getting past congress.

I like his love and respect for the military.

traditionalguy said...

Jr 565...In the words of a great Minnesota singer, " Don't criticize what you can't understand."

The times they are a changing all around the Curz Cult of Conservative Purity. Nobody buys that stuff anymore.

It's best that you get out while you can still think for yourself. Burn the Cruz propaganda and be a free man.

jr565 said...

AllenS wrote:
jr, have you ever tried to put up a new building? Around here (WI), you have to get a Land Use Permit from the county first ($150), then you need a building permit from someone else ($50) before you start. Try and tell one of then to get fucked because you believe in smaller government and see where it gets you.

Trump is not the only republican who would say there should be less regulations so that putting up a building wasnt so expensive and time consuming. its democrats that demanded all those additional regulations. And, until he decided to run for president HE WAS FUNDING THOSE DEMOCRATS.
You get what you pay for.

He's the only guy paying money into campaigns who his followers think is somehow not paying for things in his interest. Why do you think he funded democrats? When the Koch brothers pay for libertarian causes does anyone think that they are doing so for reasons other than that is what they want to be passed?
From 2006 -2010 Trump was funding Democrats so they could pass the Obama adminstrations goals. That's what he wanted. Hes not a republican and he's not your friend.

And he has some gall telling people that obamacare is now an abomination. When it was being proposed it was done so by people whos campaigns he donated to. and not the people trying to fight it. Like the Tea Party.

Amanda said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Titus said...

I watched her speech. The room was predominately men. I think they all got hard when she said sucking off. I know I would of if I was straight.

Her outfit was hideous, but she still looks good.

I would recommend she wear form fitting tops that show off her tits more-the fuck me boots and tight black pants.

Amanda said...

Whatever cogent words and ideas she was trying to impart were offset by her clownish and outlandish mannerisms. If this is what Right Wing America sounds like, they are even nuttier than I previously thought. The growling voice, the screeching voice, the hokey hayseed mannerisms....reminds me of an evangelical on crack.

RLB_IV said...

@jr565
“…Well, maybe they too are just having their palms greased. That's the cost of doing business. So why then hold them to account if they are doing the democrats bidding?”


The answer for you is simple. Don’t vote for Trump or any republican who can’t measure up to your level of purity. Now wasn’t that easy.

jr565 said...

Interesting you mention Wisconsin:
Trump criticized Scott Walker for not raising taxes:
TRUMP: I’m not worried because the state is really in trouble. I mean it’s a fantastic place, and I love the people of Wisconsin, but if you look at what’s going to happen, there’s a $2.2 billion deficit. They were supposed to have a surplus of a billion… He’s stopped a lot of work because he doesn’t want to raise taxes, so instead of raising taxes he’s borrowing… and the state is thirty eight, number thirty eight out of the states, ranked number 38. That’s not very good."

So, Trump is now in favor of raising taxes AND universal health care. Noted.

jr565 said...

RLB_IV wrote:
The answer for you is simple. Don’t vote for Trump or any republican who can’t measure up to your level of purity. Now wasn’t that easy.

that was the whole pitch of the tea party. Did you have a problem with them?

jr565 said...

RLB_IV,
and really now, how deep is my level of purity for republicanism? . I'm simply not wanting the "republican" to be pushing universal health care. I'm such an absolutist. My god!

People said Romney wasn't a real republican for a hell of a lot less. People say Rubio is not sufficiently republican because he was on the gang of 8 and tried to get comprehenisve immigration reform passed. That's a bridge too far.

But universal health care... no big whoop.

jr565 said...

RLB_IV what standard are YOU holding republicans to? or are you even a republican at all? Elaborate on why Trump is such a great conservative or Republican. Since he is, running as one, after all. What am I getting for my vote?

Freder Frederson said...

Speaking for Trump, not as Trump's running mate, she's able to be herself, let her Palinosity flow, and it's great stuff.

It's not great stuff, it is a string of nonsense that while passionate, does not provide a coherent vision of anything. I find it especially troubling that someone whose profession requires careful and precise use of language finds her speech to be "great stuff.

Michael K said...

Boy, there are a lot of spittle flecked keyboards around here today !

"I am somewhat intrigued that Althouse is looking at Palin not as a joke but as an interesting character."

Maybe she is looking at her as I look at her. She started in politics at the local level and worked her way up, contrary to people like Paul Ryan and Trent Lott who never held a job.

I have known people like her in local politics and she did the right things.

machine keeps trying to play the lefty theme about her resigning and doesn't even know that Alaska law was changed to correct the error after she left office. It's all they have.

I am not yet a Trump supporter but if I keep seeing a bunch of establishment bootlicker assholes making stupid noises, I might get more interested.

National Review is now in the hate Trump band and it fits well with the firing of Derbyshire. He was right about BLM before BLM had gotten out of George Soros' "out basket." Trump is right about the two big issues which dominate American politics right now. Illegal immigration and mass immigration by Muslims who do not share our values.

If he can't get that fixed, we are looking at a revolution.

cubanbob said...

Amanda said...
Whatever cogent words and ideas she was trying to impart were offset by her clownish and outlandish mannerisms. If this is what Right Wing America sounds like, they are even nuttier than I previously thought. The growling voice, the screeching voice, the hokey hayseed mannerisms....reminds me of an evangelical on crack.

1/20/16, 12:59 PM"

Us rubes don't feel no ways tired.

Michael K said...

" it is a string of nonsense "

From Frederson, this means she is right about most of it.

cubanbob said...

Freder Frederson said...
Speaking for Trump, not as Trump's running mate, she's able to be herself, let her Palinosity flow, and it's great stuff.

It's not great stuff, it is a string of nonsense that while passionate, does not provide a coherent vision of anything. I find it especially troubling that someone whose profession requires careful and precise use of language finds her speech to be "great stuff.

1/20/16, 1:10 PM"

Let's see how well Hillary can parse without being charged with lying to the FBI. And speaking of passionate nonsense well there is that brilliant Communist orator who is running as a Democrat.

Amanda said...

Oh dear God, she's talking again.

Damn hypocrite. She talks about PTSD in one breath yet in the other breath raves about sending troops to "kick ISIS's ass". She doesn't think that our troops will then be coming home missing limbs, with massive injuries and MORE PTSD? What an ignoramous.

Amanda said...

If she is so concerned about her son with PTSD, why isn't she at home with him instead of "stumping for Trump". Shows where her priorities are. Again what a damn hypocrite.

jr565 said...

RLB here's a standard. if you have a chance to fund republicans or democrats in the House and you fund the democrats, and they then pass Obamaacare, maybe that's how we should judge you. As someone who put his money where his mouth is. Dont then try to fleece me and say you are a great republican.
Donald had the chance to not fund Nancy Pelosi, but he chose otherwise. I'll remember that when it comes time to vote for him.

grackle said...

I'm beginning to feel we are all mice in an experiment the Professor is running.

You got the part about who is running the experiment all wrong. Trump is running the experiment – our hostess is only posting the results.

Palin and Trump have this in common: They make the lefties, the pundits, the MSM and the eGOP go crazy. This is because they are frightened to their core by anyone with charisma who is off the reservation. What will they do after we elect a POTUS that is not PC? How will they react after President Trump is sworn in and, in effect, declares PC dead simply by his presence in the oval office?

This is going to be so much fun to watch. The squealing, the moans, the exploding heads and the whining. They’ll go through the usual stages of grief – mourning the loss of their beloved PC.

First, denial. They’ll say things like, “I cannot believe this is happening,” or, “This is NOT happening.” “Impossible!” “A nightmare!”

Second, anger. He’s Hitler, he’s Mussolini, he’s a secret Democrat, he’s a secret Republican, he’s a racist, misogynist, etc.

Third, bargaining. This is what Roger Ailes did when he begged Trump to come back on Fox after Trump made sure that Fox dipped in the ratings in those vital Sunday morning timeslots. One Sunday was all it took for Trump to win. To his credit at least Ailes had the good sense to know when he was beaten. Ratings are VERY serious business to the Ailes of the world.

Fourth, Depression. The grim realization that the crutch/weapon/tool of political correctness has been sucked into a political black hole, perhaps never to return.

Fifth, acceptance. They’ll learn to live with it. It will be the new norm with which they must learn to live. They must then try to write coherent opinion pieces in a world where PC is missing. But that will eliminate half their vocabulary. In resisting this new norm, at first many will want to maintain PC as it was before PC died. In time, through bits and pieces of acceptance, however, they’ll see that they cannot maintain PC intact. Political discourse has been forever changed and they must readjust.

http://tinyurl.com/nzovrq

Michael K said...

Amanda, I suggest you put your fingers in your ears and close your eyes. Think of Hillary and medicate.

Amanda said...

Maybe she failed to notice that Trump isn't in favor of sending troops over to "kick ISIS's ass". He said the Russians should do it. He said going into Iraq was a yuuuuggge mistake. Looks like Palin isn't informed about Trump's ideas regarding foreign wars.

jr565 said...

Michael K wrote:
National Review is now in the hate Trump band and it fits well with the firing of Derbyshire. He was right about BLM before BLM had gotten out of George Soros' "out basket." Trump is right about the two big issues which dominate American politics right now. Illegal immigration and mass immigration by Muslims who do not share our values.

But so are other republicans. Mark Rubio, for example, made a very reasoned argument why Obama's push to take in refugees was a terrible idea. Trump does not hold a monopoly on anti illegal immigration positions. Even though he likes to take credit for it.

Amanda said...

I'll be voting for Sanders, Michael. Get your hand off your dick, I know Palin makes you excited, that's sort of cute at your age.

eric said...

Blogger Amanda said...
If she is so concerned about her son with PTSD, why isn't she at home with him instead of "stumping for Trump". Shows where her priorities are. Again what a damn hypocrite.


Two take aways from this.

1) Women, you don't care about your sons if you work instead of stay at home and take care of them.

2) If you're a grown man with PTSD, you need your mommy to stay home and take care of you, otherwise, she isn't concerned about you.

jr565 said...

Amanda wrote:
Maybe she failed to notice that Trump isn't in favor of sending troops over to "kick ISIS's ass". He said the Russians should do it. He said going into Iraq was a yuuuuggge mistake. Looks like Palin isn't informed about Trump's ideas regarding foreign wars.


Listen, I'm not one to agree with Amanda. But this is exactly right. I dont get how Palin is coming to the conclusion that Trump thinks we will send troops in to Deal with ISIS? He's now arguing that we wont.
of course this is the TRump of today. when it was Libya he was saying we NEEDED to send in troops becuase people were dying, damn it! Of course, since no one actually holds him to his words, he can argue two positions and no one calls him on his bull.
But yes, if Palin thinks that holding ISIS to account militarily is the right course of actions, Trump is not her guy. Someone like Rubio might be her guy.

Amanda said...

Eric,
She isn't working to make a wage to keep a roof over her and her family's head. She is trying to hitch her wagon to who she thinks is a star, for self gratification.

jr565 said...

And Michael K, I liked Sarah Palin from a few years ago. I'm baffled by where she is coming from today. Amanda hates her because she is a lefty. Im starting to dislike her beause I'm seeing she isn't credible.

eric said...

So, Trump is now in favor of raising taxes AND universal health care. Noted.

His tax plan lowers taxes. But, I can see you confusion. Trump plays off the crowd. Since Wisconsin is a left state, Walker is criticized from the left for not raising taxes. Trump wanted Walker out of the race. This is how he does it. It's not Trump saying raising taxes is right. It's Trump saying, this is what will hurt peoples perceptions of Walker.

Amanda said...

It's interesting how Trump followers simply dismiss conflicting statements made by Trump and those who support Trump. It's as if whatever Trump says, no matter how far from true conservative values he actually veers, they will excuse it because the vile things he says makes them so happy and excited, they forgive him his conservative trespasses. My conclusion is you people are fucking NUTS and hypocrites.

Paddy O said...

"One more exhibit in the endless trial of the question whether women hate women."

I was recently part of a conversation on student evaluations led by a senior faculty/administrator. Lots of talk about how to best use them given they're not a great overall tool. They do give insight and show trends. Mentioned how there's clear bias in evaluations in general. White will get a higher rating. Tall will get a higher rating. Man will get a higher rating. The last point is especially interesting, we were told, because studies show it's not men rating women lower. It's the women students. Women consistently rate other women lower on evaluations.

jr565 said...

eric wrote:
His tax plan lowers taxes. But, I can see you confusion. Trump plays off the crowd. Since Wisconsin is a left state, Walker is criticized from the left for not raising taxes. Trump wanted Walker out of the race. This is how he does it. It's not Trump saying raising taxes is right. It's Trump saying, this is what will hurt peoples perceptions of Walker.

Scott Walker is to the left? But the guy who funded the democrats in the house so they could pass Obamacare isn't. Great logic there.

jr565 said...

amanda wrote:
It's interesting how Trump followers simply dismiss conflicting statements made by Trump and those who support Trump. It's as if whatever Trump says, no matter how far from true conservative values he actually veers, they will excuse it because the vile things he says makes them so happy and excited, they forgive him his conservative trespasses. My conclusion is you people are fucking NUTS and hypocrites.

ANd this was exactly what occurred with Obama too. Don't think that the libs aren't the self same hypocrites.

jr565 said...

Trump wrote:
His tax plan lowers taxes. But, I can see you confusion. Trump plays off the crowd. Since Wisconsin is a left state, Walker is criticized from the left for not raising taxes. Trump wanted Walker out of the race. This is how he does it. It's not Trump saying raising taxes is right. It's Trump saying, this is what will hurt peoples perceptions of Walker.

IN fact Trump was calling for raising of taxes. Thats how he prosposes to fund universal health care. Tax the rich fat cats. He makes the same arguments Occcupy wall street makes about the evil wall streeters. I half expect him to say "They need to pay their fair share" like Sanders.
He's a democrat and a populist through and through. he just happens to be running as a repub so is counting on peopel who might vote for him not looking deeply into what he says. And so far, they aren't.

Michael K said...

" Trump does not hold a monopoly on anti illegal immigration positions. Even though he likes to take credit for it."

And Rubio is a hero against illegal immigration ? Wow !

" I liked Sarah Palin from a few years ago. I'm baffled by where she is coming from today."

She is another populist like Trump. I like her because she has done retail politics, which neither McCain nor any of the "consultants" know anything about. I know people like her. I spent 30 years working in California politics for the medical associations. I read every medicine related bill in California for 25 years. I know a little bit about small scale politics which is where the real stuff happens.

She has seen the ruling class in the GOP and, as a woman once said, she has "felt them cutting her throat."

She know what phonies and rent seekers they are. She might have been a Senator from Alaska but the war on her by the left closed that door because a lot of Alaska politics is Democrat. She was a cross over, kind of like Trump.

They have a lot in common. They sure have the same enemies, as we can see with Amanda. The left sure is into masturbation fantasies, aren't they?

The fury directed at them just reminds me that when you are taking flak you are over the target.

Amanda said...

And Eric, if you're a grown man with PTSD you most definitely NEED your family. He doesn't appear to have a good relationship with his ex wife or his current girlfriend, he obviously needs all the help and support he can get.

jr565 said...

Heres' the huffington post saying how Trump makes a lot of sense on taxes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-resnick/donald-trump-tax-increasi_b_8105418.html

Trump wants to tax the "rich fat cats"

Here is Paul Krugman on Trumps calls for higher taxes on the rich fat cats:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/07/opinion/paul-krugman-trump-is-right-on-economics.html?_r=0
Because He is arguing the same thing as Krugman. Krugman, the Huffington post, universal Health care. If I wanted Obama I'd vote for the guy.

jr565 said...

mIchael K wrote:
She is another populist like Trump. I like her because she has done retail politics, which neither McCain nor any of the "consultants" know anything about. I know people like her. I spent 30 years working in California politics for the medical as

I liked her because she made arguments about huge govt, and tried to get republicans in who WEREN'T assisting Obama in expanding govt programs.
THat Sarah Palin is dead, apparently.
OR maybe she thinks big govt programs are only bad when Obama is proposing them.

William Chadwick said...

Expect more of the Palin-is-stupid party line from the "liberal" Hive. This, from "geniuses" who think that statist economics actually produce prosperity, the Law of Supply and Demand can be repealed, and that the more power we cede to Big Brother, the happier and better off we'll all be.

jr565 said...

at the very least Trump is going to get into office and then immediately call for an increase on taxes against the rich fact cats. And will be at war with the republicans. ANd be supported by the democrats who are espousing the same thing.
Wont that be nice.
The republicans are again going to be viewed as the party of No and demonized for not increasing govt more. Or not raising taxes MORE. Thank you donald Trump. Thank you sarah palin.

jr565 said...

William Chadwick wrote:
Expect more of the Palin-is-stupid party line from the "liberal" Hive.

I wasnt' saying she was stupid yesterday. Only today. And if you ask why its because she seems to have been coopted by liberals. while at the same time still suggesting that she is for small govt. that is pure stupidity.
what happened to sarah palin of a year ago?

garage mahal said...

Palin can't be an idiot! The people who think she is don't think trickle down economics works! LOL

AllenS said...

Michael K said...
The fury directed at them just reminds me that when you are taking flak you are over the target.

Right on, brother.

grackle said...

Mark Rubio, for example, made a very reasoned argument why Obama's push to take in refugees was a terrible idea. Trump does not hold a monopoly on anti illegal immigration positions. Even though he likes to take credit for it.

Jesus H. Christ! Doesn’t anyone know how to Google anymore!

Washington (CNN) Marco Rubio slammed GOP front-runner Donald Trump's proposition to ban all Muslims from entering the United States on Thursday, reiterating previous comments he made calling the plan "unconstitutional."

http://tinyurl.com/zt2gdzl

I think every GOP candidate(except perhaps Cruz) at first severely criticized Trump for his stance on Muslim refugees. Now, of course, they are acquiescing to Trump’s plan. Reality is a bitch.

IN fact Trump was calling for raising of taxes.

Readers, if you want to know what Trump’s tax plan is then head on over to the Trump website. It’s all there in black and white and unfiltered by Trump opponents. Get it from the horse’s mouth.

http://tinyurl.com/o5tganu

William Chadwick said...

No one believes in "trickle down" economics, garage. That's a label memebers of the Stupid Left came up with for a free market. (No wonder garage uses it!) Because in their mind wealth is produced by the State and flows down to us from Big Brother's magic cornucopia!

Beaumont said...

I cannot listen to Trump, Palin, Cruz, and Clinton for 10 seconds before my skin crawls and I feel slimed, played, and bullshitted by these manipulative narcissistic hypocritical know-it-alls. IDK why but about the only one I can stomach for any length of time is Sanders.

Tom said...

Is Sarah Palin the Rosanne Barr of the right? I mean, yeah, this sounds exactly like Roseanne taking on her old sitcom. Roseanne credits herself with Bill Clinton's victory because she had the #1 show and spoke about how the Bush economy was crushing workin' people. Well, here's Sarah and she's a #1 show in the minds of a lot of right leaning Americans and she's talking about the same kinda stuff. And I think it's effective.

Jonathan Graehl said...

Those excerpts *are* effective communication. The critics could stand up in front of the same audience and do better? Please. These sophisticated speakers would have the crowd wondering which is the North end of the compass needle.

Palin's lines are so good that I have a hard time believing the high points are not prepared. Maybe Trump or Trump's verbal-superweapon-scientists have provided some cue cards, or maybe this is simply a style she's always had - surprisingly competent manipulation (surprising to me - I laughed to the Daily Show caricatures back in my younger days).

jr565 said...

Grackle Rubio was talking about Syrian refugees. Not ALL MUSLIMS trying to come into the country. It's a subtelty trump and his supporters might miss. Though really it's not that subtle.
So yes Rubio made the point that we can't vet all the Syrian refugees so it's silly to say we can except thousands of them in. By same token banning any and all Muslims is a bit extreme, not realistic and snot what most people who are looking at the problem seriously would suggest as an alternative.
Since of course not all Muslims are terrorists.

Brando said...

It's time to sit back and enjoy the circus. No matter what happens, we'll have entertainment. And a very large number of very disappointed people next year--both those whose candidates lost, and those whose candidate won and flopped against reality once in office. The Year of the Primal Scream continues.

Palin jumping into this carnival is just the icing on the cake. The fact that this fraud still has fans just shows you can make a hell of a living underestimating the people. A few more failed TV shows and she'll be hawking diet pills.

If Cruz feels betrayed, he should be more ashamed with himself for thinking for a minute this woman was about anything other than the glitz and show.

Brando said...

"Since of course not all Muslims are terrorists."

Whoa! Keep that nuance out of this discussion! Next you're going to say that not all people who believe in God are terrorists.

Matt said...

"Palin... This is what America sounds like." How is that a good thing? Shouldn't politicians be BETTER than us? Shouldn't the people who run for office and who we vote for be SMARTER, and more capable of LEADING than the average American? I don't want an average American holding a major office and leading us. Left, Right or Moderate give me someone with skills to lead us somewhere better than where we are today. I don't see Trump doing that and I sure as he** don't see Palin in that roll.

grackle said...

Grackle Rubio was talking about Syrian refugees. Not ALL MUSLIMS trying to come into the country.

Readers, don’t we deserve a link to where Trump bans “all Muslims.” The reason why we don’t? Because it does not exist. This commentor makes a lot of statements about Trump but never provides the sources. Best case: Lazy, worst case: Ignorant.

jr565 said...

Grackle, heres a link:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/



and I provided full quotes from Donald where he says exadtly what I say he said.

eric said...

Blogger Amanda said...
And Eric, if you're a grown man with PTSD you most definitely NEED your family. He doesn't appear to have a good relationship with his ex wife or his current girlfriend, he obviously needs all the help and support he can get.

1/20/16, 1:47 PM


Help and support, absolutely.

His mommy staying home from work? Not so much.

It's odd that you think a mom who has a grown son with PTSD should stay at home and care for that grown son, or she doesn't care about him.

eric said...

Jr, this is a better link. Don't go through the MSM filter.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration

jr565 said...

Grackle, here's another one:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/07/donald-trump-calls-for-total-and-complete-shutdown-of-muslims-entering-the-united-states/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trump-muslims-5pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory



At a rally in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina on Monday evening, Trump pointed to the statement he released earlier in the day.

“Should I read you the statement?” he asked.

The crowd enthusiastically agreed that he should.

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on,,” he said, adding the word “hell" for emphasis this time.

Supporters erupted in applause.

Not just "Syrian refugees.

"Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski told the Associated Press that the ban would apply to "everybody," including both immigrants and tourists.
Not just refugees. TOURISTS.

Where would I get the impression that he meant all muslims from? Gee I dont know..

damikesc said...

Shouldn't the people who run for office and who we vote for be SMARTER, and more capable of LEADING than the average American?

Obama is allegedly quite intelligent and God knows he can't do shit right. So, nah, not that important.

The people who think she is don't think trickle down economics works!

Keynesian economics has worked WONDERS, hasn't it?

She may have been right then, but is she right now?

...she's not running for office now...

The growling voice, the screeching voice, the hokey hayseed mannerisms

Why, it's like a Democrat debate now.

People said Romney wasn't a real republican for a hell of a lot less. People say Rubio is not sufficiently republican because he was on the gang of 8 and tried to get comprehenisve immigration reform passed. That's a bridge too far.

He's also on board with the campus kangaroo court movement, co-sponsoring legislation with McCaskill supporting it.

If she is so concerned about her son with PTSD, why isn't she at home with him instead of "stumping for Trump".

DOESN'T SHE KNOW A WOMAN'S PLACE IS IN THE HOME!?!?!?!

She has a husband, you're aware. He can handle that for the day.

Looks like Palin isn't informed about Trump's ideas regarding foreign wars.

Two different people have two different views on things? Get the fuck outta town.

Note: This isn't a Democrat debate. Republicans have differing views on things.

She isn't working to make a wage to keep a roof over her and her family's head. She is trying to hitch her wagon to who she thinks is a star, for self gratification.

To reiterate, DOESN'T SHE FUCKING KNOW THE WOMAN'S PLACE IS IN THE HOME?!?!?!

Any excuse for Hillary's numerous public appearances when Chelsea was a child?

And Eric, if you're a grown man with PTSD you most definitely NEED your family.

She is married, you know. And it's a REAL marriage, not the sham that the current Dem frontrunner is a part of.

Alex said...

Palin sounded really shrill, unlistenable.

Brando said...

"He's also on board with the campus kangaroo court movement, co-sponsoring legislation with McCaskill supporting it."

The point stands, though--if Rubio et al are insufficiently conservative, then how is Trump acceptable? Trump fans are holding their guy to a much lower standard than they hold the candidates they loathe (call them "RINOs", "establishment" or whatever). Clearly this isn't about ideological tests, personal histories, or anything like that.

My best guess is that Trump fans like something about him that eludes others--something in the way he talks and acts that cannot be really explained (simply saying "he pisses off the right people"--well, that's true of lots of GOPers that don't get Trump's support; saying "he speaks his mind"--again, so does Kanye West, so it must be something else). I can't much figure out why so many on the Left stick by the Clintons either.

Rusty said...

I can have compassion, Althouse. But the state can't. Has to do with that charity thing.

Michael K said...

"OR maybe she thinks big govt programs are only bad when Obama is proposing them."

No, I think (I haven't asked her and neither have you) she thinks there are two existential crises going on,. One is illegal immigration and the other is importing hundreds of thousands of military age Muslim men who have not been "vetted" because to do so, we would have to use radical imams in mosques in the countries they came from.

Trump is a wild card but he is probably, I'm not signed on yet, going to take care of business in those two areas and then we will see. I am all in favor of Greg Abbot's Constitutional convention of states.

I do think Trump may lean toward authoritarian governance but I know the Democrats do.

I don't like his speaking style but the only people in the GOP race that I liked are not going to get anywhere.

We are down to poor choices. Cruz is second choice for me but I am leery of first term Senators.

Rubio has made some very bad choices with immigration and that abysmal McCaskill bill on campus "rape."

RLB_IV said...

jr565 said...
RLB_IV what standard are YOU holding republicans to?

None at all. As for Trump I like his act and watching how people react to it.

I’m old enough to remember when there were conservatives and liberals in both parties. As for me I’m an ex-democrat who generally votes republican these days. It’s time for you young people to guide the parties in the direction you desire. I’m retired and living a carefree life and I aim to keep it that way.

jr565 said...

RLB_IV I’m old enough to remember when there were conservatives and liberals in both parties. As for me I’m an ex-democrat who generally votes republican these days. It’s time for you young people to guide the parties in the direction you desire. I’m retired and living a carefree life and I aim to keep it that way.

there still are republicans and conservatives and liberals. Trump is not a conservative. Why would you generally vote Republican? is it their stance on small govt, abortion, defense, taxes? Or you just like the color red more than blue?

Kansas City said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kansas City said...

I generally am not impressed with Palin (largely because in interviews she does not seem substantive), but I agree this was an excellent [largely] extemporaneous speech. She naturally connected with normal people. It is hilarious that beltway liberals are so anti-Palin and separated from the real world that they cannot do anything but criticize/mock Palin.

damikesc said...

The point stands, though--if Rubio et al are insufficiently conservative, then how is Trump acceptable? Trump fans are holding their guy to a much lower standard than they hold the candidates they loathe (call them "RINOs", "establishment" or whatever). Clearly this isn't about ideological tests, personal histories, or anything like that.

For me, I don't expect a candidate to agree with me on everything (my wife doesn't. It's insane to expect a candidate to). So, it's all down to who can I tolerate. Rubio is on the low end of that spectrum. If he wins, I'll vote for him. But the campus rape thing and the immigration thing are major concerns.

Trump wants to soak the rich? Fine. They vote Democrat and rely on the GOP to protect them from their preferred candidates. Let them suffer for a while. Universal health care? I have no idea what Trump wants to do with it. It's a major concern.

Again, my preference is Cruz. I can vote for Trump. I can vote for Rubio. I can possibly vote for Christie and Paul. Kasich and Bush can suck a bag of dicks for all I care.

RLB_IV said...

jr565
Why would you generally vote Republican? I'm a rebel.
I live in California a one party state. One party to rule us all and in the darkness
bind us…..

Freder Frederson said...

No, I think (I haven't asked her and neither have you) she thinks there are two existential crises going on,. One is illegal immigration and the other is importing hundreds of thousands of military age Muslim men who have not been "vetted" because to do so, we would have to use radical imams in mosques in the countries they came from.

Who has suggested "importing" hundreds of thousands of military age Muslim men?

Michael K said...

"Who has suggested "importing" hundreds of thousands of military age Muslim men?"


http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-allows-80-000-muslim-immigrants-into-united-states

http://www.westernjournalism.com/muslim-immigration-u-s-staggering-evidence-obama-attempting-change-america/

Between 2010 and 2013, the Obama administration imported almost 300,000 new immigrants from Muslim nations — more immigrants than the U.S. let in from Central America and Mexico combined over that period…

You're welcome. That took 30 seconds.

Michael K said...

"I generally am not impressed with Palin (largely because in interviews she does not seem substantive),"

You are probably talking about the Katie Couric interview set up by traitor Nicole Wallace with absolutely no chance for Palin to get settled or practice.

Do you happen to remember when she said "Drill, baby, drill?"

That was when Obama said "we can't drill our way out of this."

Saint Croix said...

It's time to sit back and enjoy the circus. No matter what happens, we'll have entertainment.

Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."

Anglelyne said...

jr565: Trump is not a conservative. Why would you generally vote Republican? is it their stance on small govt, abortion, defense, taxes? Or you just like the color red more than blue?

Brando: The point stands, though--if Rubio et al are insufficiently conservative, then how is Trump acceptable? Trump fans are holding their guy to a much lower standard than they hold the candidates they loathe (call them "RINOs", "establishment" or whatever). Clearly this isn't about ideological tests, personal histories, or anything like that.

Watching people here engage with you two over time reminds me of what I've heard from people who teach special needs children. You start out on Monday trying to teach them that 1+1=2, and after much sweat and patient effort, you think you've managed on Wednesday to get the concept of "1" into their heads, "plus" on Thursday, and on Friday they seem to understand how and why putting 1 and 1 together gives you two. But come Monday morning, when you ask them to tell you what 1+1 equals, they smile brightly and, with charming gravity, reply: "Trump is not a conservative".

That's OK. We still love you.

Michael K said...

Even James Taranto in the WSJ is making fun of the Trump-Palin haters.

My poll asked a set of four simple survey questions that political scientists have employed since 1992 to measure inclination toward authoritarianism. These questions pertain to child-rearing: whether it is more important for the voter to have a child who is respectful or independent; obedient or self-reliant; well-behaved or considerate; and well-mannered or curious. Respondents who pick the first option in each of these questions are strongly authoritarian.

So, you see. If you want your children to be well behaved you are "authoritarian."

That explains those terrible Trump supporters and you can see why it is dangerous. After all, Trump's kids seem very well behaved. Palin's kids seem to have imbued themselves with too many Alaska values so maybe it will balance out.

buwaya said...

Palin IS an interesting character. A fascinating character to me, speaking as a foreigner.
The reaction to Palin is also fascinating, as it is such an effective marker for social conflicts and anxieties in the US.

She is plainly a woman of the people, a American peasant, but why this should act like "nails on the blackboard" just doesn't compute for me. Its like hearing that someone is automatically hated among some groups for speaking with a Filipino accent - or for that matter with a US Black accent. I don't know why someone should be hated for being an American peasant any more than they should be hated for being Filipino or black. But there we are, there is a programmed reaction. Why this is so and what the mechanics are for this deserves scientific investigation.

That her voice, accent and speech patterns don't suit certain American tastes is fascinating. She sounds different to foreign ears, but does not seem particularly grating. Its sort of like the country-southern-western twang in American popular music, which has been so popular everywhere, is suddenly obnoxious when not in a musical context.

As for Matt - whose reaction is a case in point I think -
"How is that a good thing? Shouldn't politicians be BETTER than us? Shouldn't the people who run for office and who we vote for be SMARTER, and more capable of LEADING than the average American?"
The accent, the idiom, the different spheres of knowledge, the voice perhaps, seem to signal whether she is worse than others. There seems to be an automatic judgement that she is not BETTER in the way that she should be. This is the core of the thing. This is NOT universal in other cultures. There is no real BETTER in Chinese discourse as far as that goes. A Filipino populist politician would get dinged for poor English but not for idiomatic or "peasant" Tagalog. And its not generally so in US political discourse. Black and Hispanic politicians are rarely hated, by the groups inclined to hate Palin, for these reasons.
There is a tangle of psychological issues here, and I suspect a lot of unacknowledged status anxieties. And its not just a matter of what side one is on, it is deeper.

Kansas City said...

Buwaya has an interesting perspective.

Accents and idioms used to have a much bigger place in American culture than today. They also are fewer/less pronounced today. I really don't think Buwaya is correct that much of the hatred/disdain of Palin has to do with accent or idiom. Don't even now what "peasant" means her in terms of accent. In fact, don't even know where Palin picked up her accent. Wasn't she from Idaho and then Alaska?

The hatred/disdain of Palin arrives from liberal/conservative politics. Palin was a huge threat to liberals at one time - a very attractive, articulate and successful conservative woman. Liberals a a visceral feeling against any female or minority who is a threat to their power and their philosophy. While Palin is little threat now, liberals do not let go of the hate/disdain, at least so long as the person is alive.

Lydia said...

I dont get how Palin is coming to the conclusion that Trump thinks we will send troops in to Deal with ISIS? He's now arguing that we wont.

According to this article at Business Insider, he told "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough on December 8 that he’d “support sending 10,000 ground troops to the Middle East to defeat ISIS”.

Kansas City said...

Michael K,

No, my assessment of Palin as not often sounding substantive was not based on the Couric interview. That was political malpractice to have her do along interview with Couric that could be edited by CBS.

After the campaign, she was on Fox regularly. I was pre-disposed to like her, but over many interviews I almost never heard her say anything substantive or interact with the interviewer in a manner that showed substance to me. I was surprised and disappointed. I thought she could have been a contender.

Matt said...

Michael K

So it's now hip and cool to support Palin rather than make fun of her? Have we reached a stage where support for Palin makes one a cutting edge, smart maverick?

Matt said...

buwaya

Althouse wrote that Palin's speech 'is what America sounds like'. It's no secret that Palin isn't the brightest bulb out there and is also not considered a powerhouse politician. Maybe that's a good thing to some degree. But I'm not just judging her speech patterns; I'm also judging WHAT she says to determine how smart she is as well as how well she articulates her positions. I'm no fan of Ted Cruz but the guy is articulate. Next, one has to judge the work a politician does. Fact is, Palin wasn't really in office long enough to have a worthy track record. But few care about that since we got Obama and may get Trump. So cult of personality wins the day and when it comes to Palin or Trump, I'm just not part of the cult. Are 'regular Americans'? I don't think that many are, actually.

Michael K said...

There is a tangle of psychological issues here, and I suspect a lot of unacknowledged status anxieties.

Excellent observations.

" Have we reached a stage where support for Palin makes one a cutting edge, smart maverick?"

No, I liked her because she reminded me of other women politicians I have met who actually got things done and were not consumed either by ambition or resentment. If you spend a lot of time around politicians, you get a feel for which ones are phonies (most of them) and she is not one. I was in Wasilla when she was mayor and am familiar with the town and with Alaska.

Her career as a TV personality was pretty much by accident as the Democrats demonized her so much that a lot of Alaska nuts, and there are a lot, went after her with phony lawsuits and ethics complaints. Alaska had a law that was never seen to be as big an error as it was. The governor, or any other politician accused of such matters, was unable to get a defense from the state. They had to pay all expenses themselves and it was a form of lawfare, something like what Michael Mann is trying to do to Mark Steyn. It was bankrupting them and she resigned. The law was changed right after she did so.

Her TV career came along later and not by design, as I understand it.

I had reservations about her as president but I had more serious ones about McCain who I had supported against Bush in 2000 but who I thought too old in 2008.

If you ran an IQ contest beteen her and Biden, who do you think would win?

Amanda said...


"If you ran an IQ contest beteen her and Biden, who do you think would win?"

Biden. No contest. I think I know why the nutters in the conservative movement believe the insane stuff they do. They simply want to. There doesn't need to be anything real to back it up. If they want to believe it badly enough, they will create some "truth" to make it seem rational. Sheesh, some of you people need therapy....Michael K.

buwaya said...

Matt,
See, these are the things I don't get.
Any number of politicians are, lets say, unsubstantial, and will not hold up to a grilling about matters of public policy. Lets say Antonio Villaraigosa , another once quite promising but now dimming politician. Lets say that he is not at his best at substance.
Like Palin, his stock in trade is charisma and a certain ethnic appeal. He is no Churchill.
But lets consider the relative reaction to his affect. He was once considered quite charming by the press and the liberal political establishment, making the most of his ethnic roots but in a nonthreatening manner (I guess). There was no intense Palinesque reaction against him when he tried to run for Governor (Mayor of LA is a much better base for national politics than Governor of Alaska, and Governor of California is much better).
If one wanted to hold a contest of substance between most politicians at this level, speaking as someone who has been following politics for a half-century in several countries, I don't see that Palin is less substantial.
I am reduced, again, to consider the matter one of psychology rather than substance.

Amanda said...

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/veterans/2016/01/20/palin-blames-sons-arrest-ptsd-obama/79077266/

"My son, like so many others, they come back a bit different,” the former Alaska governor said. “They come back hardened.

They come back wondering if there is that respect for what their fellow soldiers and airmen and every other member of the military have given so sacrificially to this country, and that starts at the top. It’s a shame that our military personnel even have to question, have to wonder if they’re respected anymore.”

“I can certainly relate with other families who kind of feel these ramifications of PTSD and some of the woundedness that our soldiers do return with,” she said. “And it makes me realize more than ever, it is now or never for the sake of America’s finest that we’ll have that commander in chief who will respect them and honor them.”

Veterans groups have repeatedly warned against using PTSD diagnoses as an excuse for criminal behavior in veterans, saying studies suggest that the mental health problems make individuals more likely to hurt themselves but not others."

virgil xenophon said...

AMatt/

How smart is Sarah P? And what are her accomplishments? Well, for starters, she got herself elected Governor with little financial backing, cleaned up a thoroughly corrupt State House. Next,negotiated an int oil treaty (Sarah=1 Hills=0. No treaties of ANY kind) Also hands-on experience in command of the Alaskan Air And Army Guard (no small responsibility next door to Russia) and was responsible for obtaining/funding needed logistical improvements (roads,pol storage facilities, etc) for the USAF Alaskan Air Defense command.

And her serving only half a term? Remember, she was being bankrupted by personal nuisance lawsuits for her acts as Governor by the Dems, so resigning was the only solution to her quandary. What has Hills EVER accomplished of note except be Bills wifey. (and fly around the world as Sec of State boozing it up and leaving every place she became involved with--Russia, Libya, the ME, you name it--worse off than before she became involved.) Some track record....by comparison makes Sarah P look like the second coming of Dean Acheson, George Marshall and John Foster Dulles all rolled into one..

machine said...

"...not consumed either by ambition or resentment."

for realz?

jr565 said...

Trump supporters who did you vote for in the last election? And the election before that? Why don't you like Obama? Why don't you like mainstream conservatives? Just trying to figure out where you are coming from when you say you are conservative of why you think trump is?
If you look at my commentary on trump I'm not always negative. When he gets attacked unfairly I've defended him. I just can't for the life of me figure out where people are getting that he is anything but a film flam Artist who is only running as a republican because he couldn't as a democrat.
I don't get how putting all his money towards the Reid Pelosi congress wouldn't instantly disqualify him from most conservatives (who aren't just voting for republicans because they are "rebels"). Especially people like Palin.

chickelit said...

garage mahal said...Palin's "speech" was the worst thing I've ever witnessed. I can only she was drunk off her ass.

But you and Amandinga are just like that, garage. I recall you bragging about heckling Palin from the crowd when she spoke in Madison with Andrew Breitbard in support of Scott Walker.

Michael K said...

"Sheesh, some of you people need therapy....Michael K."

Always the response of the left. How about a comment that makes sense ? I have a couple of leftist children who I cannot talk to about politics. I have another leftist daughter who is fairly reasonable but gets teary if any of her opinions are disagreed with.

I don't mind debates. What about saying something that makes sense ?

"I just can't for the life of me figure out where people are getting that he is anything but a film flam Artist who is only running as a republican because he couldn't as a democrat."

I have my doubts about him and keep getting pushed into defending him because the attacks are so angry and unreasonable.

I have read a few people who I respect who have good things to say about him. One is Conrad Black.

The Huffington Post does a fair description, but their commenters are typical leftists with nothing but rage.

Birds of a feather! These feather are old, white, rich and encompass everything that's wrong with the world.

If you read his book about his conviction it is clear that he was a victim of selective prosecution and appeals court misbehavior.
His books are excellent.

I have still not made up my mind. I will see what voters do.

People are very angry at the ruling class and anyone who has read Codevilla's essay knows why.

Purvi Rajani said...

My friend Rob is an expert on personality type. Sarah and The Donald are both ESTPs.

https://type-coach.com/estp

grackle said...

Grackle, heres a link:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration


Naw, man, I think you need to provide a link to Donald Trump himself saying to ban all Muslims. Not CNN’s opinion of what Trump said. We all know that CNN and the rest lie through their teeth. Leave the cable news hit-pieces to the misinformed and the gullible.

Later in the comment thread Trump is finally quoted with accuracy, the bolded words being the relevant part, the part that was left out earlier:

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on,,” he said, adding the word “hell" for emphasis this time.

Readers, you will never see a video of Trump saying to flatly ban all Muslims. That video does not exist. Trump suggested that it would be a good idea to temporarily halt Muslims from entering the USA from outside the USA until such time as we “know what the hell is going on.” A fine and sensible idea. Otherwise we run the risk of even more Islamic jihad terror shootings than we currently absorb.

Obviously, Muslims “entering the United States” is a subset of “all” Muslims, unless we are to fly in the face of simple logic. BTW, if you do not wish to view a long, rambling Trump YouTube video, read the actual statement:

New York, NY) December 7th, 2015, -- Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing "25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah." Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won't convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.

Mr. Trump stated, "Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again." - Donald J. Trump


http://tinyurl.com/nbkne73

Drago said...

I wonder if Hillary lying about all that classified intel on her personal private server which was utterly unsecured and hacked by foreign powers exposing some of our highest categorized intel to our geo-political enemies was a result of Hillary's PTSD from being shot at in Bosnia by snipers?

Drago said...

machine: "...not consumed either by ambition or resentment."

I have heard this from Hillary defenders but I don't believe they are correct.

Hillary is driven by ambition and resentment and, fortunately, found the right man to hitch her little skirt to which has at least given her a shot at the top (which she is blowing badly....again).

Girl Power!

Drago said...

jr565: "I don't get how putting all his money towards the Reid Pelosi congress wouldn't instantly disqualify him from most conservatives (who aren't just voting for republicans because they are "rebels")."

He was a businessman making strategic donations.

Obviously.

I'm not excusing it, but to say you "don't get" how doing that could be discounted by some conservative voters is simply willful blindness, particularly coming on the heels of all those republicans in congress who have surrendered on too many key issues.

I've never before seen so many professed close watchers of the political scene act so flummoxed at such basic and easily understood republican/conservative base voter reactions.

grackle said...

According to this article at Business Insider, he told "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough on December 8 that he’d “support sending 10,000 ground troops to the Middle East to defeat ISIS”.

This won’t do. What we need is not a magazine’s opinion, gained third-hand though what amounts to cable newsbabble barely above common gossip in nature. We need actual statements of record of trump’s utterances. If you can’t provide that you do not deserve serious consideration.

If you look at my commentary on trump I'm not always negative. When he gets attacked unfairly I've defended him.

You misquoted him, or tried to at first. Then you saw what your mistake was and tried to paper it over with an accurate quote. Why should we trust you?

Drago said...

garage: "Palin's "speech" was the worst thing I've ever witnessed."

You really haven't been anywhere or done anything, have you?

And how could Palin's speech have been worse than your own academic and "professional" life experiences, which I must assume you witnessed?

LOL

Did Palin promise to lower the oceans? 'cuz that's some straight up crazy stuff right there!

Drago said...

Purvi Rajani: "My friend Rob is an expert on personality type"

What personality type is the perfect personality type for an expert on personality types?

Drago said...

Oh, and go Broncos! (though I feel an increasing sense of dread as the weekend approaches.....)

Matt said...

virgil Xenophon

Don't take my criticisms of Palin personally. I'm pretty sure history will show she did very little as a politician and, instead, did much more as an entertainer.

buwaya

What substance are you thinking of that makes Palin so significant to you? She is a political personality with strong opinions. So is Rush Limbaugh. I call that hot air not substance. I'd say the same about many Democrats or liberals who have spent more time making noise than creating policy.

Drago said...

Matt: "I call that hot air not substance. I'd say the same about many Democrats or liberals who have spent more time making noise than creating policy."

Well, that's an interesting point of contention, isn't it?

Ted Cruz himself has stated that he owes his Senate seat to Sarah Palin (I don't know if it's a sincere or political comment but there you go).

How many other current legislators and policy makers have been influenced or have claimed to be influenced by these "non-substance" guys like Rush? If it could be shown that some or many or a lot have, would you then amend your statement?

We could extrapolate to other "influencers" as well. Milton Friedman never created policy.....or did he (vicariously)?

The examples are endless.

Food for thought on this chilly evening.

Lydia said...

To grackle @7:39 p.m.:

That article was not an opinion piece, but a straight-forward reporting of the content of that day's TV news shows.

In any case, here's the link to the video of that December 8 show -- Trump says "yes" to the question of 10,000 ground troops starting around the 30:40 mark.

buwaya puti said...

I am interested in Palin mainly because of the reaction she has provoked. As a politician she is a minor historical figure. One day we will read about her after the dust has settled, and I hope with perspective and context.
Limbaugh is also interesting, though only partly for the same reason. If one follows Limbaugh it becomes clear that he is actually quite insightful about public policy society and politics. It is not rage that works for him, but humor. He is very impressive. The best preparation for Limbaugh I think is a solid grounding in Mark Twain.they

Sebastian said...

"let her Palinosity flow, and it's great stuff. Its similarity to the way Trump speaks creates an uncanny dynamic" I haven't listened to Palin, and am not sure I can bring myself to do so, but I do appreciate this comment. It's pretty safe to say that no other faculty member at UW would dare to say anything like it. More of this, please, and less pseudo-theological preaching to Christians about what Christianity supposedly demands of them.

Michael K said...

"If one follows Limbaugh it becomes clear that he is actually quite insightful about public policy society and politics."

Another good observation. I used to ignore him but am listening more recently because the stuff that he was saying, and which I discounted in theist, is really happening.

I don't think we have ever had a president like Obama. The closest I can come is Buchanan. He was moving arms into southern states' armories as they planned to secede.

Obama knows he will never be impeached because he is black and his black followers would riot and his white followers are consumed by leftist guilt.

The book that explains this is called The Suicide of the West.

It was written about communism but Islam seems to have taken over in the leftist mind.

The more modern explanation is by Richard Fernandez.

The West is filled with millions of people like Alex, all of them waiting for Someone. They are the product of a multi-decade campaign to deliberately empty people of their culture; to actually make them ashamed of it. They were purposely drained of God, country, family like chickens so they could be stuffed with the latest narrative of the progressive meme machine. The Gramscian idea was to produce a blank slate upon which the Marxist narrative could be written.

Too bad for the Gramscians that the Islamists are beating them to the empty sheets of paper. And they are better at it too. Maybe the old Bolsheviks could have given ISIS a run for its money, but today's liberals have declined from their sires.

Chuck said...

Best Sarah Palin story by far; Glen Rice (F, Michigan) playing for the Wolverines in Great Alaska Shootout in 1987 and the then-single tv reporter Sarah Heath...

http://deadspin.com/5841835/all-the-details-of-the-sarah-palin-glen-rice-coitus-youve-been-waiting-for

chickelit said...

Nice! "Chuck" cites stalker Joe McGinniss for some hard-hitting journalism.

McGinniss reminds me a lot of Andrew Sullivan: They both started our well but both withered and died as political opinion makers when they took on Palin.

Drago said...

Chuck: "Best Sarah Palin story by far;"

What, specifically, makes that story the "Best Sarah Palin story by far"?

buwaya puti said...

Richard Fernandez - kababayan ko 'yan
trans - he's my homeboy.

AllenS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

Here is Biden displaying his yuuuuge IQ:

With the economy floundering, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., told Ohio voters today that he and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., would focus on one specific issue that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has neglected.

“Look, John’s last-minute economic plan does nothing to tackle the number one job facing the middle class, and it happens to be, as Barack says, a three-letter word: jobs. J-O-B-S,” the Democratic veep nominee said at a morning rally in Athens.

AllenS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

There are a lot more Biden quotes. He's a regular Einsteiner:

LINK

machine said...

rousing hillbillys is the palin/rush/duckdynasty/carson/etc. cottage industry...

let's make Amurica great again!

damikesc said...

It's no secret that Palin isn't the brightest bulb out there and is also not considered a powerhouse politician.

But why is SHE specifically singled out as not being "bright" when the current VP is a certified moron and the Left excuses that.

The head of the DNC has an IQ that MIGHT hit double digits...but Palin is held up as the "dumb one".

Why is that?

Biden. No contest.

Biden? In an IQ battle between Biden and his dog, Joe would be a close second. The man is notably dim.

Trump supporters who did you vote for in the last election?

Romney. Still think he was the best choice we've had for President in an extremely long time.

And the election before that?

Bob Barr. I liked Palin, but McCain/Feingold eliminates any ability I'd ever have to ever vote for McCain for any office.

Why don't you like Obama?

Terrible domestic policy (you know, fortifying the electric grid would've been a smart move to use with that stimulus he wasted when he came into office) married to an even worse foreign policy. Has established ignoring Congress and passing legislation by fiat as an option the President can go to if Congress isn't passing bills he likes. A bit of a prick. Doesn't seem to much care for the USA.

Why don't you like mainstream conservatives? Just trying to figure out where you are coming from when you say you are conservative of why you think trump is?

There are only two legitimate conservatives running: Cruz and Paul. Cruz is my first pick and while I love the idea of Libertarianism, in the real world, it doesn't work terribly well. So I'll go with the guy who, openly, states he will fight for America and seems less beholden to the funding class of the GOP.

As far as "mainstream conservatives", looking at what Congress has passed since 2014 with "mainstream conservatives" in office, I wonder where the conservatism is there at all.

Nichevo said...

For all the haters:

If you want to beat Trump,

Have better ideas,

And sell them to the people!

Wasn't that easy?

Trump is like Michael Chiklis in the pilot episode of The Shield, called in to get the confession from the guy who they know has the little girl locked up somewhere:

Pedo: Heh heh, so are you the good cop or the bad cop?

Det. Mackey: I'm the whole new kind of cop. (unplugs CCTV)

AllenS said...

Trump is gaining followers because he sounds like a patriot. Skip the conservative-liberal labels. A lot of Americans like what Trump has to say about the direction this country has taken. Immigration is an issue that Americans think is out of control. No one else is/has been talking about it. Hillary!? Sanders? Not a chance.

grackle said...

In any case, here's the link to the video of that December 8 show -- Trump says "yes" to the question of 10,000 ground troops starting around the 30:40 mark.

Well … Trump says he would support an “international force” of 10,000 that American forces would be “part of.” Not that he, Trump, would send 10,000 American troops by themselves. So Trump would support an international coalition of America and its allies to defeat ISIS. Sounds reasonable to me.

So, you are making the same mistake that a previous commentor did – of exaggerating and/or leaving out an important detail on something you claim Trump has said or done. This is why we need sources in these debates that show us what is actually said by Trump – not what some magazine somewhere offers as its opinion on Trump’s statements.

damikesc said...

And ISIS is showing us a World War II problem.

If France stood up to Germany when they went after Austria, Hitler would've crumbled.
If they stood up to Germany when they went after Czechoslovakia, Hitler would've crumbled.

By the time they stood up to him, Hitler was way tougher than he was a few years earlier. And potential allies, like the USSR, saw no point in allying with somebody who wouldn't fight and protected themselves with different allies.

Lydia said...

Trump says he would support an “international force” of 10,000 that American forces would be “part of.”

No, you're wrong. Scarborough is clearly talking about 10,000 U.S. troops as part of an international force, not an international force of 10,000 of which some would be American. Trump says "yes" to the 10,000 troops, and then Scarborough goes on to ask if Trump would be comfortable with those troops working with forces from other countries.

Seems you're actually the one "exaggerating and/or leaving out an important detail on something you claim Trump has said or done".

grackle said...

No, you're wrong. Scarborough is clearly talking about 10,000 U.S. troops as part of an international force, not an international force of 10,000 of which some would be American.

I’ll admit to being partly wrong. The 10,000 number was clearly meant to convey the size of the American force, not the size of the total coalition of allies of which American forces would be part of. Obviously, a coalition made up of allies AND 10,000 American forces would be larger than 10,000. But neither is it true that Trump agreed to send American troops as a single entity of 10,000 to defeat ISIS.

Readers, go to the video and listen starting at about 29:49. Listen carefully. You will hear Joe saying, “I want to get specific with you like I want to get specific with Ted Cruz and everybody else …” There’s a few moments of Joe and Trump interrupting and talking over each other – very annoying – and eventually at about 30:13 Joe gets around to asking this: “So would you support taking it, say, 10,000, ah, ground troops as part of an international force?”

So, Trump did NOT agree to send 10,000 American troops by themselves to defeat ISIS – but only as part of an “international force.”

Here is the commentor’s original statement that I objected to:

According to this article at Business Insider, he told "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough on December 8 that he’d “support sending 10,000 ground troops to the Middle East to defeat ISIS”.

And since the above statement made no mention of an “international force” it implied by that important detail being left out that Trump agreed to something with which he did not actually agree to. That was incorrect and I’m glad we’ve been corrected on both of our misconceptions, because accuracy is important. That said, it still seems a reasonable way to go about defeating ISIS.

I’m wondering now if the commentators Lydia and jr565 believe ISIS should be defeated and if they do just how they, if they were POTUS, would go about defeating ISIS. Don’t be shy, display your brilliance!

Oh, and I’ll ask another hypothetical question of jr565: If your life depended on it and you HAD to vote now, who would you vote for in the campaign? We need to know where you are coming from.

We know where Lydia is coming from: She’s for Sanders the socialist who is running as a Democrat. She wants to pick our pockets to fund unicorns.

To jr565: Don’t try to dodge the question by saying you don’t like any of the candidates, or some other evasion. Remember – your life depends on it and you have no choice but to vote. Come on out of the campaign closet and declare your preference openly and boldly. Let your selection for POTUS impress us with your wisdom!

One last thing. There’s a video where most of the issues raised by Trump detractors are debunked better than I ever could. It is entertaining and not boring. Have a look, readers, copy the URL and use it whenever the Trump opposition raves on.

http://tinyurl.com/zdzj7ph

Lydia said...

We know where Lydia is coming from: She’s for Sanders the socialist who is running as a Democrat. She wants to pick our pockets to fund unicorns.

I don’t recall ever saying anything here that even remotely implied I’m for Sanders. I’m for Rubio.

Practically all of my infrequent posts have to do with clearing up other commenters’ inaccurate statements of points of fact.

grackle said...

I don’t recall ever saying anything here that even remotely implied I’m for Sanders. I’m for Rubio. Practically all of my infrequent posts have to do with clearing up other commenters’ inaccurate statements of points of fact.

I mixed you up with Amanda. Godawful mistake, that. I apologize profusely. I am relieved you are not voting Democrat. And clearing up inaccuracies is a good and valuable service. For that reason I am glad we two got it cleared up that Trump never agreed in the video to send 10,000 troops without an international force to accompany them because that would have been incorrect also. No need to pile one error on top of another, eh?

So … I suppose you support Rubio’s plan to defeat ISIS since he is your candidate. Or not. Rubio’s plan mentions a coalition also, just like Scarborough and Trump discussed. And Rubio wants to cut off the oil ISIS is selling – here again like Trump. No mention by Rubio that I could see of just how many American troops that would take. Nicely non-specific on numbers. Best to keep that sort of thing decided later, I guess.

I like very much Rubio’s stance on the internet and on-line sales. I hope Trump’s policies will be similar to that.

You seem very astute and knowledgeable. How many US troops do you think it would take to defeat ISIS, assuming you want ISIS defeated? 500? 1,000? 10,000? None? Maybe not as much fun as clearing up inaccurate statements, but here’s your chance to introduce all of us to your own viewpoint on an issue. Take your time.