And then came Trump’s time to bash all his famous conservative critics.That's hilariously loutish, calling Jonah Goldberg "a guy that can’t buy a pair of pants." I googled trump jonah pants to see if Goldberg had responded, and I got to this headline at The Daily Beast: "Trump Teases Critic for Being Paralyzed":
On Charles Krauthammer, who called him a “rodeo clown”: He’s “a totally overrated person that dislikes me personally. I’ve never met him. He’s a totally overrated guy, doesn’t know what he’s doing.”
On Jonah Goldberg, who compared him to a “failed man”: “I’m worth a fortune. You know, it’s interesting. I went to the best school, got great marks, everything else. I went out, I made a fortune, a big fortune, a tremendous fortune… bigger than people even understand. […] Then I get called by a guy that can’t buy a pair of pants, I get called names?” [Ed. note: Huh? Does anyone know why Trump would think Goldberg can’t buy pants? Send tips to tips@mediaite.com]
Not content with insulting a female reporter’s intelligence and professionalism, Donald Trump apparently mocked a conservative critic for being paralyzed. Trump in an interview with NBC News was asked about columnist Charles Krauthammer, who is paralyzed from the waist down and has called Trump a “rodeo clown.” In response to criticism from Krauthammer and National Review columnist Jonah Goldberg, Trump said the following: “I went out, I made a fortune, a big fortune, a tremendous fortune… bigger than people even understand,” he said before discussing his plan to release financial statements. “Then I get called by a guy that can’t buy a pair of pants, I get called names?”Here's the clip. He's obviously talking about Goldberg, not Krauthammer, when he gets to the pair-of-pants hyperbole.
Even if he had used that figure of speech when talking about Krauthammer, he wouldn't have been teasing Krauthammer for being paralyzed. He'd just have stumbled into an unfortunate image. And, look, Krauthammer has responded, and Krauthammer knows it's Jonah whose pants-buying wherewithal was called into question:
"[Trump is] repeating himself. I'm like Jeb on this. I'm done. The man's specialty [is] to suck oxygen, I'm going to be breathing fresh air... And I do want to make an appeal to the viewers out there to crowdsource, to buy Jonah a pair of pants. I think if you look under the table it's disgraceful the way he comes to the show."The teasing is coming from Krauthammer, and now Jonah has the exquisite distinction of getting fixed in our heads as an icon of panstlessness.
Posts
94 comments:
let's compromise between Trump and Althouse....let's get Jonah some shorts.
I will believe Trump is running for president when he files his financial disclosure payments, which I do not think he has yet done, or we would have heard about it. That would be news.
I the meantime, I don't know what he is up to, but it has to be something. The Donald may act like a clown, but he is no dummy. There is something in this for him.
And with all this pussyfooting around to the PC's and kow-towing to the media, I appreciate a grenade-thrower livening things up a bit.
Speaking of pants: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3154256/There-s-embarrassing-British-man-shorts-Mens-legs-never-exposed-daylight-says-COLIN-DUNNE.html
How much more sexist could the writer be?
Not content with insulting a female reporter’s intelligence and professionalism, Donald Trump apparently mocked a conservative critic for being paralyzed.
Why doesn't the "female writer" get a name mention and why is it all about her being insulted as a "female"? Her name was Katy Tur. Why not write, "After insulting Katy Tur for being naive, Trump took on Charles Krauthammer for being over-rated and Johah Goldberg for not being able to buy a pair of pants."
You see criticizing male journalists is A-OK, but female journalists are delicate flowers that must never be dragged into the arena! Trump is a sexist pig!
I think the comment is a reference to Jonah's laid back attitude. If you do a Google image search you often see him speaking while wearing jeans.
All I know is, watching the Trump Media Circus, how easily supposedly straight news reporters switch between "illegal immigration" and "Immigration", as if they are interchangeable.
Trump is not a serious candidate and, expect for having a lot of money, he is the equivalent of Gingrich this cycle. Gingrich did more to defeat Romney in 2012 than Obama. The guy who writes Obama's speeches get honorable mention but Gingrich gave the Democrats the theme.
I fear Trump will do the same by trashing the GOP candidate who emerges.
Autocorrect does not like the world except.
I think the writer misinterpreted the comment because it is so hard for liberals to even read the words conservatives say, they just seem to sort of skip over them, because they are afraid they will run into one more question for which they have no answer and if they ever lost their liberal faith they would be surrendering their friends.
In context, it seems the remark must have been an attempt to contrast Trump’s wealth with Goldberg’s relative poverty. It was prefaced with a brag about his own fortune, “bigger than people even understand,” and the pants remark was Trump’s clumsy way of saying that Goldberg has no comparable fortune – he cannot even afford to buy this common item – and so implicitly is not fit to criticize Trump.
As for why “a pair of pants” was chosen as the particular example of a purchase beyond Goldberg’s means, perhaps (as Patrick just commented) he thinks Goldberg dresses himself too casually, not wearing dress trousers on occasions when Trump supposes he should be. But the joke is that the reason for Goldberg’s attire is not a preference for jeans, but rather penury.
Not content with insulting a female reporter’s intelligence and professionalism, Donald Trump...
One of the great lines.
Female reporters pic.
Let's remember what we're dealing with as the world turns.
The rodeo clown put down was funny. And who refers to grades as "marks" but a prep school kid in the 50s?
And he should have said slacks instead of pants if he received such high marks at prep school in the 50s.
Rodeo clowns draw the bull off a fallen bull rider.
Imus played the interview clip drawing Imus to say "She's an idiot, isn't she?"
She's not as intelligent and professional as Trump.
Trump's skill is sand in the female reporter gears.
Female reporters have never had to deal with somebody not buying their view of themselves.
Don't underestimate how hated the MSM is out in America.
Krauthammer "Let's Roll"
What's wrong with Jonah's pants? At least he doesn't wear mom jeans like a certain president who shall not be named.
So many pieties, so little time.
I didn't think it was completely clear who referring to because he seemed to be generally referring back to his critics. The insult did seem to be about the relative wealth of the person though, because he referenced his own status and wealth and then said the other guy "can't buy a pair of pants, not that he couldn't put on his own pants or something similar which might refer to Krauthammer's physical limitations.
I bid Trumps FTW. He acts like he is holding a winning hand and refuses to fold to a media talking head tsunami of BS against him. He maybe bluffing, but we shall soon see.
In the meantime, there are so few good romantic comedies. The plot ought to be that antagonists find that they fit in the end.
Instead they turn out bad-decision plots and cliched bad male behavior, sort of like MSM narratives. Maybe it's the same people turning it out.
Professionalism, in female professionalism, means thin-skinned.
Professionalism doesn't come up in males.
The line that Trump said something wrong is stupid to start with, if you're interviewing him.
Just have fun.
What woman would think of that, though.
Instead, she's taking the narrative as truth, the very mistake Trump means to point out.
no men in shorts tag? You're slipping, Althouse.
Must be summer.
There are substantive charges in Trump's bluster, and I wish the candidates would respond with some position statements that would let us know where they stand on these issues.
The MSM knows, which is evident since they immediately try to distract us by ignoring the message and attacking the messenger - and successfully so, judging by most of the comments above.
Don't forget, Goldberg insulted Trump first saying he was "not a serious man". Is anybody else noting how liberal media icons who make outrageous comments against the common culture never pay a penalty? Also, when a liberal makes a contextual error in their speech, the media falls all over themselves fixing that but when a conservative says something that is right in concept but misspoken, they amplify he misspeak? And I include FOX news in that as, despite their better balance, they are still immersed in DC Kultur.
Sean Gleeson is on it. Trump thinks money is everything. The acquisition of money, the moving of money, and the ability to make money-- these are the measures by which he measures every person. Simple.
So "a guy that can’t buy a pair of pants" is the most withering observation he can make about a critic.
Most people are very simple-minded. Most voters have trouble believing the celebrities are so stupid. Hillary can't figure out how to operate a fax machine, for example. These people really are dolts.
While there is little doubt that illegal aliens are able to just ignore our criminal laws in a large number of cases. Arrested for drunk driving? Don't show up for the trial! Etc, etc, etc... But Trumps words were pretty bad, inartful at best.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
A, The "they're sending" construction. Who is sending?
B, Using "They are" instead of "There are."
They are bringing crime. There is no doubt about that. There are rapists among them. That has been shown. There are people bringing drugs among them, without a doubt.
The problem is his sloppy language. He missed a chance to discuss these issues by allowing himself to be credibly branded a racist. He should know that he will never be given the benefit of the doubt and that people will never try to parse his true intended meaning, but will always take the invidious interpretation and run with it.
He didn't think his announcement speech through. That makes him a clown.
I used to listen to Krauthammer a lot. He sounds so intelligent, and within his domain, he probably is. However, one day I heard him talking about something within my domain (one that I've worked professionally for decades) and he didn't know what the hell he was talking about. I don't listen to him very much any more. Michael Crichton's Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect proves accurate once again.
“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
Let Trump be Trump.
I am Laslo.
It's all humor in my book. The really funny thing is Trump is getting the RNC to wring their hands at his taking them all to another election failure.
Trump's problem is not just sloppy language. Trump's problem is sloppy thought, joined to a blowhard's mouth. The Donald has made a pile of dough in the New York City real estate market--a skill which requires a certain low cunning, plus political connections. Yes he's made a pile of dough, and he's famous for that. But I'm not certain that he has any political convictions at all. He does look in the mirror each morning and ask who's the fairest of them all--and the answer is always Donald Trump.
It is hard not to feel sorry for Trump - the great man surrounded by intellectual pygmies trying to tear him down. Shame on them I say, shame.
Never mind whether Jonah Goldberg is able to buy a decent pair of pants, the more important question is whether Donald Trump is able to buy a decent toupée.
So "a guy that can’t buy a pair of pants" is the most withering observation he can make about a critic.
Trump's problem is that he is in a bubble where people understand him. Irony and sarcasm work best with those who are immersed in the culture of the speaker. Other people can't see it because it is full of inside knowledge and shared assumptions that need not be referenced.
For example:
"One should wear dress pants in formal situations, not jeans"
"Speaking to an audience is a formal situation."
"Goldberg sometimes wears jeans to speak to an audience."
]Trump is also saying is that "Goldberg must know that that he should wear formal pants to speak to an audience, everybody knows that, therefore, the only credible reason for not wearing formal pants is that he can't afford them."
It's a friendly tweak at Goldberg, not a "withering criticism."
It's like peeling an onion.
The inevitable invidious interpretation is that Trump has contempt for the non billionaire.
Trump is morally defective. So what's new?
Mr. Trump, you said that Mexico is sending us idiots, rapists and criminals.
What did you expect to happen, given that Mexicans are a race of whiners?
I remember how refreshing it was to have Perot on the campaign trail. No more mealy mouthed politicians. Yet, if you really knew Ross Perot and you knew how he ran his own company, you realize he would have been a terrible president. Trump isn't in the same league as Perot. Running for president is just a vanity play by Trump. I'm hoping he fades away and quickly like many of the candidates did during the last go around.
I just want to say I am not defending Trump. He is in over his head. Running for president is a very demanding task. He is not up to it.
Hillary is obviously not up to it either, but the press will do their best to drag her across the line.
Trump is not up to it, and he can only expect the worst possible interpretation from the press of everything he says.
For instance Hillary got caught in a major lie in her first interview in 3 months and it doesn't even make Google News top stories today. That is the kind of help Trump can never count on. He may know Hillary personally, he probably thinks he is smarter than Hillary, he probably is, but you can't buy favors from the press like that.
Trump is (very sloppily) saying many truthful things that others won't say, or won't say directly, but which many, many Americans agree with. The murder of a beautiful young lady in San Fran by an illegal immigrant (who clearly should not have been free or in this country) ratified the gist of what he was saying. The actual statistics also ratify the gist of what he is saying.
White people are no longer a majority in California. In our lifetimes, California will join Mexico. Is that a serious issue, or not?
Goldberg is said to wear khaki shorts and sneakers below a classic white dress shirt, tasteful tie and elegant navy blazer at the Special Report panel desk. Note that you never see his legs, although he sits in the end seat. Were a Fox blonde in that seat, there's be tons on leg shots.
Fox cameras likewise avoid catching Krauthammer's wheelchair.
Trump's "Art of the Deal" has sold 184,000 copies.
Krauthammer's Things Thaty Matter"? More than a million.
More power to The Donald. None of the candidates are serious about securing the border. They're all talking about how many and when our current batch of invaders will be naturalized. We have a big Mexican problem and no one is talking about it with any degree of honesty.
Meanwhile in Mexico the next 11 million are packing their bags and charting their course Norte.
tim in vermont, that's an interesting pants explanation (not the word I want...can't quite bring it up).
It's a common problem: public personas don't show the real person inside. Word on the street is that Hillary is a funny and genuine gal, for example.
Most of us put on masks for public display. Trump, I think, doesn't wear a mask. He's just the asshole you think he appears to be. Hillary is just the bitch she's trying to hide. Obama is just the socialist he's trying to run behind.
Goldberg's nickname is Doughy Pantsload. He might be referring to that.
Hagar: There are substantive charges in Trump's bluster, and I wish the candidates would respond with some position statements that would let us know where they stand on these issues.
The MSM knows, which is evident since they immediately try to distract us by ignoring the message and attacking the messenger - and successfully so, judging by most of the comments above.
Beat me to it, Hagar.
Trump may be a clown, but he's trolling on an important issue that both parties, and their shills in the MSM, would rather you didn't notice. Let's talk about Jonah Goldberg's pants, instead.
Hope he keeps on trolling, and expands the base of issues he trolls about.
I appreciate that Trump is bringing a little excitement to the race. The more the media weenies gnaw on his ankles, the more unwashed masses like him. My fear is that he is going to shit all over the better candidates and drop out so that Bush takes the primary.
I don't think that Trump was saying that Goldberg can't afford to buy semi-stylish pants, but that he has no taste that would lead him to buy decent pants.
Tank: White people are no longer a majority in California. In our lifetimes, California will join Mexico. Is that a serious issue, or not?
We don't need to talk about how and why that happened and what it means for the future. What's important is that we talk about what an appalling white supremacist racist hater Tank is for saying it.
Oh, by the why, unfortunately it won't just be California joining Mexico. The country has already been banana-republic'ed at the federal level, and at the state and local level over large swathes of the country. If you still live in an area where rule of law prevails locally, enjoy it while it lasts. (Meanwhile, better bone up on how to survive and thrive in a Third World country.)
Goldberg is said to wear khaki shorts and sneakers below a classic white dress shirt, tasteful tie and elegant navy blazer at the Special Report panel desk.
Oh man, even better!
It's inside Fox stuff, like I said.
I agree with others who note that the reference is to Goldberg's preference for casual attire. The Daily Beast seriously needs to publish a correction, and an apology. I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but their headline is clearly false and possibly libelous.
Has anyone here actually read Goldberg? It's been a few years, and Google doesn't seem to be helping, but as I recall he constantly portrays himself as working from home, lying on his couch, and talking to the couch and the dog, which I think (it's been a while) occasionally talk back. Does he also say he writes in his underwear? I don't recall, but I think he may. It would certainly be possible for someone working from his couch at home. Apparently Trump has actually read some Goldberg now and then, unlike anyone else commenting here besides me.
Trump seems to be comfortably in the mainstream of contemporary Republicanism. He is shining a light on Republican values by articulating what most GOPers only say behind closed doors.
That is why "serious" Republican mouthpieces, like Krauthammer and Goldberg, can't stand him.
I am sure the RNC would do just about anything to keep Trump from being on that debate stage in Cleveland. I would like to say that he will drop the charade before then, but he appears to be having so much fun. Maybe not.
Trump must have gotten his picture taken on one of those bimbo-fest trips with Bill Clinton, Steve Bing, Ron Burkle and Jeff Epstein. Bubba is just now calling in his marker.
Trump, the billionaire, is running for president for one reason only. He saw how the Clintons turned the post presidency into a cash cow. No not Hillary. I am referring to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation. Could be the be the biggest payoff yet as investments go. (sarc alert)
Blogger Michael K said...
Trump is not a serious candidate and, expect for having a lot of money, he is the equivalent of Gingrich this cycle. Gingrich did more to defeat Romney in 2012 than Obama. The guy who writes Obama's speeches get honorable mention but Gingrich gave the Democrats the theme.
I fear Trump will do the same by trashing the GOP candidate who emerges.
If he does, more power to him.
I mean, have you seen what he has said about the other candidates so far? If he isn't criticizing them about issues which you and I would agree about (Illegal immigration for example) he's just saying stupid stuff about them that isn't at all substantive.
On the other hand, he is dragging the candidates to the right and the discussion to the right. We wouldn't even be focusing on the poor girl killed in San Francisco or sanctuary cities, except for Trump. It's thanks to Trump that Hillary gets asked about that in an interview and steps all over herself.
Trump is setting the tone of the conversation. Sure, the media is doing it's part to distract and make it about clowns and toupe's and racist remarks, etc.
But they can't help but ask Hillary about sanctuary cities.
Good for Trump.
In his column in the Wall Street Journal today, Karl Rove writes that, after he had raised some questions about how serious a candidate he was, Donald Trump had tweeted that he (Karl Rove) had “spent $430 million in the last cycle and didn’t win one race.”
Karl Rove notes that:
(In 2010, he donated $50,000 to the Crossroads political-action organizations for which I volunteer.) In the 2014 cycle, Crossroads groups spent $103 million to help win 10 of 12 targeted U.S. Senate seats and 10 of 13 competitive House seats. Not that facts matter much to The Donald.
I don't know. It's possible that Donald Trump believes all that he is saying and he has some aide or maybe Democratic party mole who is suplying him with all these factoids.
tim in vermont said on 7/9/15 at 8:15 AM
A, The "they're sending" construction. Who is sending?
According to a news article I read today, Donald Trump actual;ly seems to beleive (or claim) that it is a deliberate policy of the Mexican government to send the worst people in Mexico here.
Which would be very interesting, of true, but I don't think there's any basis for saying that. Fidel Castro did something like that one time, but that was only to try to get the United states to want to stop letting people escape. Castro also sent homosexuals, since taht was also against U.S. immigration law. Some of the crimimnals he sent turned out to be legitimate political prisoners, because when someone in the government had a child who was havng a rellationship with someone he didn't them to have, if it was a boy who had a relationship with his daughter he would acused of and imprisoned for rape, and if it was girl who was having a relationship his son, she would be accused and imprisoned for prostitution. Others had stolen things from the government.
Here;s Donald Trump saying this is deliberate MNexican government policy:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-win-latino-vote-article-1.2285486
Tone-Deaf Donald Trump: ‘I’ll win the Latino vote’
BY Deborah Hastings / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Published: Wednesday, July 8, 2015, 12:40 PM
...."Mexico doesn't want these people. They're forcing them into our country and we're taking them and putting them in our jails and our hospitals and it's a disgrace," Trump said.
Trump has economics theory problems -- mindlessly populist stuff -- but he's not afraid to take on the massive narrative of the MSM, which is a huge plus.
Don't talk about pantsless Jonah Goldberg! You'll only encourage him and he'll use the notoriety to crowdfund some new pants and a Juggs Magazine subscription.
I like the fact that Trump is insulting the media. My problem is that he's so bad at it. His contempt doesn't wither. There's something like bear baiting going on in these interviews. He gets up on his hind legs and roars. The reporter steps back two steps and barks at him........Here's an interesting fact. The cartels in Juarez kidnapped hundreds of young women. The girls were forced to work in brothels. Dozens of them were murdered. The police were complicit in these activities......How much time has the media spent reporting this scandal versus Trump's clumsy remarks? Which is objectively the bigger scandal?
It is not beyond the imagination that Trump could win a substantial portion of "the Latino vote," the part of it that is cast by citizens entitled to vote that is.
The resident "Hispanics" are the first to suffer from competition for jobs by the influx of "undocumented aliens," and by now they had ought to be roundly pissed off from being completely ignored by the media gasbags pontificating on "the immigration problem."
Sammy Finkelman: According to a news article I read today, Donald Trump actual;ly seems to beleive (or claim) that it is a deliberate policy of the Mexican government to send the worst people in Mexico here.
Which would be very interesting, of true, but I don't think there's any basis for saying that.
Substitute "poorest" for "worst" and there most certainly is a basis for saying that. Massive migration in recent decades of the poor and unskilled of Mexico into the U.S. has reduced the pressure for reform in Mexico, and channels billions in remittances from the U.S. into the Mexican economy.
The Mexican government actively promotes and supports illegal migration into the U.S., and lobbies for their "rights" (to taxpayer subsidies of all kinds), remarkably blatantly, once they're here. (Aided and abetted, of course, by the usual suspects on this side of the border.)
Hagar said... 7/9/15, 11:24 AM
It is not beyond the imagination that Trump could win a substantial portion of "the Latino vote," the part of it that is cast by citizens entitled to vote that is.
The resident "Hispanics" are the first to suffer from competition for jobs by the influx of "undocumented aliens," and by now they had ought to be roundly pissed off from being completely ignored by the media gasbags pontificating on "the immigration problem."
The first problem with this idea is that it assumes they are economic creatures before they are human beings.
The second problem with this idea is that people who are illegal and eople who are legal residents are often members of the same family, extended family, worshippers at a church, friends, neighbors and romantic partners.
The third problem with this idea is that this economic theory is bunk. It isn't true to life and neither can you find a single economist who buys into this. In reality, over the short to medium term, there are as many jobs are there people looking for work, and it is impossible to make projections using anything else. This is the lump of labor fallacy.
Now you may not be able to see that there can't be as many jobs as people looking for them, and if so you are like the joke about the Marxist economists who said: "This works in practicem but how does it work in theory?"
It works in theory because anybody getting money also spends money. Jobs are not like holes whicg pegs are put into, but more like a dance circle which any number of people can join.
The fourth problem with this idea is that is contrary to free market philosophy, generally endorsed by Republicans. Anyone who says this is saying that the poor are poor because the rich are rich. If the poor are not poor because the rich are rich, neither are the poor poor because the middle class is middle class or the middle class middle class because certain people are poor, or prevented from getting jobs.
There are lots of corallaries to this "lump of labor" idea, none of which any person proposing this is liable to follow.
Trump's problem .. sloppy thought … a blowhard's mouth. The Donald has made a pile of dough in the New York City real estate … he's made a pile of dough … But I'm not certain that he has any political convictions at all.
What an indictment, especially the part where he has no “political convictions.” He speaks his mind and offers his actual opinions without the usual parsing and obfuscation of the usual politician. But this is not seen as ‘refreshing’ or ‘honest’ but as “sloppy” from a “blowhard.”
Why I like Trump:
He knows how business works.
He’s a capitalist.
He made a “pile of dough.”
He has no political markers to be called in after an election. He owes nothing to the GOP running the congress – who, by the way, are doing nothing they were elected to do. And he certainly owes nothing to the democrats.
He’s candid and not afraid to speak his mind.
He is in favor of strengthening the military instead of laying them off.
I like Krauthammer but do not mind if he responds in kind to Krauthammer’s negative public statements about him. I do not find the “pants” remark to be particularly offensive.
He wants to stop illegals from sneaking across the border and committing crimes such as the recent murder committed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco who had been deported several times before.
Unlike Obama he will not lower his pants and bend over for Putin, Iran or China.
He believes in and promotes American exceptionalism – the idea that the USA is the freest and most benign world power that has ever existed.
He is unabashedly patriotic.
If needed, he is not afraid to put ‘boots on the ground.’
I also like Ted Cruz, one reason being that Cruz refused to pile on Trump in a recent interview. Character is unusual in a politician.
Errata corrected:
Now you may not be able to see that there can be (or are) as many jobs as theer are people looking for them.
Trump knows only one and half things:
1) How to negotiate. He's knows this 80%. His whole idea of negotiating is to press an advantage.
2) How to hire people who know what they are doing. Well, he knows this about 70%.
He wants to stop illegals from sneaking across the border and committing crimes such as the recent murder committed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco who had been deported several times before.
Deportation in his case doesn't sound ver effective, does it? And what is this anyway, punishing people according to who they are, not what they do???
That's not equal justice usder law. It's crazy and malign. I doubt you would say this about any other category of people.
He wants to stop illegals from sneaking across the border and committing crimes such as the recent murder committed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco who had been deported several times before.
Deportation in his case doesn't sound ver effective, does it? And what is this anyway, punishing people according to who they are, not what they do???
That's not equal justice usder law. It's crazy and malign. I doubt you would say this about any other category of people.
"And what is this anyway, punishing people according to who they are, not what they do???"
I assume "they" in this case entered the country illegally, which is why they are being deported (in theory, at least).
bbkingfish wrote:
Trump seems to be comfortably in the mainstream of contemporary Republicanism. He is shining a light on Republican values by articulating what most GOPers only say behind closed doors.
Trump is only in the mainstream of contemporary Republicanism to someone who knows nothing of Republicanism. He upsets the Republican elite by exposing that there is no Republicanism just a bunch of jerks laughing their asses off at how they duped the conservative base again.
This is similar to when I hear in argument that Fox is a conservative news channel. To a conservative Fox is no different than MSNBC or PBS.
My ex-wife a life-long member of the, "I don't care about politics," crowd has announced to the family that Trump has her vote. Something about addressing the real concern of women who don't want to get shot by illegals in public is bubbling up through the nonsense of what we see and read.
And no, deporting people when you have a porous border probably won't keep some of them out permanently.
Sorry the above first paragraph should have quote marks to read like this:
"Trump seems to be comfortably in the mainstream of contemporary Republicanism. He is shining a light on Republican values by articulating what most GOPers only say behind closed doors."
Blogger Sammy Finkelman said...
He wants to stop illegals from sneaking across the border and committing crimes such as the recent murder committed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco who had been deported several times before.
Deportation in his case doesn't sound ver effective, does it? And what is this anyway, punishing people according to who they are, not what they do???
That's not equal justice usder law. It's crazy and malign. I doubt you would say this about any other category of people.
Which is why he also wants to build a wall.
Can't wait for the debates between Trump and Christie.
"Shut up!"
"No, YOU shut up!"
I would like to see Trump and Christie box each other, and Hillary and Carly mud wrestle.
That would be better than debates.
What would the ratings be for Christie vs. Trump or Carly vs. Hillary!
@Sammy F.
Your economic theories are not going to cut much ice on the Upper Rio Grande.
Krauthammer is paralyzed from the neck down, i believe. Has to swallow air and burp it up to speak. I find him impressive, even when I think he is wrong.
Sammy Finkelman: This is the lump of labor fallacy.
Honey, I don't think there's anybody here (well, except for the resident pinkos) who needs a lecture in Econ 101. Get back to us when you grow up and become aware of all the ways the current set-up departs from theoretical models.
The fourth problem with this idea is that is contrary to free market philosophy, generally endorsed by Republicans.
Lol. Yeah, sure, when it's working to their benefit. Otherwise, no. If the people who mattered were losing money from unenforced immigration laws, the crackdown would start tomorrow and the efficiency of enforcement would be a wonder to behold.
Deportation in his case doesn't sound ver effective, does it?
Gee, I wonder why that is?
We can't have any border controls we just can't we can't we can't we can't it's impossible you can't stop people from migrating when they want to you can't you can't you can't you just can't you can't you can't you can't it's impossible...
Funny, some countries manage. What's the magical property that allows them to control this allegedly unstoppable force of nature? It's simple, really. When the people who own the whores in office want the borders controlled, the borders get controlled.
And what is this anyway, punishing people according to who they are, not what they do???
What are you talking about, Sammy? You're either being dishonest, and think this (attempted) sleight of hand is going to work on anybody, or you're so dumb you've gotten tangled up in your own hysterics.
That's not equal justice usder law.
Says the guy who just finished making all kinds of touchy-feely rationalizations for why some people shouldn't be required to respect the law.
It's crazy and malign. I doubt you would say this about any other category of people.
That is, why a certain category of people, but not others, shouldn't have to obey the law.
On the plus side, you appear to have figured out that just screaming "racist!" at people for disagreeing with you isn't really working any more. On the down side, remedial spergonomics and straw-manning hysterics aren't really much of an improvement on that, persuasion-wise.
"Trump Steamrolls NBC Reporter, Takes Shots at Krauthammer and Jonah Goldberg"
That's the most popular kind of Republican to be. One who not only goes on the most mindless, destructive rampage you can imagine, but one who sets his sights on everything and everyone even those who should be in his corner.
The more destructive, the better - in Republican world.
He will be among the most popular of the bunch this way.
Happy Campaign Season, Destructorados!
"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. "Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes. "Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world.” –
who said that?
Trump?
Nope.
wait for it...
harry Reid 1993
garage: "Can't wait for the debates between Trump and Christie"
LOL
Resident middle schooler pretends he's capable of understanding anything the Trump or Christie might say.
Adorable.
It's really quite basic.
Trump is a brand. It's necessary to keep his brand in the spotlight. In his case there is no such thing as bad publicity. If he takes a hit publicly now, he'll recoup it later in some other way.
So, no. I don't believe he is a "serious" candidate.
He is opportunistic and he recognized that there are some very, very, basic "truths" that most politicians on either side won't utter publicly, i.e. the illegal immigrant truths: lack of education, significant health issues, etc.
So Trump simply fills the void and the reactions from all sides gives him precisely what he wants.
While speaking some truths.
Win-win for Trump.
@April Apple Lol! Great quote. That was when white people were still voting for Democrats, and they didn't need to hispander.
Anglelyne said... 7/9/15, 12:16 PM
Sammy Finkelman: According to a news article I read today, Donald Trump actual;ly seems to believe (or claim) that it is a deliberate policy of the Mexican government to send the worst people in Mexico here.
Which would be very interesting, of true, but I don't think there's any basis for saying that.
Substitute "poorest" for "worst" and there most certainly is a basis for saying that.
Only Donald Trump didn't say poorest. If he hasd there wouldn't have bene the same reaction.
There is a basis for saying that when immigration is restricted, the poorest come - the poorest (or those with very close ties to the United States) will violate the law.
Massive migration in recent decades of the poor and unskilled of Mexico into the U.S. has reduced the pressure for reform in Mexico, and channels billions in remittances from the U.S. into the Mexican economy.
And while to some degree, the government of Mexico and other countries likes that and in fact complains about attempts to restruict that as an act against Mexico, that's not the samne thing as actually sending them there if they don;t want to go.
The U S has put pressure on Mexico and they warn people.
The Mexican government actively promotes and supports illegal migration into the U.S., and lobbies for their "rights" (to taxpayer subsidies of all kinds),
No, I don't think they are arguing about subsidies, but just the right to earn a living.
Here's Donald Trump about the latino (and Asian) vote in 2012:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Donald-Trump-Ronald-Kessler/2012/11/26/id/465363/?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Jolt&utm_campaign=New%20Campaign
“Republicans didn’t have anything going for them with respect to Latinos and with respect to Asians,” the billionaire developer says.
“The Democrats didn’t have a policy for dealing with illegal immigrants, but what they did have going for them is they weren’t mean-spirited about it,” Trump says. “They didn’t know what the policy was, but what they were is they were kind.”
I don't know.
Did anything Donald Trump say about Mexican immigration sound like he was kind?
Maybe he thinks there is something else that can "trump" kindness. Like self-interest, or at least imagianry self-interest.
To echo a few others, my first exposure to Jonah Goldberg was early columns at National Review Online, and my mental picture of him is a guy in tee-shirt and shorts flopped on the couch and talking to the dog, the couch and the television. It was good stuff, but not heady stuff.
Here's the Jonah Goldberg G-File issue that the above Donald Trtump quote about kindness is taken from.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421045/donald-trump-fraud
nice blog. t was amazing Trousers For women's
Post a Comment