Fuzzy Rant: Dear TEA Party Trump Chumps, Dump Trump! (updated)

Donald Trump for president?  I don’t think anything has so irked me since that image of Herr Pelosi–massive phallic gavel in both hands– strutting to the Capitol throwing her head back in a manic, evil, tyrannical laugh.   This image:

In case you’ve forgotten (and sadly it seems that far too many patriots HAVE forgotten), this was Pelosi’s victory walk.  This was her leading her traitorous horde to the chamber to vote to shove that healthcare monstrosity down our throats.  This is when she was seconds from sealing the deal, forcing a totally-partisan overhaul of 6% of our nation’s economy, handing it over to federal government control.  This was her, strutting with transparent arrogance, greatly pleased with herself for willfully ignoring the will of the people.  Patriots had assembled how many times in DC?  Been vocal in how many town halls?  Made their wishes known, loudly and clearly.  This is Pelosi’s shining moment:  kicking us in the teeth and forcing passage of a bill that she hadn’t read.  THIS is Nancy Pelosi.

And Donald Trump thinks she did an great job.  That she’s fantastic. 

Look, I get it.  I was warming to Trump.  Big.  I even told Adrienne that he was the top of my list of potentials.  But then I started watching him more closely, listening more closely, and doing a fair bit of googling (it’s amazing what pops up when you search “Soros Trump”).  The thing that first garnered my attention and suspicion was the donations to democrat candidates, including (horrifyingly) Harry Reid.  Against Sharron Angle, who was up in the polls.  Not in some distant past, but last November.  OUR November.  “Remember November” November.


We mock BO’s insane narcissism, but we embrace Trump?  Someone who is at least as, if not more, narcissistic?  We are concerned by BO’s complete disregard for the balance of power laid out in the Constitution, but we think that Trump would have any more regard for it?  He’s a progressive, he supports big government universal health care and a host of other unAmerican ideas.  He wanted Bush impeached over Iraq, believed that Bush had lied (even though he hadn’t, as we know now from the wikileaks documents).  Do you really think someone with Trump’s strong sense of his own judgment, of himself, would ever listen to the will of the people?  Do you really think that Trump would ever give a rip what we say if we disagree with him or his policies?  If you believe that, you haven’t been paying attention (or haven’t ever seen an episode of The Apprentice).  We disdain BO for being a Soros stooge, placed in that position to advance Soros’ and the leftist agenda (until Soros tired of him and decided to replace him with . . . someone.).  But we ignore Trump’s long-standing and unsavory ties to Soros?

The left has one playbook.  One.  And we are being played.  Oh yes, Trump is a leftist–he’s calling himself a “compassionate conservative” nowadays, and we all know that means nanny state entitlements and big government.  Remember how we’d raise questions about BO to his supporters?  Remember how we’d warn about the “spreading the wealth” red flag?  About his ties to Bill Ayers and Reverend Wright?  And remember how we were told to shut up, that BO’s not a socialist, that it doesn’t matter who his friends or associates or acquaintances were?  Remember how we kept saying “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”?  And how we were told that was narrow-minded, paranoid, and stoooopid?

I certainly remember.  Very clearly.

And I’m seeing the exact same thing happen now.  Only now we are the dupes, the koolaid-slurping loons who won’t hear a word against our new messiah.  We poo-poo the associations with Soros, the donations to numerous progressives (high-ranking, out-of-the-closet commies) . . . well, he’s just a business man, he’s being shrewd.  So what if Soros and Soros-related organizations (including one that supports “Palestine”) invested in Trump Towers?  Where else would Trump get the money to build his empire?  He’s shrewd, after all.  It doesn’t matter if he and Soros were both named in the same suit for racketeering and fraud and money laundering.  Nothing came of it, after all.  Smoke doesn’t mean there‘s a fire, you’re being stooooopid.  And paranoid.  And narrow-minded.

It’s deja flipping vu all over again, only we’re the sheeple now.  Blindly following our new pied piper whose only tune is destroying BO, causing a constitutional crisis, and unseating the emperor with no clothes.  And seating in his stead another, equally-naked emperor who has the exact same agenda, the exact same ideology.

We can’t be that stupid.



[Update:  I thought I’d share this tidbit with you, too.  Apparently, Trump needed a new parking lot for some hotel or casino in Atlantic City, and in order to get it, he decided to “convince” a state agency to use eminent domain to take a woman’s home (source for all quotes in link).  She’d lived in that home “for more than three decades,” but hey, Trump needed somewhere for his customers to park their limos, so the state stepped in on Trump’s behalf.  She sued.  She won.  

But Trump’s a heartless creep who would always put his own interests before those of the people of this nation.  We know this because we know his record.  Anyone who could raze a woman’s home for a limo parking lot is not fit to be president of this nation.  Eminent domain was never intended for private use, nor to be loosely defined as “community good” or whatever they’re using to justify taking people’s homes against their will to put up shopping malls and parking lots.  This sort of thing is exactly what is wrong with big, over-reaching government.]

[Update II: Please take the time to read Digital Publius’ excellent post on Trump Psychosis and read through the comments, as well.  Point. Set. Match. ]




57 thoughts on “Fuzzy Rant: Dear TEA Party Trump Chumps, Dump Trump! (updated)

  1. Ok, Fuzzy, who then?

    And this is my point. Trump is a RINO but he's on the TV campaigning for reducing the national debt and ridiculing Obama for being a faked citizen and calling him out.

    I understand your blog against his conservative credentials, but those who are not explicitly against us are for us. I don't think RINO Trump would make a good president, but MAYBE he'll encourage other candidates (tepid RINO Romney is in the lead) to be a bit more assertive.

    Palin has more guts than all the guys put together, but she isn't viable in this election cycle, IMHO.

  2. I like Ryan, but he's not running. Trump is worse than your run-of-the-mill RINO, in my opinion, worse even than Romney (and I loathe Romney). There is no one right now who I can get enthusiastic about supporting. But there are two that I am very enthusiastic about NOT supporting: Trump and Romney.

  3. Let him have his fun trying. He's doing us a big favor digging up some of Obama's dirt and secret. Trump has the $$$ to do so. I don't trust him either, but if it came down to him or Obama, don't even ask who I would vote for.

  4. It is the birther issue plain and simple. The people who believe this are so blinded that they can't see anything else.

    Which is exactly why Obama won't release it. It gives him a big edge and people are falling right into the trap. IMHO.

  5. I started warming to Trump myself. I was taken in by his siren's song about China and reducing the debt, but if indeed he DID support Pelosi and Reid (And there's no evidence to tell me he didn't), he's lost this American voter. Looks like I'll be throwing my weight behind either Bachmann or Caine.

  6. @Bill, this is true. I'm not sure that Trump's sole purpose, but it's probably in there as motivation.

    @Opus, yes, she does. So does Sarah Palin. Oh, the irony.

    @Rotti, well, I don't mind seeing BO squirm a bit (and am still waiting for a total meltdown), but if Trump gets anywhere with that, it's not because of Trump.

    @JACG, agreed, the birther issue is the siren song. I just hope that these people wake the hell up before the primaries.

    @CC, yes, me, too. And he did donate to them, the links are all in the post, and he also was asked about the donations by Laura Ingram and Sean Hannity (I'm sure the vids, well audio in Laura's case, are easy to find). There is absolutely no excuse for donating to Harry Reid to defeat Sharron Angle, nor for that matter against Marco Rubio. Twice! He donated to Crist and to the Dem. NOT to Rubio–Levin discusses this in the vid in the post, and is also available via links in my post. And now he suddenly LOVES the TEA Party? Really? Nope. I don't buy it. If he did only just this month figure out what BO is up to, he's too freaking stupid to be president (and I sincerely doubt he didn't know last year. So . . . .).

  7. Very well state, Fuzzy!

    You did some good work digging up some dirt on him. If, God forbid, he won the nomination, the Obamabots would dig up TONS of dirt, completely discrediting the GOP nominee and making a straight easy path for Obama's second term so he can finish destroying the nation.

    So I cheer The Donald for what he is doing right now, but I'll never vote for him.

    As for alternatives, there are a few… Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty and Mitch Daniels come to mind.

    It's still early, folks.

  8. Look, after these last budget negotiations, I am pretty must through with professional politicians, as are many of my other Tea Party friends. We need an experienced realist, not an ideological purist. Does Trump fit that bill? The jury is still out on that question, but we owe it to ourselves, to our nation and to our precious Republic to give the man a chance to tell us what he intends to do if elected president.

    There is one thing I am totally convinced of, Trump will tell us exactly what he now believes in and what he will do prior to being elected president. And if he should be forced to change his campaign promises, as all presidents do from time to time, he will tell us why and I have the feeling the country will be better as a result

    ex animo

  9. @Randy-g, I love her, but I'm not sure she's going to run. Heck, who knows who's running, so frustrating.

    @Silverfiddle, thank you! It only took a couple hours to get the information, too. I tweeted and FB'd it, but I wasn't satisfied so decided to post on it all, too.

    Of the three you mention, Cain is the best choice to my mind.

    And thank you, too, for posting to FR. I don't have an account there, but I wanted to tell the commenter who mentioned the “Trump Chumps” thing that this came from Levin's vid (s/he should watch it). The Alinsky here isn't me, it's Trump going for BO (not that I mind that part, but this is all-Alinsky all-the-way: this is the 2008 campaign all over again, and it's amazing to me that no one can see it). Therefore, there is no “circular firing squad” as that commenter mentioned because Trump is NOT one of us. Anyway, just wanted to respond to that. Heh

  10. @batazoid, I'm Tea Party, too, and I do understand being fed up with pols, but shouldn't that indicate that more caution than usual is needed? Why latch on to Trump, make excuses for things that are (frankly) inexcusable)? Don't you remember what happened last time someone came along and told people what they wanted to hear, even though we knew who and what he was? The Obots believed every word, even though it flew in the face of his record, of his own words, remember? Don't you remember how that played out, is playing out? Obviously, you can and should think for yourself, but this is my sense of all this. Pick the version of Trump you want to believe in, I guess you already have, but I'm going with the full picture and taking the red flags very seriously.

  11. Hey Miss Fuzzette, tell us how you really feel. I'm with you about Ryan being my favorite, but again he's not running. As for Trump, for now I'm going to just sit back and enjoy the show. I will let you and Mark Levin dig into Trumps not so good side.

  12. Trump is NOT my choice but for three years anyone who RIGHTLY asked legitimate questions about Barry's murky and disturbing past have been dismissed by the left AND the right as idiots and lunatics and frankly I am SICK OF IT. I am disgusted with every single gutless republican who has urged people to STFU over Obama's lack of a verifiable past, but it is only one of many issues that Obama needs to be hit over the head with early and often. Maybe instead of attacking Trump (who is not my choice for POTUS for exactly the lefty reasons stated in your terrific post) Republicans should stop being such fraidy pants pansies and do what they should have done three years ago and go after Obama for EVERYTHING that he should have to answer for.Stop giving him a free pass that would NEVER have been extended to anybody else.
    There should be NOTHING that is off-limits when it comes to getting Barry Soetero or whatever his real name may be, out of the WH. Can anybody tell me when and if Barry ever legally changed his name to Barack Hussein Obama? Because that's not the name he used in Indonesia!

  13. @Odie, well, I've done what I'm going to do on the subject. But wouldn't it have been nice to have known more about BO before he was anointed? Nothing wrong with doing a bit of research to be informed and to make informed choices. If people can still support him knowing all this, that's their business. And if you did, I'd still luv ya πŸ™‚

  14. I may be a “birther” but I am plenty awake. Why do people assume that just because we're happy that SOMEBODY FINALLY has the guts to talk about it openly that we're going to vote for the guy? We're not all one trick pony single issue people, you know. For instance, my deal breaker issue is dhimmitude which is why I can't stand it when ignorant people were talking up Chris Christie. Other people have abortion as their deal breaker issue, still others have deal breakers on other issues and not always just one. Is the “big tent” only big enough for people who won't talk about legitimate questions about Obama that the left deemed we must me silent on? Why take marching orders from them?

  15. @Zilla, I totally agree, and I refuse to be shut down by conservatives who want me to STFU about Trump. My not saying what I think and telling the truth about him would make me just as bad as the people who never said anything that they knew about BO. I don't quite understand why the parallels are crystal clear here. This has all happened before, it was just on the other side, then. Trump gets no free pass from me.

  16. @Zilla, what the hell are you talking about? I didn't tell you to be quiet about the birther thing, and I am certainly not taking any marching orders from anyone (and absolutely not from anyone on the left). I'm actually finding this quite insulting. If you don't want to know about Trump or if you want to ignore it, that's up to you, but there is no need to carry on as if I'm in cahoots with leftists. That's just insane.

  17. @Fuzzy Slippers, I am not sure I have “latched” on to Trump, as you suggest. It's just that I have become increasingly aware that something is dreadfully wrong with our political system…it seems to me the internal forces are simply too powerful for those who depend on it for their very lively hood i.e. professional politicians, to free themselves enough to make the hard decisions we all know are ahead of us as a nation, as a people, as a Republic.

    If you will permit me to suggest…we all must widen our gaze in this respect.

    ex animo

  18. @batazoid, couldn't agree more, and when you widen your gaze on Trump, you find Soros. Over and over. Look, if you want to support Trump, by all means, do so. But I will not. Ever.

  19. @Fuzzy Slippers, I am not sure I understand your Soros implication. But “ever” is not a word that should be used by those who are serious about making the right decision for our Republic — ever.

    ex animo

  20. @batazoid, Did you read my post? I make it quite clear what I think about Soros and Trump. And Trump, in my opinion, is the exact wrong choice for our republic. And while I appreciate your input, I think that I'll stick to selecting and using words of my own choosing.

  21. @Fuzzy Slippers, there is nothing wrong with doing your homework on a presidenial candidate. I dare say this was the greatest fault of John McCain's campaign. That said, I don't see this happening if Donald Trump runs. I am quite sure all of his business dealings, good and bad will come out ad nauseam in the primaries.

    The one thing I am mostly concerned about with Donald Trump is his stated intention of running as a third party presidential candidate should he fail in the Republican primary. If he sticks by that statement, I couldn't vote for him in the primary.

    ex animo

  22. @batazoid, he wouldn't run as an indie in the primary, only if he doesn't get the GOP nom. And yes, that's hugely problematic. Typical bullying tactic, actually. Give me the nom or I hand the presidency to BO for 4 more years. Great, stand-up guy there who obviously cares about America more than himself. /snark off

  23. @Fuzzy Slippers: I stand corrected.

    But let us part on this agreement…if he stands by his statement that he will run as an independent should he not get the Republican nomination, he will put Obama back in office in the general, which is precisely why I could not vote for him in the primary should he not change his statement — which, by the way, goes a long way to demonistrate just what kind of a guy Trump is in terms of informing the voters about his real intentions.

    ex animo

  24. @batazoid, BO informed people of his real intentions. But few were listening and fewer believed him. I don't mind being in disagreement about things; I'm not someone who wants to force everyone into a box “or else.” I leave that to leftists (and not a few conservatives, actually).

  25. Again, we agree — and in my view, that was largely the fault of McCain's campaign.

    But on a different note, I am not sure the people who elected Obama were actually wrong in their own generic reasoning. We still do need someone new. We still do need someone who can free themselves of political dogma of the present. People understand this intuitively during the last presidential election, they understand it now even more. There is something terribly wrong with our present political system. We need a new face, with all its political attending uncertainty — desperate times do, indeed, call for desperate choices — but not reckless ones. So by all means screem out your soul against Donald Trump for the common good of the Republic.

    ex animo

  26. Fuzzy: I apologize for posting your blog to FR without your permission, but you said it so well I couldn't resist, especially since fellow Right Blogistani, Reaganite Republican posted his pro-Trump message there.

    For the record, I like Reaganite Republican's blog. This is not personal, it's just a great debate we really need to have.

    I just got back from church and see that there are 74 replies to my posting your blog there. I can't wait to read them. I'll probably be called every name in the book…

    Happy Sunday!

  27. Why does everyone think the Tea Party supports Trump? Trump says he supports the Tea Party, not the other way around.

    Marco Rubio, Allen West, Rand Paul- yes. I haven't heard the Tea Party support Trump yet, except through the lame stream media. And CPAC ain't the Tea Party.

  28. Zilla: No one here is telling “birthers” to shut up. If anyone is telling you to shut up, ignore them.

    Also, there is a distinction between citizens and investigators looking into the O-Man's murky past and politicians doing it.

    Politicians need to focus on politics and solving the problems 100 years of progressivism have brought to us.

    Trump is doing a great job giving this issue visibility, but that is a completely different skill set than is needed to be president.

    I am also tired of politics as usual; it has our nation on death's door. Unlike some, I have faith that many politicians are waking up, and it's because of the Tea Parties.

  29. @batazoid, sounds good to me πŸ™‚

    @Silverfiddle, no worries, I don't mind your posting it. And I like RR, too, I don't get my panties in a knot because someone doesn't agree with me (a lot of people do, but I'm not one of them). I can separate one opinion on one subject from the whole of a person's viewpoint and the whole of a person. And I don't sweat it when people don't like what I have to say and have little hissy fits and “unfriend” me or whatever. They're free to do that.

  30. @Henry, most of the people that I've read who support Trump are Tea Party peeps. In fact, all of them are (this may because I mostly read and associate with Tea Party people, though). And that's a great point, no Tea Party person has endorsed Trump or voiced support for his run for president (Sarah mentioned the birther stuff, but she, unlike far too many people I've read online, is able to separate what he's questioning and his run. She didn't support or endorse him for president . . . yet. Who knows, she may, but she hasn't yet). Don't hold your breath on a Rubio vote of confidence for Trump, Trump donated to both of Rubio's opponents last November.

  31. As I said, Donald Trump is politically dead in the water as far as Tea Party endorsements go if he intends to run as an independent should he fail the Republican nomination.

    ex animo

  32. @batazoid, I'd be stunned if he got any Tea Party endorsements for the primaries. Someone with actual Tea Party cred will definitely run (be that Palin, Bachmann, one of the Pauls, Cain, West, et al), and they'll get the endorsements. The only endorsement I'll take seriously or care about will be Jim DeMint's. And I think it will be a cold day in hell before he endorses Trump.

  33. @Fuzzy Slippers

    That sounds about right to me, as well.

    However, if Trump really does come up with something dispositive as it relates to Obama's Art. II qualifications and starts talking about achieving significant government spending cuts BEFORE cutting Social Security, MediCare or raising taxes — and if he changes his statement about running as an independent — Tea Party endorsements could happen during the primaries.

    Beating Obama will primarily be focused on the independent voter. Palin, Bachmann, one of the Pauls, Cain, West or Demint might not pull as many as Trump might in the general, which is probably why so many old-guard Republicans are going after Trump now even before he announces. Above all…and correct me if I am wrong…Tea Party members want to defeat Obama as their highest political objective in these upcoming 2012 elections and to do so WITHOUT resorting to RINOism.

    ex animo

  34. @batazoid, well, DeMint's not running, but he's solid, and his endorsement matters to me (I may not agree with it, but I'll listen to what he says). No one else's endorsement means anything to me at all (even Palin's, she endorsed McCain, ick). And I understand that you can support Trump under some conditions; I cannot. There is nothing he can say that will change what he's done and said. Too many people just ignored everything about BO that they didn't like or believed him when he suddenly started talking about loving business and America and saying “God Bless America” after refusing to (and refusing to wear a flag pin), etc. I didn't forget, and I knew he was lying. Ditto Trump. Whatever he says now, I won't forget, and I'll know he's lying. I will never support Trump for president (and yes, I do mean “never” *wink*).

  35. @batazoid, and btw, anyone who tells you that they're going to balance the budget without touching social security, MediCare, or raising taxes is a bald-faced liar. It's not mathematically possible to do that, I'm afraid. Why do you think we're in this mess? No one wants to touch them, so they all lie and kick the can down the road. It's as much our fault as it is the pols. We need to wake up on that score and be a bit more realistic.

  36. @Fuzzy Slippers

    You won't vote for Trump if he becomes the Republican president canidate? Interesting.

    BTW, if you reduce Social Security and MediaCare BEFORE achieveing significant cuts in government spending, we will never, ever reduce the nation's deficit.

    ex animo

  37. @batazoid, I didn't say anything like that, but you can't make significant cuts in gov't spending without touching SS and MediCare, they make up well over 1/3 of the total budget and more than 2/3 of mandatory spending. They both have to be revamped at some point. The only question is, as Paul Ryan says, do we start now when we can control the cuts or later when they're draconian and immediate? The deficit is a problem, but even if it were reduced to zero, we'd still have a massive (over $14 trillion) debt to deal with. That can't be touched without surpluses. We're in serious financial trouble, and not dealing with SS and MediCare is just not an option.

  38. @Silverfiddle, thanks πŸ™‚ I'd like to think the debate is healthy, but it seems that many people are content to start flinging insults and attacks simply because I asked questions, googled some answers, and posted my opinion based on those findings. They hate Obots but expect fawning and silence on Trump? Um, no.

    Anyway, I saw the comments and thought about registering to respond to a couple (as I said above), but I realized that if people can't click a links to find sourcing or even read the darned post (as clearly many did not), it probably wasn't worth my time and energy. But it was fun reading what everyone was thinking/saying (and VERY deja vu, substitute “Obama” for “Trump” and “Bush” for “Obama” and you have the exact conversation and arguments that lefties were having and making from 2006-2008, and up to now, actually. Amazing.).

  39. Yeah. You're now over 150 comments.

    FR is a rough crowd. The Mitt and Huck zealots poisoned almost every political post during the 2008 GOP primary, and now God forbid you make a negative comment about Palin. I have seen more people ZOT'd over that heresy, which really burns me up.

    We're supposed to be for free speech, but the the loonies who get someone banned exchange highfives and exult over the fact that they've shut someone up.

    There is a dedicated minority there who have no strategic thought whatsoever. They actually think it would be a winning strategy for everyone in the GOP to question Obama's citizenship every day and never compromise one iota with the dems.

  40. @Silverfiddle, yes, I picked up on that undercurrent. It's a shame. I don't follow that site (and probably won't start now, heh), but it's not at all surprising that they attack anyone who says anything they don't like, probably (all irony lost on them) waving the Alinsky banner. And another of my favorites, is the “circular firing squad”/”eating our own” silliness that (again, all irony lost) is lobbed at anyone who criticizes or questions a conservative or pseudo-conservative (or outright leftist like Trump). They berate lefties for being mindless sheeple, but then work overtime to try to harass, harangue, and bully everyone into lockstep. Hard to take that kind of thing seriously.

    It takes all kinds, I guess, but being what you claim to loathe is not really an effective strategy. I asked these questions about BO back in the day, and I will ask them of anyone who comes on the scene on either side, giving no passes to anyone because they say something now that flies in the face of their past statements and actions/record (if we've learned nothing from BO, we should have learned that).

  41. I've always liked “The Donald” as a business man.
    I have not trusted him, from the start, as a politician, and certainly not one representing me or leading our country. Not sure what he's up to, exactly, but based on his political donations and actions prior to all the latest hoopla, he is up to no good.
    The best chance we have is Allen West- pretty sure he's waiting for a VP invitation.
    My gut tells me it's gonna be another 4 years of Obama.
    I hate to say or think it, but really, it's what I'm thinking right now.

  42. @Andrew, lol

    @Pedaling, I know how you feel. Let's try not to despair, though. If I'm right about Trump, then he will indeed bring BO down (he'll have the goods and will not be afraid to use them), and while some will decide that he “deserves” the WH for that reason alone, most (I have to believe this) are not that pig ignorant. If I'm wrong about Trump, he's going to bluster around until he grates on everyone's last nerve and then shuffle off to evict someone from their home so he can build a golf course. Either way, we win.

    As to BO winning, don't be so sure. The GOP doesn't have a field right now, at all. No one has actually declared for the race and won't for at least six to eight more weeks. The later they wait, the more frustrating for us (we're chomping at the bit to oust BO), but the better for the eventual nominee (less time for personal vendettas waged by the LSM and BO's thug machine). This is no normal election, and it's not going to play out normally. We're going to win this. We just have to keep our heads.

  43. Fuzzy, this is great! I wish more people would look into candidates and not go by a feeling or a few sound bites. If you want to know where someones heart is look at how they spend their treasure. “The Donald” is obviously not a true conservative.

  44. My hope is that the Republicans will play it smart for a change and have a good candidate waiting in the wings watching the left fall all over themselves trying to discredit the ones they think may run. I can hope anyway because we know darn well how they will destroy them if they were revealed now. Which is why they should hold out as long as possible.
    We need to throw it back at them for a change because had the media done their job they could have done to Obama what they did to Palin. They sure had enough material to go on.
    Your description of Pelosi holding that gavel in her bony hands was spot on. I haven't heard quite as accurate a description as yours.
    Good One.

  45. @Trestin, thanks! πŸ™‚ So true, and I've been doing a bit more googling, turns out (shocker) that eminent domain/eviction for a limo parking lot is not the only incident in which Trump rolled over people in the pursuit of greed and selfish gain.

    @Lisa, the GOP does not have a good candidate waiting in the wings, though they think they do in Romney or some other loser who's running yet again and who thinks it's their “turn” now. heh, thanks, and now I want to add “bony” to the description! That's perfect.

  46. Yea, Trump can easily be cast in the role of crony capitalist. Nice work, but I wasn't much worried about him outside of being a spoiler as an Inde vote splitter. He's a Perot. Not going to get majority vote.

    As far as who we will get to discuss a year from now, who knows. I damn sure hope it's not a romney or huckleberry or similar.

  47. I think the best thing Trump is doing right now is highlighting (if they are listening) to any would be GOP candidates that we don't want polite and nice. We want someone who is as sick of the left as we are and willing to take on Obama – with passion – not pussification.

  48. Janie: Elections are won in the middle, not the fringes.

    It's about style and tone. Think Ronald Reagan. He was an unapologetic conservative, but he didn't trash people. He was sick of the left, but he won with a smile on his face, he was polite and nice, and he won over the nation.

    Trump is performing a valuable service, but he is far from presidential material.

  49. @Kid, he goes far beyond being a crony capitalist. Hopefully, we can get enough people informed that Trump can't be a Perot spoiler (and I don't believe for a minute that he would not run as an indie if he didn't get the GOP nom–he's just saying that now to keep support of those who object to this blatant blackmail).

    @malcontent, Trump's the like of BO, no doubt about it.

    @Janie Lyn, yes, I'm glad that Trump is tearing down the walls that have been put up around BO, but that's the only good thing I can say about him. There are quite a few who will be going after BO with passion and facts, but it's still very early in the process.

    @Silverfiddle, the American people are tiring of pettiness, spite, and personal attacks. Substance matters, character matters. BO would never have been elected if he'd revealed himself to be such a petty, spiteful ideologue. That talk about “no red states, no blue states,” “post-partisanship,” and other assorted lies that BO told got him elected (well, contributed to it, we all know the story). What he's doing now is revealing himself to be the exact opposite of whom he claimed to be in 2006-2008. I'm happy to see it and hope he keeps it up. πŸ˜‰

What say you?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s