Trumpism: Riots

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

Trump

 

 

 I think we’ll win before getting to the convention, but I can tell you, if we didn’t and if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re, you know, 100 short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400, because we’re way ahead of everybody, I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically. I think you would have riots. I think you would have riots.

… I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.

Donald Trump, March 16, 2016

More to explorer

Ignorance, Sheer Ignorance

  The Left is becoming a stronghold of ignorant yahoos:   Just outside downtown Dunn, N.C., a historic antebellum-style house honors Maj.

Fifty Years

Hattip to commenter Dale Price.  My motto has always been:  “Slay all the Lunies, and let God sort ’em out!”

Deep State? What Deep State?

Surprise!:     Who would have thought that, this deep into the Russia collusion probe, we’d be learning about yet another dossier

60 Comments

  1. Wait a minute, I thought Trump’s followers were all good, hardworking, decent Americans and it was those crazy leftist Occupiers and Black Lives Matter thugs who were causing all the trouble at Trump’s rallies! Trump’s followers would never resort to violence if they didn’t get their way, right? Right…?

    Seriously, though, it’s POSSIBLE that what Trump means by “riots” are simply noisy, disruptive political demonstrations like the one in Chicago last week — or like the ones in Chicago in 1968. If he really means riots a la Ferguson, Baltimore or L.A. — the kind that involve looting, arson, beating up innocent motorists, assaulting police officers, etc. — then he must have a pretty darn low opinion of the people who support him.

  2. I think he’s right. Look, I’m a Cruz guy because all the other viable conservatives couldn’t make it past Iowa. I think Cruz is the best candidate for a conservative Republican party. I don’t know if Trump hurts the GOP, but I do believe he hurts conservatism. That said, if he’s a hundred or so away, and Cruz is 500 delegates behind, it’s hard to see how anybody other than Trump could be considered the most legitimate claimant for the nomination.
    .
    Especially since all the schemers scheming to deny Trump have no intention of allowing Cruz to emerge triumphant. If they steal it from Trump and turn around and give it to Rubio or Kasich, or Bush or Romney, I’ll go third party with Trump! And I don’t like him any more than Don or Paul do.

  3. Any attempt to hand the nomination to someone other than Cruz or Trump – who will be the only candidates close to 1,237 – will be as catastrophic if not more so for the GOP than Trump winning outright. As long as Cruz and Trump are reasonably close in delegate total heading into the convention, then it’s anyone’s ballgame between the two of them.

  4. I fully understand why so many Americans like Trump. I just don’t understand why they just don’t draft Putin instead. Trump is a pu**y compared to Putin, and I guarantee you that Putin would take the job. Sure there are pesky constitutional requirements and all that, but the constitution is just part of the establishment for crying out loud!

  5. I agree, as long as it’s close. Cruz can’t be more than a hundred or so delegates behind Trump, who has to be more than a hundred or so delegates short of the nomination, or it’s going to look like party insiders thwarting the will of the voters.
    .
    And even then, Cruz is going to have to successfully argue that his wins in closed primaries and caucuses should count for more than Trump’s in open primary states –assuming that’s still a credible argument.
    .
    But my guess is Trump will have enough delegates to win on the first ballot.

  6. I agree with Paul Z. But beyond that I imagine Trump would make an artful deal with Cruz before the convention. After all the Republican establish is the enemy of both of them.

  7. Trump is supposed to be such a great deal maker, why is he even talking about he deserves the nomination if he is close and if he doesn’t get it, there is going to be trouble? The party’s nomination process is not who can get the closest to the number of delegates required to get the nomination; it’s who can get that minimum number of delegates. If you’re 1 short, you don’t get it unless you start dealing, not threatening. So, Trump, show us what a great deal maker you are, and play by the rules. Personally, I hope you don’t get the nomination.

    This election was important on its own; but the untimely sudden death of the most consistent and articulate conservative Supreme Court jurist makes it the most important election ever because of who gets to nominate a Supreme Court replacement, and if there are enough U.S. Senators who will confirm the nominee. The U.S. Catholic Church’s future, as far as man is concern and our Constitutional rights of freedom of religion, are at stake. No Catholic or Christian who says they love God can vote for a Democrat in this election. The Supreme Court has done enough damage to God’s greatest gifts – the gift of life, and the sanctity of marriage. We desperately need a person in office who will definitely nominate strict constitutionalist, and Senators who will confirm the appointment, or we will be in trouble like we’ve never seen before. This election is not about the possible end of the Republican Party, it’s about the possible end of the U.S. States of America.

  8. The pendulum is swinging the other way. After 8 years of Obama, many disinterested people have awoken to a nightmare and the predictable reaction has set in. Sadly, Trump is correct: there will be violence if he is denied the nomination.

  9. BTW I forgot to add that if Trump wins the nomination there will be violence anyways. The Sanders commies will riot.

  10. I recall people getting really upset with Obama re: his “punish your enemies” comments.

    But here, where Trump threatens riots, too many of the same people are doing a cricket impression.

  11. Trump said, “I think you would have riots.” Trump did NOT say, “I advocate riots.” There is a difference.
    .
    PS, I am not a Trump supporter. And I acknowledge that he did not apparently follow up by saying he wanted peaceful protest and wuld oppose riots. However, nor did he say that he wanted riots.
    .
    The liberal left wants riots. Rest assurred that is what they want.

  12. Dale Price, I would have made the argument in the reverse: namely, that Obama first set the tone and the standard for the most threatening rhetoric in recent US election memory: note the following, esp. many made during his election campaigns:

    6/21/2008, Philadelphia Democratic party fundraiser, HuffPo: “…what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

    9/18/2008, on the campaign trail, Obama urged “that his supporters “argue with [people], get in their faces.”

    Summer, 2009, during the Obamacare fight, Chief of Staff Jim Messina openly stated, ““If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard.” However, Pat Dollard, a political analyst, alleges the quote has been tied to Obama himself in defending his signature “legislation.”

    In spring 2009, while trying to capitalize on Wall Street bonuse payouts during the nadir of the US economic collapse, Obama was eager to stir up fury: March 30, 2009 “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry. I’m angry.”
    ….
    Or, after the BP oil spill, Obama famously spoke of seeking after “whose ass to kick”.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBKeB5tyigk

    There are so many more of Obama’s specific and clever threats, these are just a handful of ready examples. And it is hard to tell most observers that Romney didnt look cowed and threatened—by what, we don’t know, but he was so subdued—-by the 2nd and 3rd presidential 2012 debates, that something went on—of course, in Obama’s general velvet glove/iron fist manner.
    ….
    So, when we are looking to self-controlled presidential speech, I would say that Saul Alinsky, er Barack Obama has set the tone and the standard of irresponsible speech that Trump will have a hard time equaling. Trump is just more rough-edged and direct. And, no, I don’t approve of it, but the one who destroys people is more likely Obama. Ask Dinesh D’Souza about that.
    ….
    Oh. And then there is our wise and smiling, Obama-hugging Pope, who has commented that he could understand, if insulted, that someone may get a “punch in the face” from the old bar bouncer. Great. I am inspired.

  13. I completely reject the idea that the plurality winner should be entitled to the nomination.
    1. In general it is a horrible way to account for the preferences of voters in a multi-candidate field. It is particularly bad in this case as there is a candidate that at least 40% of the party would consider their last choice.
    2. It is not the rules that were put in place at the start of the process. Kasich’s whole strategy has been based on forcing a brokered convention. If we just hand the nomination to the plurality winner, why would he have stayed in? While Rubio could have thought he had a chance to rack up the second most delegates after Super Tuesday, it was apparent he wasn’t going to come in first, so he would have dropped out earlier. Cruz and Rubio fans strategically voted for Kasich in Ohio, why would they do that in a plurality race?
    This focus on trying to delegitimize the convention if it picks someone other than the frontrunner is just shenanigans on the part of the Trump campaign.

  14. I agree on all counts, MichaelD.
    That said, I believe Trump will secure the nomination and get trounced in November. If the convention somehow allows for a Cruz nomination, he’ll get beat, though perhaps not trounced. GOP’s best hope is for the convention to settle on Kasich, who arguably can take more voters from Hillary than he’d lose from Trump and Cruz supporters, but that requires making two very long shots. Get used to President Clinton. The bad news is that she’ll be no better than Obama. The good news is she won’t be any worse either.

  15. The Trump Presidential campaign will be the biggest thing to happen in politics in years. My guess Trump will win in a landslide. Priggish Republicans will get on board eventually.
    Many Democrats can’t wait to get on board. Anybody got a problem with this?

  16. Michael Dowd,
    No, I don’t really have a problem with Dems supporting Trump.
    I’m indifferent as between the ruthless criminal and the ignorant manchild, and this priggish Republican will never support either.

  17. At the very least he is setting up for a third party run, probably on the claim that he is the real GOP candidate.
    Coming to the convention with 1100 delegates means nothing. After the first ballot about half of “his” delegates will be free to vote as they will. Trump has no on the ground organization but Cruz has been working hard to get his supporters on delegate slates so they’ll be there even if pledged to Trump.

    As for riots, well, I’m sure Trump would encourage [cough] demonstrations in his favor inside and outside the convention hall.

  18. Regarding threats of violence if one’s candidate loses check out John Quincy Adams’s campaign song:

  19. “That said, I believe Trump will secure the nomination and get trounced in November. If the convention somehow allows for a Cruz nomination, he’ll get beat, though perhaps not trounced.”

    In regard to Trump, Mike I doubt he would get beaten. He is clearly leading a growing movement and draws heavily from independents and Democrats. He is not a conventional politician and they can be quite dangerous when they are heading a political crusade, and as much as I despise Trump I think that clearly is what he has become the unworthy head of. In regard to Cruz I think he could take Clinton. He is tough and canny and this should be a Republican year. We must also take into account that Clinton is a miserable politician with numerous scandals on her back. Trump as a third party would make it rough, but I think he draws heavily from Democrats and independents and thus I do not think that it is predictable that the Republican would lose. If Trump is the candidate my guess is that ten percent of the Republicans, like me, would sit the race out, but my guess is that Trump would draw more Democrats that he would lose Republicans. In any case it will be a wild ride this fall.

  20. Don, I hear ya. But as rebuttal I reprint (w/o permission or attribution) this email missive from a friend

    Trump and certain GOP types (e.g., House Majority Leader McCarthy) cite the drastic increase in GOP turnout and new voters as proof that Trump is growing the party. Perhaps, but not all of those are coming vote for Trump. Many are coming to vote against him. According to the exit polls Trump has a plurality but not a majority of first time voters. He is well below 50% in overall votes cast, particularly in closed primary states. In the most recent primaries, in which Trump got 2/3 of the delegates with 40% of the vote (thank Rubio for that), over half of the GOP voters find him dishonest/untrustworthy and a similar percentage will consider voting third party. The most glaring problem is that if Trump were in fact creating all this new GOP voters, then why is he trailing Clinton so badly in the polls.

    I saw a non-political poll a few weeks ago, even before the GOP candidates decided they would get around to attacking Trump, in which various celebrities were ranked as favorable/unfavorable. Trump was in the low 60s unfavorable, ranked right beside Al Sharpton and Bill Cosby. Great company.

  21. Oh, I quite agree Mike that there are contrary arguments that can be made and the data thus far is incomplete. I think however that Trump resonates with people who believe the country is broken and I think that is probably a solid majority of the American people. Reagan, and how I hate using his name in a discussion about Trump, did quite poorly in the polls against Carter until June/July of 1980:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_polling_for_U.S._Presidential_elections#United_States_presidential_election.2C_1980

    I will be candid and confess that I thought that Trump was a joke candidate before the primaries began. I discounted the polls, assuming he was benefiting from name recognition. I was wrong. I then thought his ceiling was 35% and I was wrong. It still confounds me that a man who breaks all the political rules may well be the nominee. No, if I were a Democrat strategist I would be ringing alarm bells right now. In politics nothing is harder to beat than a candidate to whom the normal rules simply do not apply and I think Trump, God help us, is such a candidate.

  22. Understood, Don, and I concede you may be right. In an odd way I don’t care since, as I said above, I’m indifferent as to the ignorant manchild versus the ruthless criminal. I have no confidence at all in assessing which would be worse, so I will likely vote Libertarian or write in Mrs. P, who being a grandmother would no longer wince at the thought of conceding satisfaction of the 35 year age threshold. 😉

  23. Ha! Well, for the first time in my life I will be sitting out a Presidential election if Trump is the nominee, although I assume the Democrats will do their worst to change my mind. In Illinois it is an easy call, since if Trump is about to take this state he is on his way to a 48 state romp. Although Trump v. Clinton would be an appalling choice for the country, I admit that it would be one of the more interesting elections I have observed. Anything, literally anything, could happen: the FBI director threatening to resign if Clinton is not indicted, Trump deciding that politics is too boring and dropping out, Clinton being indicted and led away in cuffs, both candidates being besieged by new and old scandals, a sex tape of Bill Clinton emerging, Trump’s ex-wives and girlfriends forming a powerful pro-Trump PAC, Donald Trump’s toupee being kidnapped and held for ransom, Trump losing by ten points, Trump winning by 10 points, substantial third party challengers, riots, acts of God, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria! All bad for the country, but high in entertainment value!

  24. Don McClarey.

    “I n politics nothing is harder to beat than a candidate to whom the normal rules simply do not apply and I think Trump, God help us, is such a candidate.”
    New York Times, February 29th.

    ———————————————————————————————————————————–

    “Hillary has built a large tanker ship, and she’s about to confront Somali pirates,” said Matthew Dowd, the chief strategist for former President George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign, who is now an independent.
    New York Times, 2-29-16.

  25. “All bad for the country, but high in entertainment value!”

    Well, the first half of that sentence applies to the last seven years.

  26. Don, we agree on all counts.
    Michael, good catch. Proves once and for all the the NYT is not always wrong.

  27. Don, you say trump is dangerous, but you don’t say to whom or in what. i’ve not seen you refer to bernie or billary as dangerous – ? you’ve not the same concern?

    does this frighten you – Link: http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/obama-planned-parenthood-ceo-superhero (sent via Shareaholic)

    —-
    Speaking at an event celebrating Women’s History Month, President Obama showered praise upon Cecile Richards. His comments were prefaced by a shoutout to Sana Amanat, a comic book creator known for “Ms. Marvel” (secret identity Kamala Khan), the first Muslim superhero.

    “For a lot of young boys and girls, Sana is a real life superhero,” Obama said. “We’ve got a lot of them in this room.”

  28. “Don, you say trump is dangerous, but you don’t say to whom or in what.”

    I said that in the context of noting that Trump is a politician to whom the normal rules do not apply. That makes him dangerous to his adversaries who are used to conducting normal campaigns based upon the usual rules that apply in a given time and place. For example, being a loud mouth blowhard is normally not a way to attract votes. Another example is that I do not recall evangelicals flocking before to a thrice married candidate, or one who has been openly shacked up with mistresses. Praising Planned Parenthood would normally be the kiss of death in a Republican presidential primary. Trump has demonstrated time and again that these and other normal rules of how a campaign should play out simply do not apply to him. That is the sign of someone heading a movement determined to get someone elected no matter what. That is hard to fight against, if the movement is a rapidly growing one and the candidate heading the movement is up against weak opposition. Hillary, that is your cue to start sweating.

    If Trump should be elected I think his ignorance, ego and generally liberal instincts might well be a danger to the country, not notably more than Obama or Clinton however. That is the reason why I would never vote for Obama or Clinton and that is also the reason why I will never vote for Trump.

  29. Hey Don. Interestingly, what you say about Trump could also be said about Pope Francis but more so.

  30. Michael, pull that arrow out of your chest , slowly
    .
    Don – close but no cigar! you are sill spouting in generalities and personal perceptions- trump is dangerous because:

    “Trump is a politician to whom the normal rules do not apply. That makes him dangerous to his adversaries who are used to conducting normal campaigns based upon the usual rules that apply in a given time and place”.

    He is dangerous to his lying amoral adversaries – and that is bad?? Lyndsey Graham? John McCain? Marco Rubio? Kasich? Pelosi, Ryan ? Bernie? cankles ? Dingy filthy Harry Reid…. the usual rules of our abusive politicians and flawed political system don’t apply to him- my point to you is “the people won’t let them apply to him”- we are tired of the old rules and political correctness, the failure to answer a question head on- the morphology that goes on once they take and never leave office. and so many are labeled Catholic…..

    “For example, being a loud mouth blowhard is normally not a way to attract votes.”

    The point being is if he were a soft spoken Mondale type and passed his message in a less’ blow hard , more mondale fashion, that would be ok and in accordance with generally accepted political guidelines of behavior? Time for PC is over Don, gone- no more business as usual.
    The makers and hard workers are tired of being ‘ milked and sheared to fund black lives matter and university professors who are tenured and foreign wars not thought thru … and obama phones and section 8 housing. and$15 dollar minimum wages with no personal investment in growth and worth; no increase in productivity – defies the laws of gravity ….. we are done!
    Why do charter schools even exist??

    Evangelicals attracted to one who is ” thrice'[sic] married?? or shacked up – are you serious-? You glean some sort of morality filter from non acceptance by these heretics???
    Do you not recall Brother Jimmy Swaggart reminding all us Catoliks we are going to hell – he, caught with his prostitute in a rented convertible [ and welcomed back by his ” FLOCK “and fellow evangelicals ]
    Pat Robertson and Oral, they talk directly to God, Who speaks back to them…… just listen to them and their legions of followers…. are you serious ??
    Joel??
    Michael [ m.l.] King ph.D – the womanizer plagerist communist….. a fine leader of men.
    billy_howard_disabled_rapist
    Billy Howard Guy: Pastor charged with six counts of sexual crimes including molesting mentally-disabled woman in his care
    http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/ashe-co-pastor-accused-sex-offense-person-his-care/nfsJ4/
    tyrone_banks
    Tyrone Banks: Minister charged with rape and sodomy of 13 year-old (more victims coming forward)
    http://www.myfoxal.com/story/25431240/pleasant-grove-man-58-charged-with-raping-13-year-old-girl
    joseph_hall_sex_crimes
    Joseph Hall: Pastor charged with 14 counts of sex crimes against kids as young as 12 years old
    http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/dallas-minister-accused-sex-crimes-including-rape-/nf9N3/
    trevon_boone_rapist
    Trevon Boone: 39-year old minister arrested for rape of a minor
    http://wtkr.com/2014/05/28/local-minister-charged-with-rape-turns-himself-in/
    larry_michael_mughsot
    Larry Michael Berkley: Pastor charged 16 counts of sexual assault, drugs, and, yes – a dead body…
    http://wreg.com/2014/05/06/shocking-allegations-against-former-pastor-of-churches-in-harrison-ar-and-henning-tn/
    jerome_clay
    Jerome Anthony Clay: Pastor charged with raping a minor, under the age of 16 (prior record for domestic abuse)
    http://abc7.com/archive/9466369/
    paul_andrei
    Paul Endrei: Senior pastor charged with two counts of sexual battery and gross sexual imposition
    http://www.cleveland.com/westlake/index.ssf/2014/05/westlake_pastor_accused_of_sex.html
    jordan_andrei_sex_crimes
    Jordan Endrei: Pastor joins father in charges of sexual battery
    http://fox8.com/2014/06/05/second-pastor-at-westlake-church-charged/
    damien_bonner_rapist
    Damien Bonner: Pastor arrested for rape of a minor (who he forced to take “morning-after” pill after unprotected sex)
    http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/affidavit-tulsa-pastor-charged-with-lewd-molestation-gave-victim-pill/article_bb06eaeb-0950-5fd6-b204-7f256a373d11.html
    Second victim comes forward: http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/7th-molestation-complaint-filed-against-tulsa-pastor-damien-bonner-after-2nd-victim-alleges-abuse
    allen_lehman_sex_crimes

    These evangelicals and their fellow leaders are o.k. cause they play by todays’ political rules.,right Don ?? and they cause you confusion because they accept in their little heretical mis guided hearts someone who is 2 times with a whore; the ‘1st one’ a marriage bond may have existed. I bet they like Hollywood personalities too… i shall not cast the first stone……….

    TRUMP and PP – Ernst…. and Don, this is the specificity one looks for……

    Link: http://www.lifenews.com/2015/10/19/donald-trump-planned-parenthood-should-absolutely-be-de-funded/ (sent via Shareaholic)

    During an interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump repeated his assertion that the Planned Parenthood abortion business should be de-funded. Planned Parenthood has been caught in a series of 10 videos selling aborted babies and their body parts.

  31. “He is dangerous to his lying amoral adversaries – and that is bad??”

    My statement was not in judgment but descriptive. A politician to whom the normal rules of politics do not apply raises an enormous problem in election strategy for his election adversary.

    “The point being is if he were a soft spoken Mondale type and passed his message in a less’ blow hard , more mondale fashion, that would be ok and in accordance with generally accepted political guidelines of behavior?”

    Acting like a juvenile cretin is normally not the way to win votes, and that is precisely how Trump behaves.

    “Evangelicals attracted to one who is ” thrice'[sic] married?? or shacked up – are you serious-? You glean some sort of morality filter from non acceptance by these heretics???”

    Yeah, I actually have friends among our fellow Christians who are non-Catholic, in addition to all my relatives on my father’s side of my family, and normally that type of behavior is a turn off for evangelicals. Of course the randiest President was our fellow Catholic JFK, so you might want to park your too high horse. I might add that if Catholics in Congress had the same view on abortion that Evangelicals in Congress have, abortion would now be illegal. As for your parcel of worthless links, similar tactics are used by anti-Catholic bigots to “prove” that all priests are child molesters.

  32. Paul, normally when a pol contradicts himself inside of 72 hours, that’s a bad thing. It doesn’t change the minds of his opponents, and it makes his supporters begin to question their support. But not Trump. The normal rules don’t apply to him.
    .
    Take the abortion issue here. What are we to conlude? PP does wonderful things –except for abortion because that selling dead baby parts is a nasty business. Does that mean Trump would defund PP? Defund PPs abortion business (nb: money is fungible –to subsidize any of it is to subsidize all of it)? Outlaw abortion? Outlaw selling baby parts? Does it mean we have to pay for the wonderful side of the business so PP can get out of the nasty side of it?
    .
    The Republican Party has been reliably (if not effectually) pro-life since Reagan. If Trump becomes the GOP nominee, that may no longer be true. Much to the relief, ironically enough, of those establishment/elite types that Trump supporters are expecting a Trump presidency to rebuke.
    .
    And that’s what makes Trump dangerous.

  33. I would also say to you (and others): embrace the fact that St. Augustine of Hippo seperated state from church a millenia-and-a-half before Hugo Black seperated church from state in this country.

  34. I won’t vote for either Clinton or Trump. I pray there will be another choice by then. If taking a stand at the Republican convention against Trump breaks the party completely, so be it. The Democratic party is under assault too, being eaten by their own left…
    Both parties need reformation. This might be a good time to “take the battle to the enemy” (which I say is an Anti-American and Anti-Christian progressivism) and form new parties. – Not being boxed into a corner of party loyalty when there is not a a party remaining to be loyal too.

  35. For tactical reasons I would prefer it if the McCain/Romney/Bush wing of the party were the ones to walk out in a huff.
    .
    But if you want to shake everything up for the sake of shaking things up, Trump (whether you support him or not!) is your man.

  36. ah…i begin to smell a chapter out of Philips book coming – a good ol’ ad hominem –

    Regarding your protestant friends and my high horse – Indifferentism is a modernist error and a challenge for us all and or most or some of our protestant friends – stating abortion would be stopped if congress were populated with Protestants vs the pseudo catholics[ i would argue are protestants ] Is wishful thinking and cannot be proven so dream on : – PP is one issue, You cant legislate an end to abortion. but you stop the chicanery…. Judge Powell; LOL

    I don’t understand Ernst’s response- Ernst there is no separation of church from state in the eyes of the Catholic Faith and Magesterium – Viva Christo Re!!!! your comment states our problem in a nutshell. but i digress…..

    i had previously stated a quote wherein Trump declares himself , time and place, chapter and verse to defund the abortion giant; don McC has continued to offer no specifics as to his diatribe anti Trump- duh?? –

    Ernst you actually wrote ‘ The Republican Party has been reliably (if not effectually) pro-life since Reagan. If Trump becomes the GOP nominee, that may no longer be true – you wrote that? what plane of consciousness are you on, now ? and when you wrote that? , huh? you too are a frequent reader of the blog i take it?? as don would say….

    Other issues at a lower priority are – American Exceptionalism, immigration, fare trade, govt’ waste, education,common sense to name a few. Donald has been very clear on these, hence the majority of hard working tax paying americans are supporting his candidacy and good folks like you Don,unlike some contributors to your excellent blog, are slowly coming around to that fact. No more political business as usual. the game has a chance to change and people see that. I sense a pre- revival coalescing. the people are waking up. We’ve had people, strangers, applauding our public roosary across from PP lately, where as they used to jeer and curse us….. There will be over 150 protests against PP in cities across this country on 4/23- most starting at 9 A.M. EDST. attended by thousands! things have a chance to change.

    And don’t vote for Trump- don’t vote all ye good men who hold protestant heretics in such high view – Vote or don’t vote and give the presidency to Billary et.al. unborn and old and weak will be so much better off as will all we tax payers – clearly ;

    This Palm sunday, as we celebrate the King of the United States triumphantlly entering Salem thru the Easter gate , pray the protestants you know are moved to come under him into the one true church before it is too late but PAleeese don’t give them some false laurel to a moral high ground they neither deserve nor have earned. …………… Boniface VIII …. unam sanctam –
    Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff. http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Bon08/B8unam.htm

    and yes, JFK was perhaps AMONG the randiest- who said he was catholic? Martin luther was Catholic too..by some definition – ya know king kong was a monkey too but for Randiest in my life time, beyond FDR and JFK i must defer to the north american horn dog WJ Clinton

  37. Ernst there is no separation of church from state in the eyes of the Catholic Faith and Magesterium – Viva Christo Re!!!!
    .
    Then somebody, somewhere along the way has misunderstood the Gospels, the Epistles and De Civitate Dei.

  38. I think I’ve read everything now: Ultramontanists for Trump!

    I bet he’s got the Promethean neo-Palagianist vote too.

  39. I may be sorry I ask, but here goes:

    Ernst you actually wrote ‘ The Republican Party has been reliably (if not effectually) pro-life since Reagan. If Trump becomes the GOP nominee, that may no longer be true – you wrote that? what plane of consciousness are you on, now ? and when you wrote that? , huh? you too are a frequent reader of the blog i take it?? as don would say….

    Are you refering to the part where I called the GOP reliably (if ineffectually) pro-life, or the part where i suggest Trump’s committment to pro-life issues is dubious at best?

  40. ernst- i’ll play – no where do you say in your earlier post that trumps commitments are dubious….. so to paraphrase now in different words violates the meaning of a quote-
    I said ‘you wrote’ – therefore playing dumb, i.e. which part am i referring to is IMO childish.
    don’t do that.

    I assume from your comment you think the power and authority to govern comes from the consent of the people? Do you not acknowledge the Kingship of Christ over American individuals and their government? you been reading George Weigle, perhaps.

    and it is true you may be sorry … and perhaps forgettable.. Are you too young to recall the ’95 Republican control of all of Congress [Gingrich, that paragon Catholic as speaker] and the Presidency and did nothing to stop the funding of abortion , Which was totally within their control? The contract with America 10/12/95 [ excluding her unborn]? all funding originates from the lower house Ernst. You recall President Regan coming out and walking with the March for Life people that year- ol’ Reliable [ On June 14, 1967, Ronald Reagan signed the Therapeutic Abortion Act, after only six months as California governor. From a total of 518 legal abortions in California in 1967, the number of abortions would soar to an annual average of 100,000 in the remaining years of Reagan’s two terms — more abortions than in any U.S. state prior to the advent of Roe v. Wade. ] Or was it all of a telephone connection to a loud speaker ?? And this is your idea of reliably pro life? How Jeb and George physically came to the aid of Terry Schiavo in her hour of need- 3/2005: her civil rights to protect , they being so reliably pro life? I’m glad Mr. Lincoln was more reliably pro union and anti slavery than his successor’s in the party were reliably pro life.

    And about miss reading the “city of God”- here is one fellow, a Dr no less, who did miss read by your assessment – Aquinas:
    St. Thomas distinguishes a twofold function of the grace of Headship, analogous to the double role exercised by the head with regard to the members of the body. “The head,” he says, “has a twofold influence upon the members: an interior influence, because the head transmits to the other members the power of moving and feeling; and an exterior influence of government, because by the sense of sight and the other senses which reside in it, the head directs a man in his exterior actions.” (III. P. Q. 8. a. 6) St. Thomas then goes on to remark that Christ also, by His grace of Headship, has a twofold influence upon souls: an interior influence of supernatural life, because His Humanity, united to His Divinity has the power of justification; an exterior influence by His government of His subjects. The role of justification and sanctification is that of Christ as Priest, while the second prerogative of government and direction constitutes the spiritual Kingship of Christ. We have said the “spiritual” Kingship of Christ, for we must distinguish between the spiritual and the temporal Kingship of Christ or between His Primacy in the supernatural order and His Primacy in the natural order. http://www.catholictradition.org/Christ/kingship2.htm

    Ernst, regardless of what you’ve been taught- tell me how you SEPARATE the head from the body, and exactly where Augustine of hippo does that? i promise to write shorter replies if you will continue to betray your naivete

  41. Paul, I don’t care for literalist word games.
    .
    In the first case, I said Trump contradicted himself. He did. He said PP was wonderful, before saying PP should be defunded. If PP is wonderful, why defund it? Therefore I say his commitment to pro-life issues is dubious.
    .
    In the second case, the GOP’s reliability on pro-life issues: you don’t get to fault me for not quoting myself back to you verbatim, and then get to pretend I never qualified “reliable” with “ineffectual.” And I really can’t understand the point you’re trying to make; unless it’s that Trump’s –shall we say evolving— position on life issues doesn’t matter because the GOP isn’t meaningfully pro-life anyways. But that doesn’t make sense given your other stated views.
    .
    In the third case, if you’re expecting me to summarize St Augustine’s argument in The City of God, be prepared to sit around waiting for a week. My point was that the Kingdom (or City) of God is not of this earth* and that it’s a futile exercise to seek to bring heavenly perfection to worldly political arrangements. Madison, you may remember, had some thoughts along the same lines in Federalist 51. In short, stop looking for angels to govern you, or faulting men for not being angels, or angelic enough –it’s a rabbit hole. Particularly under present circumstances.

    *To recast Aquinas in Augustinian terms, there are two heads and two bodies, and the head governs the body, but which head/body is which, we won’t know until the end of time.

  42. Any Catholic who sits out this presidential election because Trump is the GOP candidate is not aware of what is at stake for the Church, and our country. The untimely death of Justice Scalia has made this the most important presidential election our country has ever had. The president may be gone in 4 years, and Senators in anywhere from 2,4, or 6 years depending when they were last elected. But the replacement of Scalia will last at least 20 years. If Clinton becomes President she will tip the balance of the U.S. Supreme Court to the leftest, anti-God, anti-religion, anti-constitutional rights. And that is if the Democrats get to nominate just one new justice next year. There are at least two more seats that may become open in the next 3 to 4 years, giving the Democrats the ability to pack the Supreme Court and all the rest of the federal courts with liberal justices. That will be the end of our Constitution, and our way of life. Is that what you want for your kids and your grand kids? Is that what you want to subject our Church to?

  43. And Trump said his sister would be phenomenal on the Court, so I wouldn’t expect but think of the Court! to move more than a few off of their opposition to Trump.
    .
    Also, the next President is going to be constrained both by what the Senate majority is willing to fight for, and what the minority will fight against, and vice versa.
    .
    (Granted, that calculus favors those willing to fight, so the Dems have an inherent advantage. . . .)

  44. Of course, Trump decided he was just joking after Cruz started going after him, so who knows? Maybe his supporters support him enough to let him murder the conservative (q.v.) wing, or maybe they don’t. We won’t know unless he’s elected first.
    .
    But he won’t really need them after the election, will he? At least not unless and until he decides to run for reelection, So maybe what he says today won’t be made “inoperative” as the Clinon people used to say* by what he says tomorrow. Although, he is a deal maker, so maybe he’ll find a new group of supporters to buy what he’ll be selling in a future as yet unknown, and not only will today’s positions go the way of yesterday’s, but so will tomorrow’s.
    .
    *n.b, that’s not factually accurate for the factitiously minded. To the best of my recollection the actual quote was “that information is no longer operative,” and it was said by a Clinton spokesperson, rather than an actual Clinton.

  45. Well let’s hope there would be riots because that would be an enormous foul play and denial of representation, a complete hijacking of the electoral process, and a silencing of the majority of Republicans voting in the primaries. I know you don’t like Trump, but take a good look around. He is the only guy on the battlefield ready to lead and ready to fight. Yeah- it’s a battlefield- domestic and foreign. That was no mere metaphor. Even Cruz proved himself a politician above all when he blamed Trump for the Chicago riots. Here was a perfect opportunity to point out what is wrong with our country and call out the left hellbent on taking down any opposition to the point of breaking laws and denying the rights of others. Cruz gave them a pass to get a pot shot in at Trump. I lost all respect for him then and there. To borrow a quote from Princess Leia-he’s our only hope.

  46. @Christine. I agree. “To borrow a quote from Princess Leia-he’s our only hope.” Mr Trump is a man of great courage. Look at how “they” are turning on his family. The liberals who are doing this are haters. Let not the Republican’s add fuel to the fire. May God be with him and protect he and his family.

  47. “Well let’s hope there would be riots because that would be an enormous foul play and denial of representation, a complete hijacking of the electoral process, and a silencing of the majority of Republicans voting in the primaries.”

    Trump cares not a whit for any principle other than Donald Trump. Everyone who is signing on to follow this idiot, except as the lesser of two very great evils, is gravely mistaken.

  48. “Any Catholic who sits out this presidential election because Trump is the GOP candidate is not aware of what is at stake for the Church, and our country.”

    Complete and total rot. I can understand people who decide to hold their nose and vote for the odious Trump in order to defeat Clinton. However, they should do so with open eyes. Trump as President could very well be only marginally better than Clinton. At worst he would lead this nation to disaster as a result of his ignorance and ego, and likely govern as the New York liberal he truly is. At best, he would be a national embarrassment that the Democrats would beat like a drum in 2020. There is no upside to Trump.

  49. “Everyone who is signing on to follow this idiot is a complete and total fool.”

    “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”
    Matthew 5:22

  50. Michael, I amended my response just before you posted your comment. The initial response was posted in anger and frustration at the idiocy of the Trump candidacy, and the blindness of those who follow Trump. Don’t push me however. This blog is not going to become a place for members of the Trump Cult to act as gadflys for the remainder of these primaries, and the general election if he, God forbid, gets the nomination. If I have to ban members of the Cult to make that point, I will not hesitate to do so.

  51. good morning Ernst- ” Ernst Schreiber
    Comment:
    Paul, I don’t care for literalist word games. ” i suspected as much –

    Ernst….words have meaning. if you don’t want to abide or care by word meanings , o.k.

    Don- i am blind and an utter and complete fool by your definition. Thank you! and for your fine blog- best on the net , me thinks. I am milked – don’t censor –

    P.S. – not fighting in an immoral war is not necessarily a measure of courage or valiant service, measures both ways i.e. courage not to fight and take the consequences. or measures not at all.

  52. Permit me to temporarily divert attention to another not-unrelated-incident relative to the present campaign, before it slips into our collective unconsciousness:


    “Paris-attacks Suspect Caught in Brussels”, 3/18/2016 The Independent:
    Europe’s most wanted man, Salah Abdeslam, has been arrested in Brussels after a police raid Friday.

    “The 26-year-old Belgian national is the only known living suspect in the Paris terrorist attacks that killed 130 people last November — and he has been on the run ever since. According to the Belgian federal prosecutor, Abdeslam’s fingerprints were found in a Brussels apartment that was raided earlier this week.”
    ,,,,
    Many of you are familiar with the enclave where Sharia law reigns in Brussels, the arrondissement called “Mollenbek”. Usually, Belgian police are not allowed free access in to it. It is there, again, predictably, where Abdeslam showed up at an apartment the security forces had under surveillance. Also, the same “non-traditional Muslim” behavior that marked the 9-11 hijackers interestingly enough “camouflaged” (at least to Western liberals) this particular jihadist, including as well frequenting a Brussels gay bar (that wouldn’t have been a surprise to TE Lawrence):

    “According to the British newspaper the Independent, Abdeslam’s professional résumé includes a two-year stint as a railway mechanic, in addition to working for family businesses, and a personal reputation as a hard-partying gambler, drinker and smoker. A childhood friend who recalled Abdeslam’s interest in football and motorcycles told the Independent, “I didn’t see any sign of hatred in him whatsoever.” ‘
    ….
    I don’t take sides in this political debate: for me it is ABH (H = Hillary). [I would prefer Cruz personally.] But 130 people were killed in Paris just 5 months ago: and (present company excepted) it is forgotten now. The world and US media helps by giving large sips of the waters of Lethe to the voters of the US.

    But there are Great White Sharks encircling our little bark of state.

  53. Another event involving Bernie Sanders and his wife, who tried to have a photo-op outside Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Tent City in Phoenix, AZ 3 days ago, blew up, when Mrs Sanders had no clue that all the people in Tent City were already convicted of an offense (she thought they were being held without charges. Huh?) and that she didn’t know it gets cold during the winter in AZ. She showed up at the Tent City without permission from Arpaio, who confronted her and easily answered her questions, showing her de jure uninformed radical leftism.
    …..
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/03/18/bernie_sanders_walks_off_interview_after_asked_about_wifes_clash_with_arpaio.html

    Later Bernie was asked about the incident, he changed the subject to one he is comfortable with (generalized comments like “It is an outrage”), and walked off the interview set, because his shallow persona was being penetrated:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/03/18/bernie_sanders_walks_off_interview_after_asked_about_wifes_clash_with_arpaio.html
    ….
    The biggest laff was Bernie whining that his wife was “ambushed” by Evil Joe—you mean, Bern, the way your people ambushed Trump in Chicago? D’ya think?

  54. Ernst….words have meaning. if you don’t want to abide or care by word meanings , o.k.

    That’s your big take away from my last comment to you?

  55. There are reports that “Soros” money has made its way into Kasich’s campaign chest. Very interesting, if true. Doubtless George Soros would prefer to see Hillary in the White House than any other current candidate. And what better way to scuttle Republican hopes than bring about a convention battle that appears to thwart the will of the voting public? Cruz is my choice. He’s smart, principled, and has made all the right enemies, and yes, in his own party. Let us pray he beats Trump at the ballot box. Trump’s a wild card, and probably surprised by his success. He has tapped into the widespread dissatisfaction with established elite of both parties. Nonetheless, the worst prospect would be Hillary Clinton succeeding Barack Obama. That would be the death knell of liberty and the rule of law.

  56. It is hard not to be discouraged. Emotionalism – anger, hurts, fears, and misunderstandings distract and keep us from our (heavenly or earthly) goals.
    History is full of parables for us- it there was ever a time to remember and reason together with attention to details and hope, it must be now.

Comments are closed.