Trump Gaslighting, April 1, 2016 (pm): Abortion Again
Go to :54.
DICKERSON: Let me ask you last about abortion. What would you do to further restrict women’s access to abortions as President?
TRUMP: Look, look, I just . . . I mean I know where you’re going, and I just want to say: a question was asked to me, and it was asked in a very hypothetical, and it was said, illegal, illegal. I’ve been told by some people that was a older line answer, and that was an answer that was given on a, you know, basis of an older line from years ago, very, on a very conservative basis. But —
DICKERSON: Your original answer, you mean.
TRUMP: My original. But it was —
DICKERSON: About punishing a woman.
TRUMP: — but I was asked as a hypothetical. Hypothetically. Hypothetically. The laws are set now on abortion. And, that’s the way they’re gonna remain, until they’re changed.
DICKERSON: ‘Cause you had said, you wanted, you told Bloomberg in January that you believed abortion should be banned at some point in pregnancy. Where would you do the ban?
TRUMP: Well I, first of all, I would have liked to have seen, you know, this be a states’ rights. I would’ve, I would’ve preferred states’ rights. I think it would’ve been better if it were up to the states. But right now, the laws are set, and that’s the way the laws are.
DICKERSON: But do you have a feeling how they should change? There are a lot of laws you want to change. You’ve talked about them on everything from libel to torture. Anything you’d want to change?
TRUMP: At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way.
DICKERSON: Do you think it’s murder? Abortion?
TRUMP: [Pause] Uh, I have my opinions on it, but I’d rather not comment on it.
DICKERSON: You said you were very pro-life. Pro-life means that it’s abortion. That abortion is murder.”
TRUMP: I mean, I do have my opinions on it. I’d rather, I just don’t think it’s an appropriate forum.
DICKERSON: But you don’t disagree with that proposition, that it’s murder?
TRUMP: What proposition?
DICKERSON: That abortion is murder.
TRUMP: No, I don’t disagree with it.
Aaaaaand . . . the walkback, accompanied by the claim that it is not a walkback:
.@realDonaldTrump spox Hope Hicks walks back Trump abortion comments to CBS. Says Trump WILL change law on abortion pic.twitter.com/1oedertZbC
— Jeremy Diamond (@JDiamond1) April 2, 2016
All he said was: “At this moment, the laws are set. And I think we have to leave it that way.” And hours later, that “he will change the law.”
THERE IS NOTHING NEW OR DIFFERENT HERE, CITIZEN.
P.S. As a reminder, there ain’t nothing “hypothetical” about what Trump said before. 1:32:
MATTHEWS: Do you believe in punishment for abortion? Yes or no? As a principle?
TRUMP: The answer is . . . that . . . there has to be some form of punishment.
MATTHEWS: For the woman?
TRUMP: Yeah, there has to be some form.
Not hypothetical. Nor was it edited. Even thought they tried to suggest that too:
Today in gaslighting https://t.co/0WQzojyZHU
— Allahpundit (@allahpundit) April 1, 2016
Trump spox on unequivocally, obviously unedited videotape of candidate w/Chris Matthews on abortion: "I don't know if the tape was edited."
— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) April 1, 2016
He thinks you’re stupid. He thinks you can’t understand simple English, and see when he does a 180 within hours.
As to some of you, he’s correct on both counts.
“Maybe it wasn’t you.”
Patterico (86c8ed) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:01 pmi trust him on abortion
for reals he’s not gonna get all santorum on it and get all crazy with the cheez whiz
happyfeet (831175) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:06 pmI don’t trust him at all. Why would anyone? He’s just BSing.
Simon Jester (cc05a5) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:16 pmYou can absolutely trust Trump to be pro-abortion. You can 100% positively, absolutely, and without reservation trust him not to be pro-life.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:16 pm“Planned Parenthood does great work.”
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:17 pmTrump should abort his campaign.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:18 pmTrump’s whole deal is to be the angry man who uses bombast to project strength. He is perfectly content to let the angry, unthinking, know-nothing voter to project that righteous anger onto him. Facts? Truth? Whatever you need them to be, as any true Progressive will tell you.
It is supremely important to Trump that he be given the same pass Dhimmicrat pols are routinely granted: Good/correct intention is the solution.
Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:22 pm#8 Ed from SFV,
You bring up a good point there regarding how various angry voters can project their anger onto the Trump bandwagon. Trump’s almost like the proverbial “blank slate” which Barack referred to his own vapid candidacy, where he can appeal to any number of different types of voters, without having to actually provide specific policy details.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:29 pminteresting definition of gaslighting, I thought it was driving someone crazy,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:29 pmHis statements of positions are only effective for an hour or two. Then, he denounces himself, points at a squirrel, threatens to sue someone, and goes to Twitter to rant about how extraordinarily average his tiny hands are.
JD (34f761) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:38 pmI think you are being gaslighted, as he pointed out in the carlos slim excerpt from the 1990 interview, in that soon to be defunct publication, the show the razzledazzle is the key,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:43 pmYes . . . by constantly claiming that their accurate perception of reality is wrong.
See now?
I more fully defined it in that earlier post. I think I’ll add the link to that post here.
Patterico (86c8ed) — 4/1/2016 @ 7:55 pmTrump doesn’t care about the issue one way or another, obviously. But it’s embarrassing that he doesn’t have a consistent position. This is ridiculous.
Reality is, we’re probably just as likely to get an anti-Roe justice out of Trump as we were out of Reagan or either Bushes (so about 50%). It’s pretty obvious the establishment has not been serious about overturning Roe. Look at Bush II–nobody seemed to question his pro-life bona fides–but then he nominated Roberts and Miers. We only got Alito–who probably is anti-Roe–after the party put Bush II in his place with the Miers fiasco. I don’t see Roberts overturning Roe given his recent voting history, Bush I was 50 percent, and Reagan was 33% (in fairness, with Bork, he would been at 67%)! Reagan pretty much knew O’Connor was not anti-Roe when he appointed her if what I have read about her interview is true.
Moreover, Bush II lied to all of us that he would oppose gay marriage, it was all a ruse. If you want a genuine culture warrior, the GOP establishment is no better than Trump. At least Trump gives a hope that there will be a future for the GOP because continuing to flood the country with third world immigrants will all but assure permanent Democrat control of national government. All of you nevertrumpers are doing your part to make that a reality.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:02 pmthat has been true, souter, thanks to rudman and sununu, roberts, thanks to schmidt, if he relies on session, it should be a solid choice, stone, who is the eminence gris, i’m not confident about,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:05 pm“Planned Parenthood does great work.”
Isn’t providing birth control to young and poor women a good thing? Or are we all supposed to say that’s evil, too? I’m not all that familiar with the organization but I’ve heard they provide other health services as well. Those are not bad things, those are very good things. That was actually one of Trump’s better moments since it will pay off in the general election.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:08 pmactually they went ted rall, and you never want to go there,
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/alexa-moutevelis-coombs/2016/04/01/abcs-scandal-indulges-michael-moores-afghanistan
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:08 pmNarciso,
That is what I am hoping, he is going to have Sessions and others around him. We don’t know what we will get but the track record has been so poor I have trouble believing it will be worse.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:11 pmI love it when trolls claim ignorance of a topic, then proceed to prove their ignorance by spitting out BS talking points.
JD (34f761) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:14 pmAssuming this is directed at me. Was I wrong about my statements about PP? Feel free to correct the record.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:19 pmYou’re slipping back into your Old Commenting style, Christoph. How is CFAP doing these days?
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:19 pmI don’t know much about PP, but they give away condoms, and everyone thinks that is good.
JD (34f761) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:22 pmNK, Hate to break it to you guys but I don’t even know what CFAP stands for! Why does it comfort so many here to think I am this guy?
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:28 pmFWIW – I don’t think it is Cristoph. He doesn’t quite fit the patterns. But it is a lying POS nonetheless.
JD (34f761) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:30 pmJD, I’ve been accused about a dozen times of doing so in my couple days of commenting here but have seen no actual rebuttals. And I have criticized Trump as much as I have defended him. I try to call it like I see it. He’s a flawed candidate without question, but so is Cruz. And the nevertrumpers are leading us straight to a Hillary Clinton presidency, which will end any hope of a conservative America. I hope that isn’t true, I hope we can unite to defeat Clinton or Sanders in November.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:39 pmOld Reader, Donald Trump is the one leading us to a Hillary Presidency by alienating large segments of the electorate.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:44 pm@21 what makes you think he has sleep apnea?
pinandpuller (928ad9) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:45 pmCruz stands no chance of being elected. He only polls better at the moment because the general public knows nothing about him. The video of that truly insane preacher speaking about executing gays before introducing him is enough to sink him, let alone his odd and unappealing personality. Trump might lose terribly but he’s the best chance. He can potentially flip enough rust belt swing states to win electoral college.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:52 pm@21 a CFAP could have saved David Carradine’s life.
pinandpuller (928ad9) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:56 pmOld Reader, that’s simply not true.
The head-to-head polls show Cruz and Kasich and Rubio all with a chance to beat Hillary, at least in the popular vote.
Trump has insanely high negatives. There’s no way he can flip blue states. None. His approval/disapproval rating among women is 23%/70%.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:57 pmEven the I.R.S. and Mondays have higher approval ratings than Donald Trump. And most people hate taxes and Mondays.
Not CPAP. CFAP.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:57 pm“And the nevertrumpers are leading us straight to a Hillary Clinton presidency”
Outright lie.
JD (a6bc68) — 4/1/2016 @ 8:59 pmContinuous Fapping Air Pressure
pinandpuller (0845e7) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:01 pmThis is part of the inevitable strategy employed by the Trumpkins. Ignore the historically high negatives. Obfuscate. Squirrel. Twitter pics of wives. Anything to avoid actually discussing issues – because there is zero principle behind any given answer, and will be subject to denunciation within the same calendar day.
JD (a6bc68) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:03 pmJD, what else does “nevertrump” mean other than Clinton>Trump? Of course it’s setting us up for a Hillary Clinton presidency!
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:06 pmYes, the Trumpkins’ job is to show up on these threads and blow smoke.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:06 pmBlow smoke=point out the inevitable result of “nevertrump” stupidity. Gotcha.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:08 pmTrump is Hillary’s stalking horse and so are his Trumpkins. The only chance we have to beat Hillary is to rid ourselves of f**cko in August.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:08 pmyes, I recall a similar certitude over macho grande, well you won the dollar, like the duke bros, but you kind of lost the match,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:13 pmHis negatives only skyrocketed when this nevertrump movement when into overdrive. It’s on you guys. You’re doing Hillary proud.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:14 pmI love how Old Reader believes that a candidate with 70% disapproval by women is somehow in position to shock the world with a surprise victory. Sounds like more people have been drinking Trump Vodka than we thought.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:15 pmit becomes a self fullfilling prophecy,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:16 pmNo, the more people see of him the more his negatives go up. Not everybody is as willfully stupid as Trumpkins.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:18 pmElectability is to a great degree a self-fulfilling prophecy. But there’s nothing worth electing in Trump. He is a piece of garbage. Worse than garbage. The bottom of a sewer.
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:20 pmMath with Trumpkins…
Ted Cruz isn’t popular enough to win the New Hampshire primary, but all of a sudden, he has sooooo many supporters that they have angrily driven up Trump’s negatives into the same unpopularity range as the flu.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:24 pma funny thing happened on the way to parliament,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/04/01/defiant-china-slaps-steel-tariffs-on-britain-as-trade-war-looms/
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:27 pmMy squirrel is better than your squirrel, narciso. http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/donald-trump-melania-trump-knauss-first-lady-erections NSFW
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:34 pmit’s not a squirrel, it’s a choice occasioned by china’s mercantilist system,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:38 pm“Isn’t providing birth control to young and poor women a good thing?”
When an organization uses abortion AS birth control, that is not an organization that should be publically funded.
jb (8a9f1d) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:41 pmsomething to be considered,
https://twitter.com/TheNatlInterest/status/715601583741005824
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:43 pmMeanwhile, Japan reacted poorly to Trump’s suggestion the get nuclear weapons.
So high was the level of concern, Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe felt the need to respond publicly, saying,
“what the F are you Fing talking about you Fing fool?!”“whoever will become the next president of the United States, the Japan-U.S. alliance is the cornerstone of Japan’s diplomacy.”Japan remains the only country to have had nuclear weapons used against it and has had a non-nuclear policy and pacifist constitution since the end of World War II.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:55 pmForeign Minister Fumio Kishida added, “It is impossible that Japan will arm itself with nuclear weapons.”
I have a question. Could somebody fill me in.
Shorty keeps calling Cruz “Lyin’ Ted” and both Kasich and Rubio have followed suit. But what is it Cruz is supposed to be lying about? I’m not aware of any lying. What gives?
ThOR (a52560) — 4/1/2016 @ 9:55 pmrubio over amnesty in the gang of 8, mailman’s son over medicare expansion, the whole reatter
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 10:01 pmwith carson’s interregnum, it’s an old tactic, bob dole, people used it back in 1988, to little success,
Bum rap on Kasich. http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/01/john-kasich-presses-super-pac-to-pull-ad-assailing-ted-cruz/?_r=0 Read a little bit of it.
Rubio was a month and a half back over the Gang of Ocho like narciso said. Anything newer?
nk (dbc370) — 4/1/2016 @ 10:07 pmdidn’t soros chip in to mailman’s son, mailbag, plus I thought they couldn’t call it off,independent operations and what not,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/1/2016 @ 10:10 pmThank you.
ThOR (a52560) — 4/1/2016 @ 10:36 pmOld Reader=EPWJ Scuzzyfavor is the real conservative.
Yoda (feee21) — 4/1/2016 @ 10:49 pm“His negatives only skyrocketed when this nevertrump movement when into overdrive.”
Outright lie.
JD (34f761) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:18 pmPlanned Parenthood is an abortion factory. Period.
They hand out condoms, do pap smears, make references for mammograms (which they don’t do), and hand out literature. They do these things so that every condom they can hand out, they count as one activity. They they claim that abortions are some ridiculously low percentage of their total activities. They also use their non-abortion activities as their beard for the federal funding they receive — funds which are “segregated” and not used for abortion provision in exactly the same manner that my nephew claims he’s only peeing in his part of the swimming pool.
Planned Parenthood is like a crack house that also sells lemonade out front. It’s still a drug den, not a lemonade stand. Anyone who doesn’t understand this is “pretend pro-life.”
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:28 pm“They they claim that abortions” –> should have been –> “Then they claim that abortions ….”
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:29 pmAnyone stupid enough to fall for Trump’s schtick has done so. That doesn’t mean they’re all permanently stupid. “#nevertrump” only represents a fraction — a sizeable one, but no more than a plurality — of people who oppose Trump. We all cooperate, without direction, in a crowd-sourced effort to peel off any redeemable Trumpkins, to rally our own spirits and enthusiasm, to keep ourselves and others well informed, and to encourage anyone else who is undecided that they need to turn out for Cruz as the sane alternative.
Mere Trumpkins can be redeemed, if they haven’t voted yet. They can be redeemed in November when they vote for Cruz.
Blaming #nevertrump for Trump’s sagging poll numbers is not quite correct, although it would certainly make anyone who associates himself with that movement happy to think so. The bigger factor is that Trump’s been scoring own-goals continuously since the Arizona primary. The wheels are coming off the Trump bandwagon, but they’re not being shot off by outside criticism so much as knocked off by the old fat guy with the poisonous giant caterpillar on his head.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:36 pmThe Trump shills who comment regularly here are in a different class from ordinary Trumpkins. They’re not just suckers; rather, they’re actively trying to help Trump sucker more people. Their main value is for the amusement they unintentionally generate — typically a clownlike aggressive insincerity that very much parallels their idol’s.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:39 pmBTW, although I bow to no one in my disgust for and opposition to Donald J. Trump, I still haven’t embraced the #NeverTrump theme. My current backup plan, if Trump should become the GOP nominee — which I think is increasingly less likely with each passing day, actually — would be to hope that the convention could demand of Trump a genuinely responsible and unifying Veep choice.
And then I’d patiently wait for Pres. Trump to commit the high crime or misdemeanor justifying his impeachment in the House, conviction in the Senate, and removal from office. I expect he’d do something about that serious during the first 30 days in office, so … we’d have a new POTUS by, say, March 2017.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:44 pmI still think Trump would guarantee a Hillary win; I’m just explaining how I’d rationalize my own vote, if Trump were the GOP nominee. It’s enough of a rationalization that I could sleep at night, I think. We’ll see.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/1/2016 @ 11:46 pmThe Republican National Committee has a new webpage, ConventionFacts.org, with an extremely succinct and clear explication of the how the 2016 GOP National Convention will work, including the operation of the convention’s Rules Committee, what happens if there’s no first-ballot nominee, the difference between bound and unbound delegates, and several other important particulars.
I encourage folks to share this resource widely.
The nominations process isn’t specifically mentioned, nor are any of the existing rules from the 2012 Convention (such as Rule 40(b)’s “eight-state rule”).
Trump and his campaign have been focused, amateurishly, only on the delegate allocation process (which is done through the primaries and caucuses); too late, in at least some instances, they’re waking up to the fact that they should also have been focused on the delegate selection process (picking what individual people fill the spots after they’re allocated). The Cruz campaign has been on top of this continuously, and I’m sure that as part of that effort, they’re going to be particularly focused on getting as many Cruz supporters as possible onto each state’s two-delegate representation on the Rules Committee.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 12:53 amAnd then I’d patiently wait for Pres. Trump to commit the high crime or misdemeanor justifying his impeachment in the House, conviction in the Senate,
And, in fact, there is no law of any kind requiring delegates to honor the nominee’s choice of running mate. It’s a custom (and there may be a party rule), but I cannot see how the delegates could be bound by law.
So, were Trump to somehow back into the nomination, and choose, say, Lou Dobbs or Ann Coulter, as his running mate, the delegates might well say, um, NFW. And pick someone less likely to be impeachment insurance such as Gingrich or Rubio or some other hungry but capable politician.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:11 amA quick scan of the GOP rules indicates there is no rule mandating that the delegates support the presidential nominees choice of running mate. They just have to have the same 8 states to put a name in nomination.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:17 amCrunatics are so in favor of coercing people, I can’t see why you would draw the line at coercing women not to murder their children.
An abortion costs the abortee about $1400, so it’s not like an accident. It’s highly planned and organized murder on an industrial scale. Premeditated murder. Right? Murder one.
Child abuse, neglect, and abandonment, it’s all downstream. Those people who couldn’t scratch together $1.5K to do what they wanted to do.
So Mr. Prosecutor, have you ever brought a case of murder one against a floozy who offed her kid as a matter of convenience?
Why not?
Because murder is legal in this country, if you happen to be female with the discretionary amount of cash on hand. The court ruled in a 5-4 decision that “rich” women are allowed to kill their own progeny.
President Trump (or Cruz) can’t change that, short of taking a pillow to Sotomayer, Kagan, Breyer, Ginsburg, and sometimes Kennedy.
You all talk about surviving Obama and fixing the damage he’s done. We can’t even get passed the damage LBJ did.
And this sectarian bullcarp, where you Texans act all high and mighty. Fark you. You sent LBJ to plague our country.
California sent Nixon.
I’d take California’s undiluted morals (and New York’s) over your Texas version any day of the week and twice on Sunday
papertiger (c2d6da) — 4/2/2016 @ 2:38 amI’ll run your comment by the homeless lady who poops behind the 7-11 and get right back to you, papertiger. She’s fluent in Incoherent.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 5:33 amIt is rather obvious Liars for Trump would like to make #NeverTrump their Dolchstoßlegende for his defeat but Gallup tracking of his miserable performance does not show an inflection point from the end of February, when #NeverTrump took off, through March. The inflection point can best be ascribed to his deliberate refusal to reject the embrace of David Duke. That refusal, just like his abortion response, was predicated upon Trump’s imagination regarding the appropriate stimulus to the regular viewers of reality shows demographic which constitutes his “base”. It’s rather funny to watch Gingrich and Coulter cringing as they realize Trump lacks the ability to tune his rhetoric to a wider audience. He knows his marks and plays them like a fiddle but his political skill is limited to fleecing real suckers.
Rick Ballard (edb5cf) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:08 amWhat is Trump’s position on abortion, papertiger?
DRJ (15874d) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:14 amTwo days ago Trump wanted to jail women who abort their babies, but yesterday he said abortion laws are fine the way they are:
What is Trump’s position today, and what will it be tomorrow … or do you care?
DRJ (15874d) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:18 ami don’t care what Mr. Trump thinks about abortion
it’s a silly very very micro issue and just deathly boring set against this sad little country’s very huge and very real problems
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:20 amhappyfeet doesn’t care about abortion. What about you, papertiger?
DRJ (15874d) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:24 amnonono i love abortion but I do NOT care what Mr. Trump thinks about abortion
abortion is an important freedom for women but it should a lot be left for the states and whatever douchebag you cowardly failmericans put in your stanky white house, that person has way more important stuff to worry about
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:27 amDon’t care? Fine, then you and Trump should stop talking about it because you don’t care. Stop trying to play both sides. If you do care, then pick a side and stick with it. Pick pro-choice or pro-life but pick only one, unlike Trump.
papertiger, don’t let Trump get away with acting like the GOP establishment. They both want to play both sides. They both manipulate their supporters by using abortion as a wedge issue.
DRJ (15874d) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:35 amSee, papertiger? happyfeet is fine with letting people use abortion as a wedge issue because it means abortion isn’t changed in any way. He supports the GOP establishment on things like abortion and SSM marriage. Do you?
DRJ (15874d) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:38 amit’s america’s filthy propaganda sluts what bring up abortion (pretty much only with Rs) cause of socially backwards hypermyopic social con trailer parkers have made it a litmus test
i don’t see that Mr. Trump is anywhere near as consumed with overwrought fetus-lust like carly or teddy pie
america is in no danger of electing one of them ones
in no danger whatsoever
abortion in 2016
is not what peeps be tambout
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 7:58 amOne of the seven forbidden words of the Democrats?
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:03 amAbortion
Terrorism
Deficit
Welfare
Benghazi
Monica
email
nk, that would actually be a good strategy in the general election campaign…to name 7 topics that Hillary doesn’t want to discuss. And to name all 7 at every stump speech to the point that a “medium information voter” would be able to name them. Sure, maybe the late nite talk show hosts would make our nominee for doing that, but if we can successfully establish the narrative that Hillary doesn’t want to talk about those issues, it will become the perception.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:14 amAnd even if Hillary tries to nibble around the edges on a couple of them, there are still several of those issues she doesn’t want to touch, and her refusal to do so would only fuel the perception.
I wonder if Carson is still happy about his endorsement of Trump?
Nah, I don’t really care. Carson was another guy who had no business thinking he could run the country.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:21 amDr. Ben Carson lol
him got sassy at a prayer breakfast
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:22 amWell, the way you’re talking, I better not find out you’re taking an online course in brain surgery.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:36 amnonono I’m studying bento
is how japanesers use lunch to say i love you
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:40 amit’s not a crazy notion, the grandson of kishi would reasonably not bring it up,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/5187269/Japan-should-develop-nuclear-weapons-to-counter-North-Korea-threat.html
narciso (732bc0) — 4/2/2016 @ 8:50 amIn a world with 7 billion people, there will always be someone as loony as Trump to quote for cover for the caterpillar-head.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:11 amReading a comments thread with happyfeet is like having a conversation next to someone afflicted with tourettes – except hf is here to interfere with the conversation, while those who are merely ill are innocent.
Steven Malynn (4bc33a) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:34 amlol Mr. Malynn so cons crave my respect
they crave anyone’s respect anymore
poor babies
they were the girls of the 50s
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:39 amThe seven forbidden words of Cruz supporters:
Natural born citizen, Canadian father, Establishment Lackey.
ropelight (a0da30) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:52 amwheels within wheels:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3416775/posts
narciso (732bc0) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:57 amit’s so weird Mr. ropelight how they have so much trouble seeing what desperate fealty teddy pie has to the harvardtrash goldy sacky mythical three-legged stool establishment
he ain’t nothing but a thang
and a damn hard on the eyes thang to boot
poor guy
he has to campaign with carly on the stage just to make himself look slightly more attractive
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:59 amropelight, Ted Cruz’s father is not Canadian. He’s from Cambodia. (LOL)
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:59 amMake that Cuban father, it’s been a Bloody Mary Saturday morning.
ropelight (a0da30) — 4/2/2016 @ 9:59 ami have ninja radishes for garnish
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:01 amthey’re new
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:02 amHippies! Your age is past flower children! You’re knocking the establishment because you couldn’t get into it.
And you probably didn’t get to go to Woodstock and roll around in the mud with hairy chicks, either, I bet.
Get out of the way and let the new generation run things. You’ve made enough of a mess over the last 50 fifty years.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:06 amyes yes is time for the 700 Club generation to embrace their hard-won irrelevance
there’s a new sheriff in town!
and his name is Mr. Donald Trump
and he
is
beautiful.
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:09 amWhen he grows hair.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:11 amFershluginer Baby Boomers! Mein Gott!
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:14 am100!
now is time to pause and reflect on the journey we’ve traveled
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:17 amKT Oslin’s Greatest Hits – Songs From An Aging Sex Bomb is free in prime
that is a good value
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:20 amYou’re right, nk, I wasn’t at Woodstock I was at Saigon in 69′. But I knew some of those hairy chicks before I went. A hippie chick named Debbie Katz comes to mind. She had so much arm pit hair it looked like she had Buckwheat in a headlock.
Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:21 amTo correct a few errors by a babbling, poorly-informed Trumpkin (#68):
Roe v. Wade (1975) was a 7/2 decision, not 5/4. The splintered follow-up decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) had no single majority opinion, but the ruling generally upholding Roe was by a 5/4 vote. Neither decision has anything to do with whether women seeking abortion are “rich.” With Scalia’s death, the Court is presumably split 4/4 right now on most, and probably all of the important, issues relating to abortion, including the continued validity of Roe v. Wade.
I can’t speak for our host about very much of his practice as a Los Angeles County prosecutor, but I’m quite sure he’s never prosecuted any woman for having an abortion; that would be contrary to current law, but also contrary also to the law that even pro-Life forces would change us to. People who are moral conservatives all uniformly understand that, which is why Trump could enrage both the pro-Choice and pro-Life forces (and everyone anywhere in between the outermost-margins of both of those moments) with a single, spectacularly stupid statement (which this same babbling Trumpkin promptly endorsed, and still argues, even though the candidate had to flee from it).
No one smothered Justice Scalia with a pillow. (And the CIA didn’t murder Breitbart on Obama’s order, either.)
I’m quite certain that in Texas, California, and New York, no one to speak of — except Muslim sharia law advocates, who are fortunately still quite few in number — are in favor of punishing women for having abortions, or targeting the innocent families and children of terrorists for murder by the U.S. military. Someone who’s in favor of those things is spectacularly out of touch with morality, as practiced anywhere in the United States. He’s sick.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 10:51 amif you don’t punish em how they gonna learn?
bad lady you are bad
we know what you done and now you have to pay for your crimes
happyfeet (831175) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:05 am@ Rick Ballard (#70): Thanks for teaching me a new German word: “Dolchstoßlegende”!
I’d heard the historical concept, and this new word is now in my passive vocabulary. But the pronunciation — I’m likely to be a while getting my mouth around that.
Maybe Donnie Drumpf can help teach American how to say “dolchstoßlegende.”
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:11 amAt #65 above, I linked the RNC’s useful new webpage at ConventionFacts.org. Further to that, the NYT has an interesting and useful graphics-and-text explanation of the state-by-state delegate selection, binding, and unbinding processes: How Votes for Trump Could Become Delegates for Someone Else. It’s worthwhile reading.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:24 amBeldar,
Can you point me to where Trump ever said he wanted to kill the innocent children of terrorists? Maybe he meant we should go after family members that are complicit–either militarily or by prosecution, maybe he meant we should bulldoze their homes like Israel does. I would support prosecuting complicit family members–for some reason we do seem to give family and friends a big fat pass when they refuse to turn them in. That needs to stop.
As far as the punishing women thing. It seems completely morally bankrupt to equate abortion with murder but then argue it’s beyond the pale to contemplate punishing women. I always thought this was just a way to make pro-life stance more palatable to the masses. But I guess a lot of you actually believe it, which also means you really don’t think abortion is murder at all. Roe v. Wade was obviously a horrible decision, but tell me why judicial conservatives like me should continue to oppose it when it’s clear the pro-life side doesn’t even view it harshly enough to even contemplate punishment for the women that procure them.
I knew the pro-life movement had this stance but the reaction to Trump’s comments was eye opening. None of you really think it’s murder after all, or even bad enough to support punishing the women that participate. Why should judicial conservatives continue to support overturning Roe when the pro-life movement so weakly opposes abortion that it refuses to contemplate punishing women that get them? Serious question.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:33 am“Maybe Donnie Drumpf can help teach American how to say “dolchstoßlegende.”
That’s beyond both his capability and the capability of his base. He applies the concept continuously with his riffs on swarthy Mexicans and wily Chinese stealing jobs from Americans though. Cooper, Matthews and Dickerson have begun the process of media vivsection of the creature which “free” media created and watching realDonaldTrump flayed and dissected on TV is going to draw ratings which should exceed those of the reality shows upon which his absurd candidacy is based. The media has achieved their objective for Act I and the curtain is rising on Act II.
Rick Ballard (edb5cf) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:41 amOld Reader, are you utterly incapable of using internet search engines?
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/12/02/trump-on-islamic-state-terrorism-you-have-to-take-out-their-families/
SPQR (a3a747) — 4/2/2016 @ 11:50 amIn World War II, the last war we actually won the military of the U.S., and our allies carpet bombed and firebombed cities in Germany, France, Poland and several other countries as well as cities in Japan where we also used atomic bombs on as you called them “the innocent families and children”. These were not families of civilian murdering terrorists but of genuine, in uniform enemy soldiers and sailors. We killed 100,000 in the firebombing of Tokyo alone.
So apparently when you say “Someone who’s in favor of those things is spectacularly out of touch with morality, as practiced anywhere in the United States. He’s sick.” you are referring to two US Presidents, their administrations, the military and the soldiers airmen and seamen who made it possible along with their counterparts among the allies.
That’s a whole sh!tload of people you think are immoral and sick. Funny thing is they thoroughly defeated the enemy and won the war. Every victor in history does so by killing civilians. From Alexander to Eisenhower civilians are targeted and killed. It’s war. And having fought in one I know that to be the truth. Civilians die and civilians are targeted and it’s done by all participating combatants.
You are probably an excellent lawyer and have a huge sense of morality (although some may find them mutually exclusive) but you are not a soldier. If you’re going to engage in war, put your men in harms way, there is no limit to what you must be willing to do to win and save the lives of those who fight for you. Nuclear weapons were not made to drop on battlefields they were made to take out cities and the women, children, babies, pets, farm animals, hospitals, churches, temples and orphanages in those cities. The reason is that those are all support facilities for the soldiers as much as manufacturing and fuel facilities are.
And rule #1 is you don’t let the enemy into your camp. We wouldn’t bring Germans into America when we were fighting the Nazi’s and we shouldn’t bring moslems into America when we’re fighting ISIS.
Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 4/2/2016 @ 12:11 pmNo, Hoagie. Even in WW2 we didn’t target civilians because they were civilians. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were military targets.
We use the best technology available to be as humane as possible in sparing noncombatants when we’ve gone to war. One’s just as dead, it’s true, if one is a “collateral casualty” instead of a targeted one. But the morality is entirely different.
What Trump proposed was that the United States embrace and engage in terrorism itself, by ordering its military forces to deliberately target the children and families of terrorists. Not “the complicity or cooperating families of terrorists” — if they’re actively assisting, then they’re terrorists themselves.
No, Trump wanted to kill innocent children. That was his first reaction, just like his first reaction was to punish women for abortions. He’s utterly amoral.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 12:31 pmah Matthews, who didn’t want a debate between two cubans, who had that nc-17 impulse with obama, who rollicked with bill ayers, after the election, and dickerson, who recommended obama to destroy the party,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/2/2016 @ 12:55 pmNuclear weapons were not made to drop on battlefields they were made to take out cities and the women, children, babies, pets, farm animals, hospitals, churches, temples and orphanages in those cities. The reason is that those are all support facilities for the soldiers as much as manufacturing and fuel facilities are.
Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 4/2/2016 @ 12:11
WHAT? Never heard of Tactical and Battlefield Nukes have you? All nukes are not Strategic Weapons that are located in Subs and Silos and have megaton yields. Some can actually be launched from artillery shells and fighter aircraft and are low yield nuclear weapons of just a few kilotons. They are not weapons of mass destruction per se, but have a limited range of effect in order to minimize collateral damage.
Yoda (feee21) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:09 pmSPQR, Yeah I had seen that quote. Doesn’t explain if he was speaking about innocent family members or complicit ones. Also not completely clear he meant “take out” to mean kill, could mean abduct and hold/interrogate, take them out of picture if they’re supporting.
I disagree with Beldar on WWII bombing. Much of it was not strategic but was designed to break the will of the country to fight. We dropped two nukes over cities for crying out loud. The civilian and non-military property destruction was not just collateral damage, it was part of the intended target. Let’s not kid ourselves.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:24 pmExcept we will freely discuss them. You just don’t like our answers.
Patrick Henry, the 2nd (ddead1) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:29 pmBill Clinton encouraged Trump to run. Now we know why. I suggest the opposite of triangulation is “striangulation” which is what Trump is doing to the GOP. Bill must wake up every morning laughing.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/2/2016 @ 1:38 pmYoda, please take things in the context they were meant. There were no tactical nukes in 1945 which is the time period I was referring to. So the decision was made to kill everybody rather than nobody. It was a moral decision. Nuclear subs and silos came a lot later so I wasn’t referring to them either, however they prove my point: they kill everybody even civilians.
First off Beldar, civilians at not usually targeted because they’re civilians, they’re targeted because they’re the enemy. When countries declare war they declare war on all of each other, not part of each other. We declared war on “the Empire of Japan” not the army of Japan. Also, the tired old excuse of Hiroshima and Nagasaki being military targets although technically true because they had “some” military use really just that, an excuse. Their military importance was minimal and they because they were so low in military importance they were not even heavily or frequently bombed with traditional ordinance. One could say civilians are military targets because it is they who work in the factories and farms to feed, clothe, supply and arm the soldiers in the field.
Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 4/2/2016 @ 2:14 pmI want you to understand Beldar, I’m not for “targeting” civilians but I would not let one American die because I was afraid I’d accidently kill a civilian. And I certainly wouldn’t lose a war because I wouldn’t bomb their cities and the civilians in them.
Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 4/2/2016 @ 2:19 pmPH, where did you discuss Ted Cruz as a GOP establishment lackey? He worked in George W Bush’s White House, his wife works for Goldman Saks, he was Texas AG and was elected to represent Texas in the US Senate. That’s about as GOP establishment as it gets.. So where did you point out Ted Cruz’s establishment credentials?
ropelight (a0da30) — 4/2/2016 @ 4:02 pmropelight,
Ted Cruz was not TX Attorney General.
Rather, he was the TX Solicitor General.
I don’t know why some of you Joe Six Packs have such a problem with someone whose wife works for Goldman Sachs. But if you somehow believe that working for Goldman Sachs is evil, how is that you manage to turn a blind eye to Donnie Trump’s scandalous business career?
Whom do you expect to run for President, if not someone with a record of success? Do you want the night janitor at the Acme Corporation to declare for President? Or the day-shift manager at your local McDonald’s? And at least Ted Cruz’s wife has held a prestigious job based on her brains, unlike Donnie’s wife, who used to take her clothes off to earn her paycheck.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/2/2016 @ 4:17 pmI’m gonna get that homeless lady’s name, the one that poops behind the 7-11, so you guys can nominate her for President. You can’t get less established than her. Except maybe some guy who’s
“donated” hundreds of thousands to Democrats and had Hillary at his wedding (I don’t know which number). Now, he really is non-establishment.
Yes, we know all those things about Cruz. And we like him for them. Show he is a solid person, not a skirt-chasing dilettante.
nk (dbc370) — 4/2/2016 @ 4:18 pmHoagie (#118), thanks for that clarification. FWIW, Richard Overy’s The Bombers and the Bombed: Allied Air War Over Europe 1940-1945 (2014) is really good on this subject from every angle — historical, ethical, industrial. Highly recommended.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 4:40 pm@ Cruz Supporter (#120): You’re right, of course, to correct the Trumpkin who misidentified Cruz’ public office. In Texas, the attorney general is elected statewide. The solicitor general is a top-level employee of the Office of the Attorney General who serves, in effect, as the attorney general’s own special lawyer, and to supervise all of the appellate representation of the State of Texas by the AG’s office. Cruz was, then, fairly described as a public servant, but as a lawyer for a high Texas state-government insider (then-AG now-Gov. Greg Abbott, who supports Cruz enthusiastically).
Of course, being an “insider” at the state capitol level is entirely another animal from being a Washington Beltway insider. But as for Cruz being an “insider” at even an intra-state level:
Anyone with even a passing knowledge of Ted Cruz’ political history knows that he won his present job in the U.S. Senate through an improbable and spectacular upset of the second-most powerful insider within Texas state government, multi-millionaire and long-time Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst, who had near universal name recognition and approval within the state — whereas Cruz had no money, only a handful of supporters, and effectively zero name recognition other than among those (including me) who’d been paying attention to his spectacular string of successes as SG.
In other words, Cruz has already proved himself — by deeds, not brags or promises — to be the outsider insurgent that Trump pretends to be.
That’s exactly how he got to the Senate, where he is without question the least “insider” member to have a seat in modern political history. If you rank Senate insiders, Ted Cruz is #100 on everyone’s list. Texas voters showed that we view this as a feature, not a bug, when more than 1 million of us turned out to give Cruz a huge margin in a still-badly-split field on March 1.
These Trumpkins are sure silly.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 4:56 pmThe only difference between Clinton and Trump is that she sells influence and he buys it.
Cruz has never done either.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/2/2016 @ 5:00 pm