DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Religious Dick on January 24, 2016, 04:06:08 PM
-
(http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3101/8750/original.jpg)
I greatly enjoyed this video as well....
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3kz74x_the-national-review_creation
-
Theodore Roosevelt Malloch:
"George Will and National Review Part of "Senile Ruling Class"
by KATIE MCHUGH
23 Jan 2016
Dr. Theodore Roosevelt Malloch, author of DAVOS, ASPEN & YALE: My Life Behind the Elite Curtain as a Global Sherpa, Chairman and CEO of The Global Fiduciary Governance LLC, and great-grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt, told the Breitbart News Saturday audience that the Beltway-entrenched, right-leaning pundit class revealed how out of touch it's become after National Review published a special issue dedicated to attacking GOP frontrunner Donald Trump's populist and nationalist pitch for the presidency.
Malloch told Breitbart News editor-in-chief and host Alex Marlow that he has been a lifelong reader of National Review and was a friend of its founder, William F. Buckley. "I think I grew up watching every single episode of Firing Line."
"What I said basically, I wasn't surprised by these old, tired voices, including George Will, and all those in the NR, anti-Trump campaign. It's essential a last-ditch effort to try to stop the inevitable. The whole thing is rather foolish. It's vitriolic," he said. "I think they've actually handed Trump the fastest route to the presidency, and this will increase his poll standing by more than 10 percent. Because National Review is really not significant anymore. It's readership has dwindled. Its editor surely ain't no Bill Buckley in any way, shape, or form. But it is interesting to see what these old, inside-the-Beltway bandits have to say and frankly, what they have to lose. Because that's what this is all about: They all backed other candidates, right? They backed Cruz, Rubio, and Bush. And they've lost. So they will. they don't have a horse."
"The GOE as I call it, the Grand Old Establishment, no longer represents real conservatism or the evolving GOP," Malloch added.
Marlow asked why Malloch thought voters so roundly rejected the pundit and consultant class entrenched in D.C.
"Well, I think this is the pendulum swing. People are just sick and tired of the same-old, same-old, and this class whether it?s on the Left or the Right frankly don?t understand the term. They don't understand economic anxiety that is experienced by middle class people, and they, to put it in a nutshell, they don?t live in the flyover zone. They're captives of Washington, D.C., which is a one-factory town. I lived there myself for a period. It is a one-factory town. It has an insidious culture. And these people have become complete insiders. I would actually say they're complicit in the malaise of governing. They go along to get along. And they're, in fact, part of the problem. So they actually fear Trump or that whole movement, because they will be excised."
Executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon asked Malloch to give some details on his journey from being an insider's-insider to more of a Jacksonian. "You write with the voice of an intellectual from the nationalist, populist movement," he told Malloch.
"Well, I am a movement conservative," Malloch said. "I attended an evangelical college and did a doctorate under Straussians. I studied with Allan Bloom [author of The Closing of the American Mind] and that whole cast. I've been in dozens of conservative causes and served in many think tanks. I was an early-age foot solider in the State Department under Ronald Reagan. I was appointed by Reagan and served under Bush 41 in a high-ranking U.N. post. I've been an intellectual, I guess, my whole life. I've written a number of books on global strategy, international economics, more recently on management, spiritual capital, even a book on the value of generosity. I do political economy as the Brits call it, but I am intellectually basically a Presbyterian from Philadelphia."
When Bannon asked if Malloch cancelled his subscription, Malloch laughed and replied, "Well, they need all the subscriptions they can get, so I cut them a break there."
In a blistering essay published at The Gateway Pundit, Malloch compared D.C. Beltway conservatives and Bushworld to Tammany Hall and wrote they?re long overdue for an upset:
[George] Will, NR and their Bushie buddies on K Street, who are very much Inside the Beltway, can't stand the possibility that Outsider business-savvy Trump would upset their cushy little applecart and gravy train. All the clubs, fancy lunches, paid for by lobbyists, and the Republican coziness cum cronyism would be swept away like the end of Tammany Hall, were Trump to succeed. Will would have to close his swank salon in upscale Chevy Chase and come to the realization that we no longer inhabit the quaint 18th century world that so enthralls Will and his toney, all talk, no action ilk. His brand of politics and talk shows ad nauseam would come to an end. He might have to sell all his dated bow ties at the Episcopal Church secondhand auction, if there were any takers (he IS an atheist) or go back to the professoriate.
Will, NR and the Grand Old Establishment (GOE) are not the GOP, as they are now discovering. Will may not like Trump's TV shtick but he will not be able to rid us of him or drive him from the Republican Party. Indeed, Donald has pledged not to run in a Third Party, would Will and his likes make the same pledge now? Do they play by the same rules?
Trump is succeeding precisely because the Will-types have failed to govern, caved into the welfare state and become likeable iconoclasts who achieve nothing. Will was the mock-debate candidate for George W. Bush and we all saw how that transformed him into a real conservative. Kristol was the hack behind Dan Qualye and that bombed.
It appears that the Establishment Republicans will apparently go to any distance to stop Trump. Why? Because he is outside their ranks in much the same way that Buckley was outside the norm when he ran for mayor of New York. Bill too could be acidic, tempestuous and cutting in his own unique, yes, urbane way. Get used to Trump. This is a new era.
Only Trump has the credibility to speak to this liberal globalist "superstition" which was Buckley's firm point. Trump gets it in a way Will and his new world order types never did.
Trump may in fact be a paradox: he is a conservative who seeks to ensconce liberalism with a small L, i.e.; limited government, a free economy, and a big stick. He is doubtless loud, populist, takes the offensive, and most importantly, he can win!
George Will, NR and the political class should stop with the name-calling and re-enter the world of reasoned argument and support a big tent Republicanism.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/01/23/exclusive-theodore-roosevelt-malloch/
-
I greatly enjoyed this video as well....
Good one Religious Dick....and hey don't be such a stranger.
-
Here's the thing. The GOP created Trump, or at least his massive support. They did this by completely abandoning that which had their consitutents vote them into office for, in the 1st place. They campaigned on repealing Obamacare, on enforcing the border, and on using the power of the purse to push Obama into being more finacially responsible with tax payers' dollars.
They failed exponentially, on all of that. As soon, as they won their elections (most of them that is), they immediately cowed to the GOP estbalishment, and went right on passing everything Obama wanted, but simply in lesser amounts. So scared that they'd be blamed for a Government shut down, they capitulated, and literally threw everyone who elected them, under the bus
And its why the "hatred" of Government currently, is at an all time high. That's why Trump is getting so much support, because he's not part of that. It doesn't matter that he's not conservative in any way, outside of his rhetoric. He's really farther to the left than Romney. So despite that Cruz is really the only candidate that has been consistent with those who elected him, in support the tea party movement, he's still "one of them", as in one of those politicians, that the country has come to loathe
I disagree that Trump would lose to Clinton, since she's such a flawed candidate to begin with, and those conservatives who would consider sitting out, I don't think could stomach another 4 years of the same garbage we've been getting. Many a Democrat and Indepedent would flock to a Trump nominee vs a Clinton, or even Bernie. I'd be in the same camp, holding my nose while pulling the lever for Trump. One can hope that the GOP will get their act together and coalesce their message vs trying to tear each other a part. But in the end, it's their election to lose, whomever their candidate is
-
One of the very few things that might make me vote for Trump would be if I were really worried that HRC might win instead.
I don't like the guy I don't trust him nor do I feel the charm.
But Hillary is an order of magnitude worse, so I could be a nose holding voter.
So Hillary is sort of a gift to Trump, I think Sirs has this pinned.
Don't you also think this can make for a very low turnout election?
If the turnout is low and Bloomberg is running , the Bloomberg draw against Hillary may cost her the plurality.
-
Here is a Trump story from the office today.
I swear on the Bible & my Mother's grave this is exactly what went down.
Knock knock on my office door.
A black guy named Bobby that works for us says
"hey I been meaning to ask you something".
I said "ok Bobby whats up...?"
He said "i know you follow politics...what do you think of Trump"?
I thought "umm I've worked with this guy over ten years and never discussed politics".
So I went soft and said "well Bobby I really like some of the things he says".
He immediately blurted out "I do too!".
I was shocked...
He continued how he thought we should give Trump a chance
that Trump may slow down the floodgate of illegals
that Trump is better equipped to encourage business and jobs
Here is a black guy that is not political saying he likes "Trump"
Another guy told me his Father-In-Law who is Mexican likes Trump for 2 reasons.
#1. Mexican men like/admire "macho men" ...ya ever heard of "machismo"?
#2. This Mexican wants illegals stopped because he sees more illegals as job threats.
I think Trump's support may be much wider & deeper than polls/lame-stream media think
There are many that "quietly" support Trump.
And it doesn't hurt that the best the Democrats can do is Clinton/Sanders.
-
Like I said. ... it's the GOP's election to lose, given the current Democrat front runners
-
Here is a Trump story from the office today.
I swear on the Bible & my Mother's grave this is exactly what went down.
I don't doubt you.
If Polls are underestimating his appeal this would not be a big surprise to me.
I am not on the Trump bandwagon, I don't think he is the best available.
But...!
I have reason to be glad that the bandwagon for Trump exists.
It is evidence that money alone does not make the establishment candidate a shoo in.
Even though Trump has money, he is not spending it at the rate that some are that he is outperforming.
Now if only I could transplant some Trump charm onto my favorites.
-
Trump has simply grown a constituency out of racists, and dummies who think that anyone has managed to get very rich must also be very smart. But Trump's run is nothing but a personal Trump ego trip. He cannot and will not win, and his chances at getting the nomination are sttill below 50-50, because the Republican Party is not a democracy, but a plutocracy masquerading as one.
-
Trump has simply grown a constituency out of racists, ......................
Really?
Racism?
Why would any racist like Trump?
Trump is not my favorite because I see better available.
This might change and leave Trump the best choice, I wouldn't like that but it is a real possibility.
But a real case of racism would be a deal breaker.
-
Didn't you get the memo, Plane? Any and all conservatives and republicans are by definition, racist. Especially if you're a white conservative male republican. Might as well just wear a sheet
-
Didn't you get the memo, Plane? Any and all conservatives and republicans are by definition, racist. Especially if you're a white conservative male republican. Might as well just wear a sheet
That was a safe bet for most Democrats until the Kennedy election.
Somewhen along in there the Republicans decided that while the Democrats were discarding Racism because it was not worth the effort and was not enough to get Democrats elected anymore, it would be worth the effort for Republicans and would get Republicans elected .
This may seem like a fractured logic , but you might be surprised at the number of people who think it true.
-
Would you be surprised, that I wouldn't be surprised at all?
-
Trump says racist crap to appeal to racists, like Mexico is sending rapists and murderers into then US, and Muslims should nbe barred from entry into the US based on their religion alone. He quotes bogus statistics about Blacks being criminals.
Trump is clearly deliberately trying to appeal to racists. You have to be a drooling idiot to not see this.
-
Mexican is a race? Muslim is a race?
Mexico is a real border problem and large influx of Muslims is a potential problem, real problems.
It does not help problems to forbid discussion of problems or important aspects of problem.
I don't think racism is the real issue , the use of racism as "Shut UP!" tool serving as substitute for rationality is at issue.
I don't agree with Trump on the Muslim thing , and I don't expect a great wall of Texas to be cheap or paid for by Mexico, but I resent the censorship of the false racism branding.
-
It may not technically be racism, but it is clearly stereotypical bigotry, which is equally odious.
Mexico will not build any wall, and the US may only extend the wall they already have around populated areas, but there will not be a uniform wall along the entire border. This is not a major issue, in any case. Trump has no real economic plan, and he lacks the ability to deal with Congress. He would be a disaster as president.
But he will never be president.
We will all get to see him throw a major tantrum, eventually.
It will be more amusing than Fonzie jumping the shark.
-
Trump has simply grown a constituency out of racists, and dummies who think that anyone has managed to get very rich must also be very smart.
Racists and dummies are entitled to their opinion just like anyone else, and apparently there are plenty of them. They also get to vote just like anyone else. Deal.
I notice Nationalist parties in Europe like the Front Nationale, Vlaams Belaang, Jobbik and UKIP are doing pretty good these days, too. Apparently peasants all over the West have a few things to tell The Enlightened? these days.
-
Trump is not a bigot in the traditional sense. he pretty much looks down on everyone who disagrees with him as inferior.
He does use bigotry against Mexicans, veterans who get captured, women who do not look attractive to him, people with deformities, and anyone else who fails to recognize his utter greatness to gather in a mob of bullies who support him.
-
he pretty much looks down on everyone who disagrees with him as inferior.
that describes liberalism to a "T"
liberalism = "you don't agree with this?"
"ok then we know whats best for you & we'll pass a law to force your ass to do what we want"
-
he pretty much looks down on everyone who disagrees with him as inferior.
that describes liberalism to a "T"
liberalism = "you don't agree with this?"
"ok then we know whats best for you & we'll pass a law to force your ass to do what we want"
BINGO!!
-
"ok then we know whats best for you & we'll pass a law to force your ass to do what we want"
===========================================
Yeah, that's the ticket.
That is how Obama came and took away all your guns.
-
yea....too bad the Constitution, got in his way
-
"ok then we know whats best for you & we'll pass a law to force your ass to do what we want"
===========================================
Yeah, that's the ticket.
That is how Obama came and took away all your guns.
Exactly what I don't like about him.
-
Yeah, you all hate Obama because he took away your guns.
You donlt even realize how utterly STUPID that sounds.
-
Apparently you were too STUPID to notice the point that the Constitution got in his way of any such effort. Here's a reminder.....CONGRESS makes the laws, not Obama or any President for that matter. That's kind of how our Government works, for those who lack basic Constitutional knowledge
-
Obama has not even tried to take your stupid guns.
-
Any new executive actions in bypassing congress & the Constitution is yet another progressive attempt to "take our guns"
-
You are a fool. There is no ban on your gun ownership. Everything proposed is on forbidding the sale of guns and accessories, like ammo clips not yet sold.
-
You are a fool. There is no ban on your gun ownership. Everything proposed is on forbidding the sale of guns and accessories, like ammo clips not yet sold.
Is this a distinction or a difference?
If we could buy any gun that we wanted , but couldn't buy the ammunition or accessories that we needed , then this would be a distinction that made no difference.
-
If you had the amount of ammo that is reported, then it would not inconvenience you at all.
No one needs hundreds of bullets to defend themselves.
No one.
Nor do they need 20 or 50 or 100 bullet clips.
The Whiskey Rebellion and Shea's Rebellion proved that citizens with guns cannot successfully defy a government with an army.
-
Once again, xo proving Cu4's demonstration of others who are to dictate what others need and don't need. News flash professor, a responsible gun owner needs hundreds and hundreds of rounds to maintain a level of sharpness & proficiency, by practicing at gun ranges or in the woods, away from people. You have no clue how many rounds I've gone thru in my lifetime as a gun owner......that'd be in the thousands. Your supportive rhetoric of what Obama and the left is trying to pull is precisely the point being made on your side's efforts to ultimately ban weapons.
Again, good thing the Constitution keeps getting in your side's way
-
No one needs hundreds of bullets to defend themselves.
No one.
This is not true , and to those who know guns well the statement sounds silly.
How do you get to Carnegie Hall?
-
You do not need to have a clip that holds 20-50 bullets to practice shooting a gun.
-
There is no limit to "need" when defending oneself. The issue of high capacity magazines is practicality. No responsible gun owner is going to want to carry 100 round magazines. However, there's nothing wrong with 20 to 30 round magazines
-
You do not need to have a clip that holds 20-50 bullets to practice shooting a gun.
True , and I have never owned a gun with a really large clip.
But buying hundreds of rounds and burning them in practice I have certainly done.
Saying this is un-necessary is a good cause of eye rolling for those in the know.
Now , while great big clips were made illegal to make or sell during the Clinton administration and stayed illegal for ten years a documentable zero(0) lives were spared.
So how is the argument that we do not need them stronger than the argument that we do not need to forbid them.
-
You cannot say that no lives were saved.
You certainly cannot say that limiting huge ammo clips will never save lives. They certainly will not make anyone safer.
-
You cannot say that no lives were saved.
Sure I can......adnauseum.
You certainly cannot say that limiting huge ammo clips will never save lives. They certainly will not make anyone safer.
I certainly can say that too, and they do
-
You continue to be full of shit.
-
And your opinion on that matter continues to be meritless
-
You cannot say that no lives were saved.
You certainly cannot say that limiting huge ammo clips will never save lives. They certainly will not make anyone safer.
http://www.macon.com/news/local/crime/article30138393.html
In this attack a couple were attacked in their own backyard, shot in their car.
The unarmed man was dead, the woman had a pistol with an empty clip.
One of the attackers was dropped off, dying, in his mothers front yard.
Apparently this woman lived until her ammunition ran out.
Would she have lived through the incident and saved the mans life if she had more shots?
No one knows.
But remember, next time you are ambushed , it is now too late to go get more, what you have with you is the whole budget.
If you have few, be cagey with them.