Were you upset when Nixon met with Mao in red China? Did that meeting convert Nixon to communism?
Actually the REVERSE happened! China became Capitalist, and become world’s largest exporter.
My post refers to Ivanka and Gore. Nothing to do with China; you may have confused me with someone else.
Re Trump’s conversation with Taiwan’s president: It’s about frickin’ time the USA gave democratic Taiwan the respect it deserves.
Trump, to the contrary, has been a Democrat, has contributed to Democrats, has been all over all issues in recent decades and has very little credibility for consistency. Recently, he has been visited by Mad Dog Mattis and changed by 180° his opinion on waterboarding. He changed his opinion on the minimum wage. At the request of the very same daughter who arranged the meeting with Al Gore, he proposed a brand-new entitlement to a country $20 trillion in debt. One gets the feeling that Donald Trump is not nearly so Machiavellian as he is malleable for the last person who has is ear.
Even if Trump is as Machiavellian as his fans on this thread insists he is, where is the press release telling us the purpose of the meeting and restating his firm conviction that climate change is a "hoax?"
This is not a minor matter, climate change is the tool, the weapon with which the left proposes to do away with capitalism. If we hand this weapon back to the left and even aim it at our vital center, all of the good intentions of Donald Trump on many other issues will be as nothing. We are advised on this thread to refrain from criticizing Donald Trump and give the man a chance. This is advice which is not heeded when we heard of the proposed nomination of Mitt Romney but we are supposed to assume a passive crouch even now when our very capitalist heritage is at stake. The system does not work that way, Donald Trump, for all his unorthodox campaigning, is not the exception to this rule.
Our role as conservatives is to support him when he is conservative and equally to oppose him as and when he wanders from the true faith. When we do so we advance our conservative/patriotic cause but to do otherwise is to abandon our very reason for existence here.
There is a legitimate role for conservatives who believe that every politician, even every conservative politician, must be fairly appraised and honestly criticized in good faith. To reverse the principle, it is not good faith to dismiss facts or to belittle good-faith criticisms by attacking the messengers. It does not matter whether you like Mark Levin, it does not matter whether Mark Levin's rating numbers are improving (he seems to be doing quite well) or falling, it does not matter whether you can find something about my character to criticize, it matters whether there is merit or not in the substance.
It matters only whether conservative values are advanced or retarded. Adults should understand that what is at stake here especially about climate change is terribly important but our conservative values are not advanced by turning this forum into a mindless cheering section or by turning this forum into a cesspool of personal invective.