Posted on 08/30/2015 6:00:11 AM PDT by GeronL
Mark Levin also endorsed Orrin Hatch. How'd that work out?
Well at least you're intellectually honest. But yes, there are other good candidates on that issue. And I'd also warn you, if we solve the immigration issue and don't stop Obama Care, the country is dead and gone anyway. You may think this is a single issue election, but Obama Care will destroy health care for 325 million lives - 12-15 million illegals cannot do that. Oh, if we let them vote, then we're doomed - never have anything but liberal Democrat rule - but there is a cancer that is much bigger and much more malignant. And DT is very weak on that.
Hey Larry, how’s that 30,000 Dow coming along. Gonna write another book?
They are truly desperate; now they are breaking out the “boogie man” Herbert Hoover to try and scare voters away from voting for TRUMP! Oh nose, we’re all gonna die!!!!!
Well, with our American “corporations” having gone full-bore into promoting/funding the pushes for both amnesty and the homo agenda, I frankly no longer give a damn about their well-being. I’d like to see them kicked in the teeth.
This is why we can't take 80% of you nimrods seriously. That is such an irrelevant, vacuous, emotional and stupid response as to be beneath reply. Are you calling Levin a RINO? An establishment hack? Are you so enamored of your Trump knee pads that you will stoop to such infantile foolishness? I guess you answered those questions in the affirmative....
If they were honest they would say something on the order of "I like his positions on immigration and trade, and am willing to put up with everything else for the sake of those issues."
If you still believe 12-15 million, you’re not as smart as you think you are.
The part about him being wrong.
It's simple, maybe rational on the surface, but it's shallow and self defeating. The way to protect our countries ability is to get the government the hell out of the way, export our liberalism, and we'll have all the ability we need. And FTR, most of what we import is then USED TO MANUFACTURE the finished products here. Did that ever occur to you? Did it ever occur to you that many imports are then turned into manufacturing jobs here - construction jobs too? I guess not.
Trump is providing a valuable service in broaching subjects that others won’t go anywhere near.
Whether he has the goods to go the distance remains to be seen, and I’m not sold on the idea that he would be even a decent president.
He’s kind of got the “Perot” thing going and that makes me suspicious that he is more of an autocrat than even Obola has been and that kind of personality does not lend itself to the consent of the governed.
In fact, many people who support Trump disagree with him on a variety of issues. I will support anyone but Jeb Bush and I completely disagree with Trump on Eminent Domain. I’d like to see his feet held to the fire over this. On the other hand, he has many positions I support and he’s magic on the platform. Funny, down-to-earth and real. That’s what’s attracting people.
I see you are on Obama’s, Hillary and Jeb Bush’s side on this....
YES but everyone has to play by the same rules in order for it to work Edmund.....
Do you really think it’s good that United States still pays Tariffs but China and Mexico do not?
The current trade agreements are RIGGED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES.
We led the world for over 50 years AFTER World War II and we had Tariffs at the time.
So you argument is 100% ESTABLISHMENT/GLOBALIST BULL$HIT!!!!
Our country is on the wrong track and you think we are on the right path.
Economically we are close to collapsing, and you STILL GULLIBLlY BELIEVE THE LIE?????
BOTTOM LINE IS THIS................
Was the United States a stronger nation, heading on the right path, leading the world from 1945 to 1996 (Before NAFTA) than from 1996 to the present. In other words which United States is stronger economically. The one with tariffs or the one without tariffs?
Ok, so you support Kudlow’s position on the chamber & illegals.
so, you’re one Trump fan boy who is willing to reject the analogy of Trump to Reagan? Check, we got you down for that.
By the way, the economy was awesome under Reagan, all the way into the Clinton years....so you are outing yourself as an economic liberal to agree with Bernie Sanders more than you believe in Reagan, and to think de regulation is a bad thing. You are a full fledged economic leftist.
So you think we need tariffs? Please.
He’s insanely bullish. Even when captains of industry are jumping out windows, lol.
Once again, you argue like a 10 year old school girl......once again, you do not have any intellectual backing to your argument, so you attack the messenger because the message kicks your ass. To translate what you are saying, because Mark Levin and Ronald Reagan made a few mistakes, we must accept the Donald - who has made a thousand times as many mistakes. Wow, are you brilliant or what?
Hoover followed Coolidge’s philosophy that “The business of America is business”.
This philosophy was what destroyed the Whig political party, because its leaders just couldn’t bear to oppose slavery, because it was “good for business”. The rank and file, who became the Republicans, thought otherwise.
But as soon as the Whigs finally died, because nobody but the wealthy supported them (attn: Mr. Jeb Bush and his 30,000 supporters), they immediately migrated to the Republican party and successfully tried to take it over. After that whole slavery thing had been settled.
At the start of the Great Depression, Hoover kept his focus on the recovery of business, *not* on the suffering of his countrymen. While economically this would have eventually worked, maybe, in the meantime people were starving, the currency was so deflated that nobody had any money to spend, and it was too expensive to ship cheap food to market.
It should be noted that Hoover strongly *opposed* the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act. He called it “vicious, extortionate, and obnoxious” because he felt it would undermine the commitment he had pledged to international cooperation. He eventually signed it.
Does that sound familiar? More concerned about internationalism than Americans. As has been mentioned elsewhere, Donald Trump is terrifying the elite classes, precisely because he is an American nationalist.
Nationalism is definitely *not* “business before all”, if it hurts Americans and our national sovereignty, it is *not* good for us.
The *only* legitimate internationalism we should *ever* endorse is that which profits our nation. And the circular logic, that internationalism itself profits our nation, is utter b*llsh*t.
It has been proven beyond doubt that if a nation lets itself be suckered, internationalism will drain it like a vampire. Look at the illegal immigration crisis in Europe and the US. The internationalists are all in favor of it.
America and Americans have suffered extensively because of the internationalist follies of its leaders in both parties.
No, Donald Trump is no Herbert Hoover. Thank heavens.
And that is a big reason he is so popular. The other Republican candidates would be very wise to pay heed and stop kissing the ring of the internationalists, be they socialist internationalists or multinational corporation internationalists. Neither of these groups have *any* loyalty to America or Americans. Some of them openly *hate* America and Americans.
There is an anecdote that a conservative was made head of the CIA. One at a time he brought in his section chiefs and showed them a map of the world on his wall.
“Which one is your country?”, he asked them. They typically pointed out their assigned area of interest.
“No”, he replied.
“Your country is the United States. Never forget that.”
“Sounds like fascism
Hugo Trump, see how well it worked out for Cuba and Venezuela”
So, okay; after what which nation’s shining example of economic utopia should we pattern ourselves?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.