Posted on 04/16/2011 8:57:04 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
Look how Chump operates. Caught red-handed now with his vicious attacks on George Bush, who most conservatives had issues with, he now says but for Bush there would have likely been no Obama. That may well be true. I have been a harsh critic of Bush's spending, including in my book. But Chump was calling Bush EVIL and demanded his IMPEACHMENT because of the Iraq war and in the middle of that war. He said Bush lied to get us into Iraq. His comments were vile and outrageous, not unlike the America-hating leftists who sought to undermine are armed forces there. Now he wants us to believe that his criticism of Bush was because Bush's poor record set the stage for Obama? Chump attacked Bush over Iraq because if you were a big-mouth, attention-seeking liberal, it was the thing to do. He had no altruistic or principled conservative motive for doing so at the time and expressed none.
As recently as last year, while conservatives and Tea Party activists were organizing and rallying against Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their radical agenda, Chump was helping to fund some our opponents. He contributed to left-wing, Tea Party-hating menaces like Chuck Schumer, Anthony Weiner, and Harry Reid. What about his contributions to Charlie Crist, while Crist was running against Marco Rubio? Did he donate to any of the Tea Party candidates? Did he contribute to the Tea Party movement in any way, with time or money, before today? Why not?
Chump also praised Nancy Pelosi. He thought she was great. I played the audio. I guess he was just mistaken, again. He supported universal health care, but not any more, of course. He supported abortion and gay marriage, but that was then, this is now. He supported John Kerry for president in 2004, but that's because Bush was so evil. He leaned on government officials to use eminent domain against a little old lady whose home happened to be in the way of a parking lot he wanted to build for one of his casinos in Atlantic City, but he has always been for private property rights.
So now Chump rails against China and demands Obama's birth certificate and we are supposed to swoon over the man. But when asked about the Ryan budget, he turns stupid again -- he says Ryan should not take the lead on this, we need a bipartisan consensus to move forward? And with whom do we build this bipartisan consensus? Reid? Obama? Is Chump really this dumb, or is he, once again, trying to figure out which way the wind is blowing?
Chump is a phony and dissembling. He called a hastily organized press event this morning because I, and others, are on to him.
TRENDING: Trump lashes out at George W. Bush and Obama
Today he is speaking at a local Tea Party rally. And why? Because now he wants our support, not because he supports us or our principles, or ever did. Chump is about Chump. And he thinks we're too stupid to notice. Are we?
Like I told you the other night, the same people who are buying into this Trump mania are some of the very same people who have been attacking her consistently since 2008. There is a correlation, and I'm bringing it to everyone's attention.
Oh, and BTW, just to remind folks once again the context of all of this...
What are you implying?
Wow, I find it amazing that so many chest-beaters here on FR are now suddenly willing to throw Conservative principles to the wind and overlook Trump's past contributions, statements, and behavior with the excuse that it's just business.
Simply amazing!
Levin is just Savage on Prozac. Both of them are decent guys who go off the deep end at times.
Levin fails to understand WHY Trump is gaining traction - because NOBODY ELSE HAS THE BALLS TO DO WHAT TRUMP IS DOING. NOBODY. Including Levin himself.
So maybe Trump decided it’s more profitable to be on the receiving end of it for a change.
Since we’re traveling down Fantasy Lane, why not show me pictures of Lindsay Lohan getting her MBA from Harvard.
I think Trump and Palin have more in common, than different.
They’re certainly treated about the same.
In fact, listening to Trump this week on Rush’s show - there was an interesting exchange where Rush was asking Trump about a possible announcement. Trump was dodging somewhat, and the topic touched for just a moment on the disclosure requirements to run. Trump said, in a meaningful way, something to the effect “you might be surprized” with his announcement.
A thought came to this poster listening to that exchange, that Trump might be riling up the base, going after Obama, and then might just throw his support to Palin.
To avoid having to divulge his own finances...
Sure would be awesome.
Defender of the Constitution my @ss! Mark Levin is about Mark Levin! Oh, and protecting the Republican establishment from the “crazy birthers”. Mark Levin = ULTIMATE HYPOCRITE!
I’m personally surprised that Mark Levin (who must get paid big bucks for keeping up on current events) just found out that Trump was no fan of GWB or the Iraq War.
Many people here were not fans of Bush or - I suppose - the Iraq War.
I’ve always liked Trump despite disagreeing with him on many things. I’m enjoying his attacks on Obama.
Comb over? I thought that was a dead cat.....
He isn’t attacking our enemies. He’s FUNDING THEM!
Conservatives seems to like to eat their own and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Whatever happened to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?" I had forgotten that Levin was doing such a great job of awakening the masses to the evils of Obama that he had brought, what, 1/1000 of the attention Trump has to our current leader's shortcomings?
Look, he can fight Trump and prop up his ratings all he wants. But he is doing Obama a favor by doing so.
Well, Levin just did performed one of those head-tail inversion gymnastics that destroyed whatever credibility he might have had with me.
There was an altruistic princpled conservative motion for opposing the war in Iraq, or at least three of them:
1. We should not bankrupt the US over something of marginal significance, but we did so.
2. We should not change a winning strategy mid-stream, but we did so. We had Sadam so locked down he could not fly a paper airplane across the palace atrium without shooting it down, but we decided that we should undo what was working, at relatively low cost, and put boots on the ground at enormous cost. Then there is Afghanistan.
3. You don't of your own volition start a war without some idea how it should end and some plan for getting there. As it turns out Bush sold out to the neo-cons without a clue of what should happen or how it shoud happen. Offensive warfare is not poker where you take the risk of drawing a poor hand and have to play the hand you are dealt. Sun Tzu laid it out two millenia ago, but the neo-cons forgot to read that book and Rummy fired generals until he found some who hadn't read it either. Once we got past Rumsfeldt, Cheney, Wolfowitz and a couple of fawning generals we started to do the right things militarily, but geostrategically it was already too late and we were well down the path to public financila bankruptcy.
The other day we actually had some of the Trump boot lickers actually saying his use of and support for eminent domain abuses was ‘just business’.
Then what do you make of #49? Nobody attacks our enemies more consistently, more vociferously, in a more principled way than Levin.
Trump is a vichy republican.
You must have completely missed the past week. Hell, yesterday on Rush he was trashing Ryan's budget as being 'bad for Senior citizens' (almost using Harry Reid's words) and saying Republicans should moderate on the budget instead of going too far. He was also implying how they were getting too extreme. The real Trump comes out, he just says it in his salesman way that many completely miss what he really is saying and buy whatever book, steak, smoothie, or other Trump branded crap he is selling.
I’m not attacking Levin.
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.