Posted on 12/13/2015 1:02:11 PM PST by VinL
the trumpbots won’t mind. they’re already supporting a lifelong liberal, so throwing the most conservative justice on the SCOTUS under the bus is no big deal.
How can Trump hope to get along with the judiciary if he campaigns against them in a personal manner? We are not talking about Ginsberg here, but a fellow conservative on the court. He is showing himself to lack the judgement and character to an effective president.
So who has the best interest of the black student in mind?
—The one that uses AA to get them into a difficult and competitive top tier four year institution, at which they fail, or
—The one that encourages the student to go to a two year school first, or a lower ranking four year school where they succeed?
“They were very, very tough to a certain community,” the Republican front-runner continued. “I thought it was very tough to the African-American community.””
Ok so what is the “hit”?
It’s milder than what I’ve heard people on FR say when Scalia voted on an Scotus case we didn’t agree with.
Yes I heard the interview. We get the usual making mount Everest out of a thimble of sand.
Does this tell us anything about Trump’s judgment on appointing SC Justices?
Same way Cruz hopes to get along with a senate that he has slammed.
Affirmative Action is an admission of that assertion. Scalia does NOT have to argue the point; the mere existence of an Affirmative Action program is de facto admission of the assertion.
To win the presidency, you build coalitions.
Defeating Mrs. Clinton requires limiting her attractiveness to black votes.
Trump said it came across as harsh. To black ears, it probably did.
I’ve got no problem with his statement.
It’s strategery.
Scalia’s remarks were ‘inartful.’ Good to see Trump say so.
*******************************************************************************
Liberal speak: ‘inartful’ = not politically correct.
That is because Trump is all over the board. He knows what he knows, and there is a lot he doesn’t.
This true affirmative action problem is well known, and is no surprise to anyone who has followed the issues. It was probably the first time Trump has even heard of it.
Locking up Muzzies has covered up a lot of problems in his campaign - now he has painted graffiti on a cornerstone in the conservative foundation of America. Spitting on Scalia doesn’t help him, but proves the theory on certain issues he is to the left of Mitt Romney.
Cruz is a lot smarter than this.
Scalia was asking a question in an Oral argument. The attacks are based on taking his question out of context. Trump’s jumping on the democratic bandwagon to attack one of our best SC justices is a disgrace. Trump is a carnival barker not a conservative.
It is ironic that Trump said that Cruz can't get along with RINO's at the same time he picks a scrap with Scalia. But there is a significant difference between the two. Cruz is calling out a wolf in sheep's clothing for defeating conservative efforts. Trump was criticizing Scalia a stalwart conservative on the court for being conservative. Trump's problem is he is making enemies with conservatives with his demagoguery, hurting the conservative agenda, Cruz is making enemies with enemies of the Constitution and the conservative agenda.
So, you hate Cruz and now Scalia. You are no conservative.
True. But you have to expect that nowadays. Throw in "some" or "many" or "certain" so that you don't sound like you're talking about Black people or Black students as a whole.
Trump said it came across as harsh. To black ears, it probably did. I’ve got no problem with his statement. It’s strategery.
******************
So, allowing Justice Scalia to be maligned as a racist is OK with you, as long as Donald gets votes from the African American community? That’s “strategery”???
I guess then one might suspect that Trump is telling folks that he will deport illegals or ban all Muslims may also be likewise insincere - “strategery”?
just “strategery”—
Trump didn’t stop with saying that Scalia’s statements were tough. He went further.
“I don’t like what he said,” Trump told Tapper of Scalia. “I heard him, I was like, let me read it again.”
“I’m going ‘whoa!’” the real estate billionaire concluded.
So you’ve gone from “inartful” which is defined as: “Awkwardly expressed but not necessarily untrue; impolitic; ill-phrased; inexpedient; clumsy” to “a bit racist”. Nice.
Inartful is Trumps middle name - and his claim to fame on FreeRepublic. I don’t have any issue with that but I do find it amusing when his apologists go knee-jerk against any observation of his conduct.
If that was his point then he’s an idiot. LOL
no..
but
change the words African Americans to southerners and them University of Texas to Ivy League schools and then tell me people from the south wouldn’t think they were just crapped on!.. nobody wants to hear they are stupid... Trump is exactly right on how it sounded..
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.