Posted on 06/06/2016 9:34:41 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Ohio Gov. John Kasich tweeted Monday morning that presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump should apologize to U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel, the judge presiding over a Trump University lawsuit.
"Attacking judges based on their race &/or religion is another tactic that divides our country. More importantly, it is flat out wrong," Kasich tweeted.
"@RealDonaldTrump should apologize to Judge Curiel & try to unite this country. #TwoPaths," he added.
Trump has said that Curiel could act unfairly in the case because of his Mexican heritage. On Sunday, Trump said "it's possible" that a Muslim judge could also be biased because of Trump's controversial proposal to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the country.
Kasich has not endorsed the presumptive nominee of his party, saying he would need to see a significant change in Trump's tone. Kasich told cleveland.com's Henry Gomez that it's possible he may never endorse Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at cleveland.com ...
Trump talks to Judge Jeanine Pirro about the Trump U lawsuit and other matters:
FUJK
I can’t believe these “brilliant leaders” can’t make the La Raza connection. It is a simple matter. They could just look it up. Dummies. This leads me to believe there is a dark side to the discussion that no one wants to open up.
Maybe they are thinking about criminal connections and that Zer0 has the goods on them. Call me a conspiracy nut, but I don’t care. Follow the money! I am sure the Mexican drug cartels have La Raza on their payroll. I am sure lots of politicians are getting money under the table from the cartels. It is the only way I can explain their bottom of the shoe stupidity.
I know one thing. The cesspool is deep and I would not be surprised if drug money was going to the Clinton campaign. Their drug connection goes back to Arkansas. Look it up.
John Kasich’s mother should apologize to America.
Sit down
?
talking to Kasich lol
BINGO
The Dems have been playing identity politics for the longest time. Hillary embraces Black Lives Matter, who call all white cops racist murderers.
Hillary said ‘whites are at fault.’
Didn’t seem to cause a stir.
I was hoping so. Usually I know when I’m trying to be provocative.
Show me proof where is bias is on any ruling. That is the problem. There is no basis for Trump making these claims.
A Presidential candidate does not take shots at sitting Federal judges.
You salute the rank, not the person. This is a bad mistake for Trump, as we are talking about this, and not the issues.
Most importantly though, this is not about the judge per se.
This is the way Trump sets the media narrative.
There is a method to what seems to be a shoot from the hip style.
The bottom line is earned media...and it occurs according to a well-thought out strategy.
Also consider this...
Trump and Newt exchange numerous emails during the day. Newt knows that he has earned Trump's trust and knows that he will have an important position in a Trump administration.
Given that, there is no way on earth that Newt would sabotage Trump by telling the world that, re: the judge, this "was the worst possible mistake Trump could make."
This is a coordinated action. It is hard to see and intended to be so.
You have read Sun Tzu. Reconsider this matter in light of that.
There are two schools of thought about the way Trump sets the media narrative (which he does every day).
He is either off the cuff. That's one school of thought.
Or he is operating according to a plan. That's the second.
As a former NYer and senior investment banker on Wall St, I have followed him for 35 years.
He is not off the cuff.
You don't make billions by shooting from the hip.
Read Sun Tzu's The Art of War. That is one of Trump's major playbooks.
Then read Clausewitz On War...and you will begin to see Trump's strategy.
A word to the wise.
Attacking the opinions of others is not a winning strategy.
State and defend your own position and show respect for others (even when you may not respect them).
This is Free Republic. You are the face of it when you post. Be dignified. Be a patriot. Be strong.
No, Mr. Kasich... you just don’t get it.
Trump is where he is because he DOESN’T apologize, for anything. You should take a lesson, Mr. Kasich ... maybe next time, you’ll still be in the race and actually have a shot - if you show a little spine.
I know... that’s asking a lot of a politician.
Kasich is a damn whimpering liberal these days. The clown started off early in elected office, then went to work for an investment bunch like Goldman Sachs and he was making millions. Hell, he reported 5-6 million last year. 10-1 says most is from greasing his hand while asking for special favors. Trump is right as this damn judge is no pal. I would want him removed. When the star of those suing Trump was totally discredited in court-the damn case should have been THROWN OUT ASAP .
I think you may have misunderstood me. I think DT is brilliant. It is the democrat/leftists that are totally idiotic as well as corrupt and violent and power hungry. They are in no way wise or have a plan other than ignore the law and kill in order to get what they want.
I found the following and it’s right on the money. sadly.
Modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.
Modern leftists tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e., failed, inferior). The leftist’s feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual’s ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is “inferior” it is not his fault, but society’s, because he has not been brought up properly.
The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself.
Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.
Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the over socialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists’ hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred.
If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss.
We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
The people who rise to positions of power in leftist movements tend to be leftists of the most power- hungry type, because power-hungry people are those who strive hardest to get into positions of power. Once the power-hungry types have captured control of the movement, there are many leftists of a gentler breed who inwardly disapprove of many of the actions of the leaders, but cannot bring themselves to oppose them. They NEED their faith in the movement, and because they cannot give up this faith they go along with the leaders. True, SOME leftists do have the guts to oppose the totalitarian tendencies that emerge, but they generally lose, because the power-hungry types are better organized, are more ruthless and Machiavellian and have taken care to build themselves a strong power base.
These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and other countries that were taken over by leftists. Similarly, before the breakdown of communism in the USSR, leftish types in the West would seldom criticize that country. If prodded they would admit that the USSR did many wrong things, but then they would try to find excuses for the communists and begin talking about the faults of the West. They always opposed Western military resistance to communist aggression. Leftish types all over the world vigorously protested the U.S. military action in Vietnam, but when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they did nothing. Not that they approved of the Soviet actions; but because of their leftist faith, they just couldn’t bear to put themselves in opposition to communism. Today, in those of our universities where “political correctness” has become dominant, there are probably many leftish types who privately disapprove of the suppression of academic freedom, but they go along with it anyway.
Thus the fact that many individual leftists are personally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means prevents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian tendency.
Today leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of activist movements. Yet not all activist movements are leftist, and some activist movements (e.g., radical environmentalism) seem to include both personalities of the leftist type and personalities of thoroughly un-leftist types who ought to know better than to collaborate with leftists. Varieties of leftists fade out gradually into varieties of non-leftists and we ourselves would often be hard-pressed to decide whether a given individual is or is not a leftist. To the extent that it is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined by the discussion of it that we have given in this article, and we can only advise the reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist.
But it will be helpful to list some criteria for diagnosing leftism. These criteria cannot be applied in a cut and dried manner. Some individuals may meet some of the criteria without being leftists, some leftists may not meet any of the criteria. Again, you just have to use your judgment.
The leftist is oriented toward large-scale collectivism. He emphasizes the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. He has a negative attitude toward individualism. He often takes a moralistic tone. He tends to be for gun control, for sex education and other psychologically “enlightened” educational methods, for social planning, for affirmative action, for multiculturalism. He tends to identify with victims. He tends to be against competition and against violence, but he often finds excuses for those leftists who do commit violence. He is fond of using the common catch- phrases of the left, like “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” “capitalism,” “imperialism,” “neocolonialism,” “genocide,” “social change,” “social justice,” “social responsibility.” Maybe the best diagnostic trait of the leftist is his tendency to sympathize with the following movements: feminism, gay rights, ethnic rights, disability rights, animal rights, political correctness. Anyone who strongly sympathizes with ALL of these movements is almost certainly a leftist. [36]
The more dangerous leftists, that is, those who are most power-hungry, are often characterized by arrogance or by a dogmatic approach to ideology. However, the most dangerous leftists of all may be certain oversocialized types who avoid irritating displays of aggressiveness and refrain from advertising their leftism, but work quietly and unobtrusively to promote collectivist values, “enlightened” psychological techniques for socializing children, dependence of the individual on the system, and so forth. These crypto- leftists (as we may call them) approximate certain bourgeois types as far as practical action is concerned, but differ from them in psychology, ideology and motivation. The ordinary bourgeois tries to bring people under control of the system in order to protect his way of life, or he does so simply because his attitudes are conventional. The crypto-leftist tries to bring people under control of the system because he is a True Believer in a collectivistic ideology. The crypto-leftist is differentiated from the average leftist of the oversocialized type by the fact that his rebellious impulse is weaker and he is more securely socialized. He is differentiated from the ordinary well-socialized bourgeois by the fact that there is some deep lack within him that makes it necessary for him to devote himself to a cause and immerse himself in a collectivity. And maybe his (well-sublimated) drive for power is stronger than that of the average bourgeois.
Always a possibility.;-)
John, first you apologize for being a traitor to the USA. Then we will talk.
That Southern CA location damn sure is funded by drug money, and; the Clinton’s just got a sampling. Obama and the entire Dem O Rat party are getting cash from these lawyers. The damn Fed Judge is an anchor baby 10-1.
Wrong. These damn Judges with agendas need exposing.
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.