Posted on 09/02/2015 2:14:36 PM PDT by Biggirl
Wednesday on his radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh discussed the backlash within certain conservative circles to the candidacy of GOP front-runner Donald Trump. Limbaugh specifically focused Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens, who unleashed a scathing attack in the Journal earlier this week aimed at Trump and his supporters.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Not joking”
My same reaction to Jorge’ Ramos’ interview of Ted Cruz. I could only take about 5 minutes it before melting down at his tremendous egotistical biased stupidity and my going off to kick inanimate things. Only person who's ever made me that mad in my life is Bill Gates and his for-shi.t piece of cr@p MS office products!
Yes, miss, that’s been my theory for a long time.
They never left.
Rush nailed it today!
Maybe Trump is a belated convert to conservatism in more ways than on illegal immigration. But I am skeptical. I think some of the more reliable conservatives (Cruz, for one) could stake out a position on illegal immigration that would incorporate many or most of Trump’s ideas.
He said the anger of the American people goes way beyond "conservative/liberal" posturing and terminology. He correctly pointed out that these "conservatives" have not accomplished one single thing, they just talk or write about things, and do absolutely nothing.
He also pointed out how the republicans won the House in 2010, and said they needed to win the Senate in order to actually do anything, then they won the Senate in 2014, and now claim they have to win the Presidency in order to do anything. They are all-talk, worthless, do-nothings.
I agree with you 100%. I don’t believe Trump is a conservative. He might be like a southern democrat but he’s no Ronald Reagan. I’ve stopped listening to Rush. It’s all Trump all the time w/ no analysis of Trump. All he does is talk polls. I might as well be watching CNN.
“My same reaction to Jorge’ Ramos’ interview of Ted Cruz.”
Oh man, I stand corrected. Make that 2 people who need their teeth smashed out
None of these guys will be able to defeat Trump in this primary. Trump’s stance on legal and illegal immigration is why he’s winning. There isn’t any other candidate with the right stance on that issue. It’s also the biggest issue facing our nation and has enraged Americans across the political spectrum because it’s almost never addressed in a serious manner by any politician. There is no other issue with such a disconnect between politicians and the vast majority of American citizens than immigration. There isn’t any alternative to Trump on this issue, and that’s why he can’t be beaten. This immigration issue alone will likely lead him to victory in both the primaries and general election. It’s not hard to understand his success, and it will be near impossible for a candidate to take him down on other issues when they are failures on an issue many see as being more important than other by far. It’s one issue that should break or make a candidate.
— LeeClementineKenny
“Almost think"? Or you think? Come on Sparky, out with it. Commit for Heaven's sake. It is, after all, an important contention. I wanted to respond to what you said but can't if you use weasel words to express yourself.
I am not defending fake or spineless Republican conservatives, just questioning whether we should trust Trump because he agrees with us on one issue.
Yes! John Adams and Ben Franklin would recognize Krauthammer, Will and this NR idiot.
Throw in Lois Lerner and we have a Trifecta!
Dentists will love us!
I caught part of Rush’s show today, and it was quite informative.
He also covered the topic of hedge fund liberals and “carried-interest.”
What Does Your Host Think of Trump’s Plan to Tax the Hedge Funders?
So Trump is coming in and he wants to end what’s called “carried interest,” and he thinks that these rich hedge fund people ought to be paying the same rate as the top marginal rate that people that earn ordinary income are paying. And he has also... I don’t know how specific he’s gotten, but I think he has also included other really, really, really rich people who ought to be required to pay a higher rate. Now, I don’t know what his cutoff is.
I think I heard people that are incomes of $100 million. We’re talking about one-tenth of one-tenth of the top 1% here. But the thing about it is that the Republican Party never is in favor of tax increases on the rich. (Have I been saying “cuts”?) Tax increases is what Trump is talking about. The Republican Party never, even now... I mean, that’s the one thing amazingly they have not given away. They are steadfastly opposed to tax increases on the rich, anybody, anywhere, any time. Income tax.
They go along with other fees and so forth being raised along the way. But when it comes to the income tax and the marginal rates on income tax, they have never come out in favor of raising it on anybody. Trump is. So Clarence here thinks that he’s gonna get me in a trap ‘cause he thinks I’m a Trumpster and that he can get me on hypocrisy, ‘cause he knows that I’ve always been opposed to tax increases on anybody.
But since he thinks I’m supporting Trump, that I’m gonna bite the bullet here and come out and support Trump’s tax increases on hedge funders. The desire to raise taxes on the hedge funds, get rid of carried interest, is not an idea that originates with Trump. It’s been floating out there. You know, I’ll tell you the what really point to learn about this. I first heard about the... I’m not a hedge fund guy, so carried interest was something I had to learn about.
It’s a really screwball definition. It’s one of those things that you can’t possibly understand unless you’re in the business. You know, economists and money people have their own lexicon and they speak in that lexicon and it sounds like you don’t know what you’re talking about, therefore you really aren’t allowed to participate. A lot of industries do that. They come up with their own lexicon, their own language. It’s a way of identifying who’s in and who isn’t.
Carried interest is a term that basically is a convoluted way of computing what kind of taxation there should be on activity at hedge funds. It’s a way of shielding a lot of ordinary income from top marginal tax rates. And the first people I ever heard stand up and oppose it were Democrats, which made sense to me. I mean, hedge fund people, for the most part, are the uber-wealthy. And by the way, it’s a law written by Congress, written by Democrats, written by the Ways and Means Committee with all kinds of input from lobbyists and so forth. So this is not something that just magically happened because the hedge fund guys had all this power.
This was a law. It’s written in the tax code like any other aspect of the tax code is. And it’s made to order for the Democrats to oppose. I mean, it’s made to order for their whole argument that the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the rich are stealing from everybody else, and yet it’s not the Democrat Party attacking carried interest. Have you noticed that? The Democrat Party, whenever they talk about raising taxes, they always exempt the hedge fund people.
The reason is, folks, contrary to what every low-information voter thinks — hell, every union member thinks. Practically half the country thinks that the Democrat Party is devoted to the little guy, that the Democrat Party is defending the little guy and the Democrat Party is out there attacking CEOs and attacking corporations and attacking all these big behemoths and they’re gonna get even with ‘em and they’re gonna take money away from ‘em because they’ve been stealing from the poor and that’s how they’ve been getting rich, everybody thinks that’s what the Democrats do.
The Democrats are not making a move on carried interest and haven’t. They’re trying to protect the hedge fund guys because most of the hedge fund guys are big Democrats, a good percentage of them are, as are a lot of the Wall Street CEOs, as are a lot of media CEOs. They’re all liberal Democrats. The Democrat Party, contrary to what everybody thinks, is not circling the wagons and defending the little guy. The Democrat Party’s in bed with Wall Street. That’s why Bernie Sanders is not going to get the Democrat Party nomination no matter what because he’s serious about implementing policies that would punish those people financially.
The Democrat Party’s in bed. They have become the party of Wall Street. The Democrat Party has become the party of the rich, and they’ve done everything they can to shield it. It’s amazing to me that of all the talk about raising taxes on those people coming from a Republican, at least in the primaries, Trump, carried interest, that’s what he’s attacking. If I know Trump, he’ll have a codicil to his tax increase, and it will be an option not to pay it.
END TRANSCRIPT
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/03/04/cnbc-explains-carried-interest.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/08/31/trump-as-tax-code-king-and-hedge-fund-slayer/
“I know it better. I’m the king of the tax code,” brags Mr. Trump. “And I’m going to come out with a plan, a simplification, a plan getting rid of some of the deductions, which are ridiculous and complicated.” Who can disagree with him that our tax system is ridiculous? Which tax specialist could stand up to Mr. Trump’s moxie and braggadocio?
Mr. Trump says his proposal will be hated by people at hedge funds but loved by “pretty much everybody else.” Trump has blasted hedge fund managers for not paying their fair share. “The hedge fund guys didn’t build this country. These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky….They make a fortune. They pay no tax. It’s ridiculous, OK?” Trump refers to the carried interest loophole that allows private equity and hedge fund managers pay taxes at capital gain rates instead of ordinary income.
Since you've stopped listening to Rush, it's unfair to him to make an assessment on today's broadcast based on mere comments on this thread.............Wouldn't you agree?
“Dentists will love us!”
Still laughing. 9 out of 10 Dentists would agree with us, and are sadistic too!
I’m amazed that people who dismiss Fiorina as a fake conservative - because she thinks that the anti-gay marriage county clerk should resign - are still defending Trump, whose liberal pronouncements on many issues are well-documented. Fiorina at least defended the right of private business owners to refuse to service gay marriages.
That ONE issue(invasion) is the issue of our time. Are we to be overrun with peasants form the third world with no intention of assimilation and only want “Government” to take care of them? This is bigger than WWII as this is an internal threat and the nation we patriots love is in the balance.
“I almost think he’s a liberal Trojan Horse, intended to disrupt the normal Republican primary process and throw it into chaos.”
I enjoy Alex Jones too, but not everything is an elaborate conspiracy plot just because.
And exactly what “chaos” has taken place other than Jeb getting knocked off his perch? As if the Democrats were so afraid of him in the first place. Also, what was the normal primary process other than the right splitting votes and the GOPe winning?
The “chaos” is that people like Cruz, Walker, Rubio, Christie, Fiorina, and others - ALL of whom have better conservative credentials than Trump - are being swamped by the Trump mania.
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.