Posted on 07/26/2024 8:45:02 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
So how? How can he disavow something he knows nothing about? This entire comment is a contradiction in and of itself.
Also....
Donald Trump has lately made clear he wants little to do with Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for the next Republican president that has attracted considerable blowback in his race for the White House.
“I have no idea who is behind it,” the former president recently claimed on social media.
Many people Trump knows quite well are behind it.
Six of his former Cabinet secretaries helped write or collaborated on the 900-page playbook for a second Trump term published by the Heritage Foundation. Four individuals Trump nominated as ambassadors were also involved, along with several enforcers of his controversial immigration crackdown. And about 20 pages are credited to his first deputy chief of staff.
In fact, at least 140 people who worked in the Trump administration had a hand in Project 2025, a CNN review found, including more than half of the people listed as authors, editors and contributors to “Mandate for Leadership,” the project’s extensive manifesto for overhauling the executive branch.
I have a coworker who is in Opus Dei. His wife is not to be seen by a male doctor without him being present, I believe.
I'm not a member of Opus Dei, nor am I Catholic. But I believe that your coworker is sound-minded. I don't go to female physicians, and my wife doesn't go to male physicians.
And at this point, sure he knows about it, has seen the headlines, probably read quotes and pages from it, so to say he disagrees with some of the content, finds it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal" is likely accurate.
Very interesting. Thank you.
You didn't read his quote. Let me read it back to you....“I know nothing about Project 2025."
He goes on to say this.... “I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.
So which is it? He knows nothing OR he knows something (that he disagrees with)?
I wish I knew why Trump is claiming to know nothing about Project 2025 and at the same time disagrees with it. I wish I knew why he knows nothing about it, yet dozens of his campaign staff are on board with it. Wilfull Ignorance maybe?
And if the democrats are so rabidly against it, why is he not for it? Is he trying to play the middle ground again?
The VP wrote the forward to the paper. I think it’s going to be part of the campaign through our VP nominee.
>> Leftists hate Catholicism, and Catholics.
The Left hates Christians, period end of story. Why? Because the left is informed by satan, and satan most definitely despises the body of CHRIST.
That’s why the body of CHRIST — that means ALL of its (valid) tribes — must stick together as a body.
And conservative Catholics are most definitely a valid tribe.
So what then might an “invalid” Christian tribe? Those who have abandoned their First Love and gone the way of the world. ELCA, I’m talkin’ to you! UMC, ditto. PCUSA, also. Jesuits — you (and Francis!) are whoring with satan.
Conservative Catholics (e.g. Opus Dei), PCA, LCMS, GMC, you have stayed true to the WORD at great cost and cut yourselves free from the worldly heretics.
“Here is another story Jesus told: “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer who planted good seed in his field. But that night as the workers slept, his enemy came and planted weeds among the wheat, then slipped away. When the crop began to grow and produce grain, the weeds also grew.
“The farmer’s workers went to him and said, ‘Sir, the field where you planted that good seed is full of weeds! Where did they come from?’
“‘An enemy has done this!’ the farmer exclaimed.
“‘Should we pull out the weeds?’ they asked.
“‘No,’ he replied, ‘you’ll uproot the wheat if you do. Let both grow together until the harvest. Then I will tell the harvesters to sort out the weeds, tie them into bundles, and burn them, and to put the wheat in the barn.’”
>> Opus Dei is simply an organization for Catholics who are serious about their faith. There’s nothing creepy or spooky or nasty about it
Exactly the conclusion I have arrived at.
The document is 900+ pages, I've read some of it, just a bunch of ideas they've collected. You've likely seen the some of the quotes, cutting programs, and so forth. As he says, "some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal".
If he went down the path of picking and choosing what he agrees with, he'd never finish and it would just lead to more controversy and distraciton. Again, it is over 900 pages. Bether to say he has nothing to do with it, close off all discussion.
Since the Heritage Foundation and the many authors have not stepped forward to clearly state that this was their work and Trump had nothing to do with, I hope all suggested are blacklisted from Trump 2.0.
Vance wrote a forward to an upcoming book by Kevin Roberts but NOT the forward to the 900 page Project 2025 document. Kevin Roberts wrote the forward to Project 2025.
PDF: https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf
Trumps words overrule them. And no, it’s aides from his first administration. This is not Trumps blueprint.
On this we can agree! The word is Bravado.
I hope all suggested are blacklisted from Trump 2.0.
That would make millions of democrats very happy.
Heritage has been in the business of publishing an agenda for the next administration since at least 1980. That year, I think it was called “Mandate for Leadership.” With Reagan coming into office after four years of Carter, the program was very exciting. Ditto this time, after four years of Biden.
The Heritage program had always been more comprehensive the Republican Platform, especially this year with the down-sizing of the platform to 18 pages. And, it has always been a kind of wish list supposing we have the votes where Congressional action is involved, or maybe a starting point in negotiations where we need to pick up some votes.
The gop lol. In my home they are now the Grand Ole Planned Parenthood Party.
Vance says.. well the Supreme Court made me do it.
What a bunch of wussies.
I will never, ever support a candidate who supports planned parenthood just because my grocery bill is too high.
You will stand before your Creator and He will not absolve you from seeking first your own kingdom.
Oh thank you.
Heritage has been producing these big policy books every four years since 1980. They are meant to reflect the recommendations of “the conservative movement,” broadly defined. Heritage coordinates and obviously has final edits, but a lot of groups participate. The basic idea was to fill the gap between very wonkish academic think pieces on the one side and, on the other, clown car level political sloganeering. Heritage isn’t trying to write legislative language, but it does want to produce something meaty enough that conservatives in Congress or an incoming Republican administration could turn into specific policy goals.
Ronald Reagan was very much interested in coalition building and developing a Republican Party that could actually govern. As he liked to say, the person who agrees with me 80 percent of the time is an ally, not an enemy. Reagan celebrated and cultivated his alliance with Heritage. That doesn’t mean he agreed with it on everything — and there has always been room for disagreement within the constituent elements of the conservative coalition — but Reagan knew who his friends were and he valued their participation in developing ideas, specific policy goals and strategies.
I’ve browsed parts of Project 2025. I frankly find it disappointing compared to earlier versions. I don’t know whether this reflects the people in charge — Heritage’s founding generation is now retired and some have passed away, and I think it’s lost some of its moxie with succeeding generations — or whether it is an adaption to the corruption of political discourse in the age of social media or to Trump’s twitter-centric view of political rhetoric.
Reagan had no academic training in the field, but he had become a thoughtful, solid student of political philosophy. This reflected his own experience as a union president getting red pilled by the communist presence in Hollywood and then his years doing his GE talks, which we now know he mostly wrote himself. He read widely, and he took seriously the great documents and and underlying ideas of America’s founding. He was always anchored in a conscious effort to advance a coherent philosophy, albeit with the recognition that practical politics demands a lot of compromises. He could have civil conversations with opponents and personal friendships with people on the other side. Etc., etc.
Reagan could take something like Project 2025, sort out what he liked and what he would put aside, and celebrate a partnership with its authors.
Trump’s lodestar is his ego and this morning’s Twitter feed. Reagan was a conservative. Trump is a populist. Reagan was a coalition and Party builder. Trump wants followers. How much of Project 2025 might Trump support if he bothered to find out what is in it? Probably a lot, but Trump has no interest in finding out. Trump wants to surf the headlines and dominate today’s news cycle.
What is it about Project 2025 that so many find objectionable? It looks like a good plan to me. But the GOP Platform is more doable and fits into Project 2025. Both are good.
LOL. That is exactly how the liberals are reporting on Project 2025: scare headlines and conclusory accusations at a sub-moron level, issued with the smug certainty that their armies of goosestepping, slogan chanting NPC followers will never actually read anything for themselves.
If I could make one thing mandatory, it would be that everyone, no exceptions, has to take a red pill.
That doesn’t mean that everyone would agree with me. That won’t happen. It just means that everyone would have to step out of their closed little echo chambers and actually look at the arguments on the other side.
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.