OT "Three questions for the Democratic candidates"...

[Oren]

<http://video.foxnews.com/v/4715975140001/three-questions-for-the-democratic-candidates/?playlist_id=928378949001#sp=show-clips>

Trumpies know?

[trader_4]

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 10:40:59 PM UTC-5, Oren wrote:
> <http://video.foxnews.com/v/4715975140001/three-questions-for-the-democratic-candidates/?playlist_id=928378949001#sp=show-clips>
>
> Trumpies know?

I agree with O'Reilly. I left the room halfway through the first question.


BTW, did you see this? Best thing I've seen in a long time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3GRG1-KrIY

[T]

On 01/21/2016 07:40 PM, Oren wrote:
> <http://video.foxnews.com/v/4715975140001/three-questions-for-the-democratic-candidates/?playlist_id=928378949001#sp=show-clips>

This was a fun listen!


> Trumpies know?

They do now!

[Oren]

Trump recently mentioned William Frank Buckley, Jr. being from New
York. In a recent tweet he said he never heard of the National
Review, a conservative publication. Can this clown make up his mind?

<http://video.foxnews.com/v/4717378347001/is-donald-trump-a-menace-to-american-conservatism/?playlist_id=928378949001#sp=show-clips>

Dana is on point.
--
"..,what is good is the front end if you don't have the back end"-- Kimberly Guilfoyle

[T]

Don't take other peoples word on what Trump says. Here
what Fox just said about it;

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/22/rnc-cuts-debate-ties-with-conservative-magazine-over-anti-trump-issue.html?intcmp=hpbt2

'Trump described the magazine "a dying paper" out for publicity'

Pretty dumb for the RNC to cut of National Review. They
are way me friendly to the Republicans than anyone else
that has hosted a debate to date.

[Oren]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:01:09 -0800, T <T...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Don't take other peoples word on what Trump says.

I don't. He has hoof and mouth disease. Just listen to what he says.
It comes from his mouth. People don't make it up.

He changes on a dime. And you think he is a conservative? He gottcha.

[rbowman]

On 01/22/2016 05:01 PM, T wrote:
> 'Trump described the magazine "a dying paper" out for publicity'

That CIA sponsored rag can't die fast enough.

[T]

I remember it as a kid. I loved it. It was
scandalous to the libs

[rbowman]

It had its moments but by nature I lean to the Old Right, not Buckley's
New Right interventionism. The term wasn't even coined when I was a kid
but paleoconservative would fit. I certainly wasn't SDS but I didn't
have much use for the YAF, another Buckley project, rooting for a war
they had little expectation of fighting. Like Cheney, they had other
priorities.

Over the years NR has excommunicated many people including Pat Buchanan.
No one ever noticed outside of their 100,000 or so readers.

My favorite Buckley memory is him and an extremely shit faced Jack
Kerouac on Front Line.

[T]

On 01/23/2016 12:17 PM, rbowman wrote:
> My favorite Buckley memory is him and an extremely shit faced Jack
> Kerouac on Front Line.

Do your remember the "William F. Buckley doll, equipped with
a chair that leans to the right. Dictionary not included"?

[Robert Green]

"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message

> It had its moments but by nature I lean to the Old Right, not Buckley's
> New Right interventionism. The term wasn't even coined when I was a kid
> but paleoconservative would fit.

Somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun is how my wife phrases it. I think
the NR's concerted Trump slam is really a badge of anti-establisment honor
for him. I suspect it will "sell more Trump" than Obama's EO's on gun
control have sold more guns. IIRC, he's seen gun ownership increase under
his reign more than any other president. Ah, the law of unintended
consequences.

--
Bobby G.

[trader_4]

I saw that too. IMO, Fox is really falling down here. Few at Fox get
the idea of conservatism, what it's all about, and why there is real and
legitimate concern about Trump not being anything close to a real conservative.
And some at Fox are even worse, eg Bolling and Jesse Watters. Waters
position is that you just need a candidate who draws big crowds and issues
like the candidates track record of being a conservative and issues like
eminent domain are flippantly dismissed as irrelevant. If it were only
eminent domain, I could agree. But there is a whole boat load more in the
case of Trump. And Watters point about big crowds is countered by polls
that show among the top GOP candidates, Trump when matched against Hillary
does the worst, losing most of the time, while the others all win by
decent margins.

[trader_4]

I assume you mean it's pretty dumb for the RNC to cut National Review
out of the upcoming debate. I agree. But if that's true, then what
about Trump attacking it as a dying paper? Not only is it an attack,
but it also shows that Trump hasn't even looked at an issue. It's
not a paper and no conservative or anyone else that has any familiarity
with it, would call it a paper. Can you show us any other conservative
politician that doesn't know what the National Review is, calls it
dying, irrelevant, etc?

[trader_4]

This "don't listen to other people's word on Trump" thing is
getting real tired. You and I have cited countless examples of
Trump, in his own words, time and time again. This denial tactic
is worthy of Goebbels.

[trader_4]

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 2:43:30 AM UTC-5, Robert Green wrote:
> "rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
>
> > It had its moments but by nature I lean to the Old Right, not Buckley's
> > New Right interventionism. The term wasn't even coined when I was a kid
> > but paleoconservative would fit.
>
> Somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun is how my wife phrases it. I think
> the NR's concerted Trump slam is really a badge of anti-establisment honor
> for him.

Give us the list of the establishment GOP politicians who are
following most of the principles of conservatism, as esposed by
National Review. National Review has been speaking out against
what has been going on by the establishment politicians for
decades. And what those true conservatives spoke out about,
against Trump, is their fear that Trump, who isn't a real conservative,
could get elected and destroy conservatism, by people thinking his
act is what conservatism is all about. It's like a faker coming
along and selling you what they claim to be is a Mercedes, but in
fact it's just a cheap Yugo piece of junk. It destroys the brand.

[rbowman]

On 01/24/2016 06:52 AM, trader_4 wrote:
> Give us the list of the establishment GOP politicians who are
> following most of the principles of conservatism, as esposed by
> National Review. National Review has been speaking out against
> what has been going on by the establishment politicians for
> decades.

You're coming close to admitting the GOP should change its mascot to a
rhinoceros. That is, if you consider National Rearview's
interventionist, globalism to be real conservatism. Buckley's crew
purged the Old Right from the rag just as effectively as Stalin getting
rid of dissenting voices.

[rbowman]

On 01/24/2016 06:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
> I assume you mean it's pretty dumb for the RNC to cut National Review
> out of the upcoming debate. I agree. But if that's true, then what
> about Trump attacking it as a dying paper? Not only is it an attack,
> but it also shows that Trump hasn't even looked at an issue. It's
> not a paper and no conservative or anyone else that has any familiarity
> with it, would call it a paper. Can you show us any other conservative
> politician that doesn't know what the National Review is, calls it
> dying, irrelevant, etc?

Getting technical, aren't you? If Trump had called it a magazine would
you have pointed out that NRO isn't a magazine? As far as dying, look at
the circulation figures. NR, like many of the right wing talking heads,
does best in Democratic administrations.

[Tekkie®]

trader_4 posted for all of us...

WE are really tired of your same postings ad-infinitum. We know you don't
like Trump. I don't know what I like about any of them, yet you called me a
Trump lover. It used to say for amusement purposes only on the wrapper. Do
not restate your blather again and again. When Trumpit says something you
don't agree with make a rational reasoned post. Right now you look like you
belong on the Dem shout it until it's true bandwagon.

--
Tekkie

[T]

On 01/24/2016 10:53 AM, rbowman wrote:
> the GOP should change its mascot to a rhinoceros

1+

[trader_4]

I think most of what you post is blather too, but I'm not here
bitching about you posting it. You don't like it, find another
thread.

[trader_4]

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 1:55:04 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
> On 01/24/2016 06:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
> > I assume you mean it's pretty dumb for the RNC to cut National Review
> > out of the upcoming debate. I agree. But if that's true, then what
> > about Trump attacking it as a dying paper? Not only is it an attack,
> > but it also shows that Trump hasn't even looked at an issue. It's
> > not a paper and no conservative or anyone else that has any familiarity
> > with it, would call it a paper. Can you show us any other conservative
> > politician that doesn't know what the National Review is, calls it
> > dying, irrelevant, etc?
>
> Getting technical, aren't you?

It's not technical at all. It shows that Trump doesn't even know WTF
it is. And that he's so lazy, that instead of reading it, and then
commenting on the substance of what was there, he instead resorts to
his usual as hominem attack. Can you show us any conservative that has
ever called NR a paper?

If Trump had called it a magazine would
> you have pointed out that NRO isn't a magazine? As far as dying, look at
> the circulation figures. NR, like many of the right wing talking heads,
> does best in Democratic administrations.

As far as dying, show us a real conservative that attacked it like
that, calling it dying, irrelevant, etc. Those are the points.
Wooosh....

[Scott Lurndal]

trader_4 <tra...@optonline.net> writes:

>I think most of what you post is blather too, but I'm not here
>bitching about you posting it. You don't like it, find another
>thread.

better yet, find a different newsgroup. Or get a stool and go
yell at passersby at the park.