Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Politics and World Leaders => Topic started by: Matthew on January 23, 2016, 12:57:27 PM
-
Trump: a Rude, Crude, Lewd Dude!
by Don Boys, Ph.D.
http://donboys.cstnews.com/trump-a-rude-crude-lewd-dude
Full disclosure: I don’t like Donald Trump as a person or performer or politician although I have said that I would vote for him (very reluctantly) given the Democrat choices. Nevertheless, being an Evangelical (more precisely a Fundamentalist) I am amazed at the Christians who have drunk Trump’s brand of Kool-Aid. They need to wipe their lips and rethink their support for him.
He is bold, blunt, brash, boastful, and bombastic -- none of which would eliminate him but I don’t like his gambling empire which is associated with booze and prostitution. He, of course, is not a conservative since he has been all over the map. He appears to be an opportunist. He doesn’t seem to know what he believes about abortion, but he knows that it is permissible to take private property for his own use! No Conservative, no Constitutionalist, no Christian can agree with that.
He told “60 Minutes” on Sept. 27, 2015 that he is for universal health care: “I am going to take care of everybody.” He added, “the government's gonna pay for it.” That’s you and me. As to abortion he would continue government support of Planned Parenthood but not their abortion efforts. Of course, that is insane. Last year he told “Meet the Press” that he would not rescind the Iran Nuclear Deal. He is mushy on the Israeli question and refused to agree to Jerusalem as Israel’s capitol. As to immigration, he told Newsweek last year that he wants amnesty: “I want to move ’em out, and we’re going to move ’em back in and let them be legal.” That is amnesty after a quick visit back home. Whatever Trump is, he is not a Conservative.
My big concern is that he seems to be without character. He obviously has an inferiority complex and has to always tell everyone that he has the most, the biggest, the richest, the nicest, the shiniest of whatever. To inflate himself, Donald boasted that his Las Vegas hotel is the “tallest, most beautiful building in town” when there are three taller buildings. He boasted that his jet is “bigger than Air Force One” when his plane is about 75 feet shorter. It seems he hasn’t had much of a relationship with truth.
For sure I am not a supporter of Hillary Clinton but it was totally crass for Trump to make an issue of her potty trip during the televised debate. Concerning her trip to the potty he said, “It was disgusting…. Where did she go?” It had nothing to do with political issues or the debate. Trump simply slugged Hillary below the belt. Some say it was only politics; however it only proved Trump is a thug and a rude dude.
Donald said Ted Cruz was a “total hypocrite.” And, “He’s a nasty guy. Nobody in Congress likes him.” Well, that could be a recommendation after all, Christ said in Luke 6:26 “Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you!” Cruz should wear that like a merit badge given to him by Donald the Rude.
Moreover, he refuses to deal with issues but majors on insulting people. I am not a fan of Rosie O’Donnell but a wise person does not say everything he thinks even if they are true. He was out of line to say Rosie was a “nice fat little Rosie,” or to say she is “crude, rude, obnoxious and dumb.” He has characterized women as “fat pigs,” “dogs,” “slobs” and “disgusting animals.” Rosie called him a “snake-oil salesman” but that is unfair–to snake-oil salesmen. Trump has a problem with women resulting in the moniker of Donald the Crude.
His problem with women is obvious since he has been married thrice. Trump has had big problems with his personal choices. He fathered a child out of wedlock with the woman who became his second wife with the birth taking place two months after the wedding. He was married the third time to a Slovenian model in 2005. While that history does not seem as bad as Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton’s many foolish, filthy, feral flings, it is part of his résumé and must be part of the equation. It would be pathetic but not precedent-setting to have such a man in the Oval Office.
Trump uses foul language proving he is an uncouth, unthinking, uncaring, and uneducated person. A few years ago, even the most rude, crude, and lewd men did not use vulgarity in decent company especially in the presence of women. Even non-Christians should not use vulgarity.
My critics will accuse me of living in a religious bubble and that has been generally true for most of my adult life. However, that does not mean that I have had no exposure to the real world with all its corruption. After all, I have traveled worldwide, shopped, dealt with businessmen, was a life insurance salesman, served in the Indiana House of Representatives (where I reprimanded the cursing wife of a judge in front of him and their legislative friends), and appeared on hundreds of television and radio talk shows where I was called many vulgar words that I had no idea of their meaning! So my “bubble” has not meant total seclusion.
All my close friends and associates are very kind, honorable, honest, educated, cultured, urbane, sensitive people who eschew “gosh,” “heck,” “darn,” although we do lose control at times and utter “cool” or “neat.” Gasp! Maybe we say “cool” to appear cool in the eyes of others!
I am not suggesting that people who use dirty four letter words are living in the depths of depravity, although I am saying that such words are unnecessary, uncouth, uncivil and a poor example to others, especially the young.
Whatever we say should be unambiguous and not be embarrassing or an insult to others. The Bible teaches that our yea should be yea and our nay should be nay. Vulgar (even non-vulgar) curse words are proscribed and never acceptable by civil, cultured, or Christian people.
The Apostle Paul commanded us in Colossians 3:8 “Put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communications out of your mouth.” He also said, “Evil communications corrupt good manners.” Swearing results in a coarsening of society.
Evidently Trump’s momma never washed out his mouth with soap as was commonly done years ago! That worked for thousands of us. Donald the Crude needs his mouth washed out with soap.
But it gets worse.
He referred to oral sex on “Celebrity Apprentice All-Stars” twisting a female star’s comment to appear she referred to oral sex when she did not. Recently, he used a Yiddish vulgarity to slam Hillary. And he insulted Megyn Kelly referring to her monthly period. He’s a lewd dude. So that makes him Donald the Lewd.
Speaking of Arianna Huffington he said, she is “unattractive both inside and out. I fully understand why her former husband left her for a man–he made a good decision.” Say what? ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is never justified. Was that an endorsement of same-sex “marriage”? Alas, the irrational, irrepressible, and irresponsible Trump is Donald a rude, crude, lewd dude.
When asked if he ever asked God for forgiveness for his actions he said, “I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don’t think so,” he said. “I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don’t bring God into that picture. I don’t.” That is an asinine, arrogant, and atrocious reply. Even a shallow Christian would not make such a statement. Christ said we should pray, “Forgive us our trespasses.” Why? Because everyone sins and needs forgiveness. Even Donald Trump, probably more than anyone knows. Moreover, it could be dangerous to put a narcissist like Trump in control of U.S. military machine. A man who thinks he is always right is a very dangerous person.
When Trump is challenged for his lack of decency, decorum, or discretion, he always seems to justify it by pointing out his high polling numbers among Evangelicals. Americans can support whomever they please; however, for a Christian to vote for Trump is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.
Trump the rude, crude, lewd dude has proved the old adage that money and power can’t buy class or real friends but they may buy votes; however he won’t get my vote unless the alternative is a Socialist or a future resident of a federal prison.
-
Trump is a nationalist and he has promised to protect Christians
-
he won’t get my vote unless the alternative is a Socialist or a future resident of a federal prison.
Bernie Sanders is admittedly a socialist, and Hillary Clinton is on a collision course with federal prison for the high crime of treason. Traitors have traditionally faced a firing squad. That would be a colorful end to her bad act.
So who does that leave you with as an alternative, Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz? (Please don't say Marco Rubio.)
-
he won’t get my vote unless the alternative is a Socialist or a future resident of a federal prison.
Bernie Sanders is admittedly a socialist, and Hillary Clinton is on a collision course with federal prison for the high crime of treason. Traitors have traditionally faced a firing squad. That would be a colorful end to her bad act.
So who does that leave you with as an alternative, Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz? (Please don't say Marco Rubio.)
The Bushes have advanced the NWO more than anybody else in the US including Obama--it is their legacy.
-
I think the reason this article has no down thumbs is because matthew has disabled that function when it comes to him.
This article complains about the fact that Trump has not declared he wants jerusalem as israels capitol(so they can build the third temple and further persecute religions other than theirs). It complains that he is mushy when it comes to israel. That "mushy" means that he has not folded or shown his cards when it comes to israel expansion(the 1967 borders question). And, it complains he will not rescind the iran deal. And, in my book, those are all good things.
I could most likely pick apart so much in this article. But, I just don't have the time or the desire. Perhaps matthew doesn't like Trump because he will likely be able to avert the crash/"back to organic farming" scenario that he is always preparing for. Matthew might not need those rain buckets or that 1 year supply of food if Trump gets elected. Other than that, I just don't see the reason to bash Trump.
-
I think the reason this article has no down thumbs is because matthew has disabled that function when it comes to him.
The thumbing feature has long outlived its relevance, but if any particular member's posts cannot be down-thumbed, the whole concept is nonsense.
This article complains about the fact that Trump has not declared he wants jerusalem as israels capitol (so they can build the third temple and further persecute religions other than theirs). It complains that he is mushy when it comes to israel. That "mushy" means that he has not folded or shown his cards when it comes to israel expansion (the 1967 borders question). And, it complains he will not rescind the iran deal. And, in my book, those are all good things.
I could most likely pick apart so much in this article. But, I just don't have the time or the desire. Perhaps matthew doesn't like Trump because he will likely be able to avert the crash/"back to organic farming" scenario that he is always preparing for. Matthew might not need those rain buckets or that 1 year supply of food if Trump gets elected. Other than that, I just don't see the reason to bash Trump.
It seems to me a large segment of Trump's opponents don't like the fact that he has a lot of money. It takes a lot of money to run for president, so that pretty much rules out those who are not wealthy. His idea of accepting no salary for being President has got to be the most bold principle proposed in a LONG time, and the Liberals just HATE it, because they think they own the practice of bold principles.
.
-
Kim Jongish? Matthew is the Moderator and it'd be silly to let members abuse their privilege of membership by downvoting the person who hosts the entire forum.
I'm sure the world hates Kim Jong Un because he doesn'trecognize Israel as a nation ... nor does he permit Jews to criticize him, at least in his own country. Consider everything you know about Kim is as truthful as everything you've been told about Hitler :shocked:
-
Donald Trump is a vehicle for a much larger movement. The alt-right is using him to promote their ideas. The alt-right is more diverse than traditional conservatism. It's hard to pigeonhole them. The millennial brand of conservatism seems to favor the rude language Trump uses. It's difficult to say where conservatism is headed once the babyboomers starting dying off. A lot of these right-wing millenials seem to favor extreme beliefs.
-
The millennial brand of conservatism seems to favor the rude language Trump uses.
I guess I miss the millennial cut-off by a couple of years, but I can't stand to listen to Trump. Many of the things he's said seem very childish and immature to me. Bush said something a day or two ago about Trump's actions being that of a very insecure individual. Whether or not that's actually true, I completely agree that he comes across as exactly that.
-
The Republican machine that is owned and financed by the globalists
are speeding millions of dollars to defeat Donald Trump.
They did the same in 1964 to defeat Berry Goldwater in his race
against the Democratic LBJ. This is the very last time that the
overwhelming white voters elected a Democrat as President of the
U.S.
-
There is a group of Republicans (some of them delegates) who are so upset about Trump that they're threatening to swing over to supporting Hillary if Trump gets the nomination. Their problem is that they like the status quo just the way it is, and they see Trump as upsetting their apple cart.
-
Donald Trump is a vehicle for a much larger movement. The alt-right is using him to promote their ideas. The alt-right is more diverse than traditional conservatism. It's hard to pigeonhole them. The millennial brand of conservatism seems to favor the rude language Trump uses. It's difficult to say where conservatism is headed once the babyboomers starting dying off. A lot of these right-wing millenials seem to favor extreme beliefs.
There is a segment of the patriot movement that is New Age.
-
he won’t get my vote unless the alternative is a Socialist or a future resident of a federal prison.
Bernie Sanders is admittedly a socialist, and Hillary Clinton is on a collision course with federal prison for the high crime of treason. Traitors have traditionally faced a firing squad. That would be a colorful end to her bad act.
So who does that leave you with as an alternative, Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz? (Please don't say Marco Rubio.)
We won't know who the biggest crook of 'em all is until they announce the election results.
-
Pray: that we be united to Christ and the candidate
Heaven so chooses ! :applause: :applause: :applause:
-
neilobstat - have you listened to what roger stone is staying about hillary and this election? I just recently learned about him, but you might want to check him out. He is basically unofficially working for trump outside his campaign exposing all of the corruption of trumps competitors. And, according to him, republicans have been for hillary all along. As in, they are paid to lose.
-
I think the reason this article has no down thumbs is because matthew has disabled that function when it comes to him.
This article complains about the fact that Trump has not declared he wants jerusalem as israels capitol(so they can build the third temple and further persecute religions other than theirs). It complains that he is mushy when it comes to israel. That "mushy" means that he has not folded or shown his cards when it comes to israel expansion(the 1967 borders question). And, it complains he will not rescind the iran deal. And, in my book, those are all good things.
I could most likely pick apart so much in this article. But, I just don't have the time or the desire. Perhaps matthew doesn't like Trump because he will likely be able to avert the crash/"back to organic farming" scenario that he is always preparing for. Matthew might not need those rain buckets or that 1 year supply of food if Trump gets elected. Other than that, I just don't see the reason to bash Trump.
:applause: I so agree! Maybe we all need to gamble now and play the "trump" card. Our nation is on the point of death! Its almost like we have to choose the lesser of several evils!
-
I think the reason this article has no down thumbs is because matthew has disabled that function when it comes to him.
This article complains about the fact that Trump has not declared he wants jerusalem as israels capitol(so they can build the third temple and further persecute religions other than theirs). It complains that he is mushy when it comes to israel. That "mushy" means that he has not folded or shown his cards when it comes to israel expansion(the 1967 borders question). And, it complains he will not rescind the iran deal. And, in my book, those are all good things.
I could most likely pick apart so much in this article. But, I just don't have the time or the desire. Perhaps matthew doesn't like Trump because he will likely be able to avert the crash/"back to organic farming" scenario that he is always preparing for. Matthew might not need those rain buckets or that 1 year supply of food if Trump gets elected. Other than that, I just don't see the reason to bash Trump.
:applause: I so agree! Maybe we all need to gamble now and play the "trump" card. Our nation is on the point of death! Its almost like we have to choose the lesser of several evils!
To use "lesser of two evils" to justify Republicanism and the right wing is simply stated: stupid. No good comes from any evil. EVER! Also placing faith in Trump hoping he might delay the inevitable death of our godless nation of heathens is naive. He's Protestant at best and when does anything they do end well? Look at America. That sure took a turn for the worst. Also we are not at the point of death we are a dead man walking. The ax has already fallen and we just wait for it to remove our head.
You should only "gamble" on the Church. How can you vote for someone who's not Catholic? I know that there are no Catholic candidates but tell me how you're going to explain to God on your day of judgment and use the excuse "It was the lesser of two evils".
Moral of the rant: Evil is evil. Saying otherwise is heresy. Because Pilate killing Christ to prevent a riot was a "lesser of two evils" seeing how it's one man for hundreds. As for Matthew, you hoard those rain buckets and canned goods because it's looking like a long apocalypse from where I'm sitting!
-
And is Republicanism truly the lesser of two evils? Democrats give you the tools to destroy yourselves while Republicans nail it in with heavy hand.
-
I think the reason this article has no down thumbs is because matthew has disabled that function when it comes to him.
This article complains about the fact that Trump has not declared he wants jerusalem as israels capitol(so they can build the third temple and further persecute religions other than theirs). It complains that he is mushy when it comes to israel. That "mushy" means that he has not folded or shown his cards when it comes to israel expansion(the 1967 borders question). And, it complains he will not rescind the iran deal. And, in my book, those are all good things.
I could most likely pick apart so much in this article. But, I just don't have the time or the desire. Perhaps matthew doesn't like Trump because he will likely be able to avert the crash/"back to organic farming" scenario that he is always preparing for. Matthew might not need those rain buckets or that 1 year supply of food if Trump gets elected. Other than that, I just don't see the reason to bash Trump.
:applause: I so agree! Maybe we all need to gamble now and play the "trump" card. Our nation is on the point of death! Its almost like we have to choose the lesser of several evils!
To use "lesser of two evils" to justify Republicanism and the right wing is simply stated: stupid. No good comes from any evil. EVER! Also placing faith in Trump hoping he might delay the inevitable death of our godless nation of heathens is naive. He's Protestant at best and when does anything they do end well? Look at America. That sure took a turn for the worst. Also we are not at the point of death we are a dead man walking. The ax has already fallen and we just wait for it to remove our head.
You should only "gamble" on the Church. How can you vote for someone who's not Catholic? I know that there are no Catholic candidates but tell me how you're going to explain to God on your day of judgment and use the excuse "It was the lesser of two evils".
Moral of the rant: Evil is evil. Saying otherwise is heresy. Because Pilate killing Christ to prevent a riot was a "lesser of two evils" seeing how it's one man for hundreds. As for Matthew, you hoard those rain buckets and canned goods because it's looking like a long apocalypse from where I'm sitting!
I see I am starting to get down thumbed but no one actually responds. Kinda like dealing with Protestants...
-
Hello Anon Catholic. I did not ignore you.
I have been busy and i get ignored here too !
-
We need to pray for the Candidates God gives us.
Then they can change or we just allow this world to
control us. Never feel less. :pray: :pray: :pray:
-
I don't live in the U.S. so maybe I don't have a say but Trump reminds me of George Patton. He got the job done. Too bad he was killed before he could finish it. I think Trump will get the job done too and he's going to turn things upside down .
-
We need to pray for the Candidates God gives us.
Then they can change or we just allow this world to
control us. Never feel less. :pray: :pray: :pray:
Fair enough but until said candidate does change voting for a godless or protestant is the same as giving consent. So all those placing their vote with Trump consent to a twice divorced fascist? Who in no way embodies any aspects or traits that any decent Catholic should. All we can do in many cases is pray but suggesting that praying for a heathen after you vote for them is like dousing your house in gasoline and praying that no one has any fire nearby. Just, no.
-
I don't live in the U.S. so maybe I don't have a say but Trump reminds me of George Patton. He got the job done. Too bad he was killed before he could finish it. I think Trump will get the job done too and he's going to turn things upside down .
Patton didn't have two divorces, nor was he running for president. Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
-
We need to pray for the Candidates God gives us.
Then they can change or we just allow this world to
control us. Never feel less. :pray: :pray: :pray:
You know what? You're right. I'm voting fir Hilary and I'll pray she becomes a better person. Then I'll pray for the director of Planned Parenthood too after I donate 10k dollars and just pray they become a better person.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
-
I'm sick of these candidates attacking each other. They should be going after Obama and especially Hillary.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
People work. They don't wait around waiting for hand outs.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
Fair point, but are they billionaires running for president? Let me amend previous statement. Power doesn't come to those with clean hands. That's what I'm saying here and the lesser of two evils arguments that some of these people are trying to use is my main point. Your Lord, our God will not accept "I did it because it was the lesser of two evils". That is BULLCRAP! Spewed from the mouths of morons no better than the liberals they despise so much because EVIL IS EVIL!
That is the point I'm trying to convey. Power does not ever find it's way into clean hands and when it does those hands are severed quickly by the powers that be.
-
I don't agree with everything you've posted so please help me understand what you're conveying.
The candidates aren't living saints so we shouldn't vote at all?
God can't take good from evil? In the bible, Ruth was a Moabite who worshiped a false god. Her grandson was David the king who was a murderer and an adulterer
BUT from them came the Redeemer of the world.
The US is going to elect a president to get the country out of the mess it's in NOT
elect a Pope or canonize a saint.
The US has a habit of electing lawyers just like Canada, until recently when we elected a lifeguard. It's time the US elected a business man who has had many successes but also some failures in business that is willing to clean house and enforce the laws (immigration) and reverse some bad ones.
You know what you'll get with Clinton; Bill times ten.
Jesus said, "Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar" I believe that means each person has a duty and should vote for the person he believes will best run the country.
The bad thing is the pool of choices is very muddy.
-
I don't agree with everything you've posted so please help me understand what you're conveying.
The candidates aren't living saints so we shouldn't vote at all?
God can't take good from evil? In the bible, Ruth was a Moabite who worshiped a false god. Her grandson was David the king who was a murderer and an adulterer
BUT from them came the Redeemer of the world.
The US is going to elect a president to get the country out of the mess it's in NOT
elect a Pope or canonize a saint.
The US has a habit of electing lawyers just like Canada, until recently when we elected a lifeguard. It's time the US elected a business man who has had many successes but also some failures in business that is willing to clean house and enforce the laws (immigration) and reverse some bad ones.
You know what you'll get with Clinton; Bill times ten.
Jesus said, "Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar" I believe that means each person has a duty and should vote for the person he believes will best run the country.
The bad thing is the pool of choices is very muddy.
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
-
I don't agree with everything you've posted so please help me understand what you're conveying.
The candidates aren't living saints so we shouldn't vote at all?
God can't take good from evil? In the bible, Ruth was a Moabite who worshiped a false god. Her grandson was David the king who was a murderer and an adulterer
BUT from them came the Redeemer of the world.
The US is going to elect a president to get the country out of the mess it's in NOT
elect a Pope or canonize a saint.
The US has a habit of electing lawyers just like Canada, until recently when we elected a lifeguard. It's time the US elected a business man who has had many successes but also some failures in business that is willing to clean house and enforce the laws (immigration) and reverse some bad ones.
You know what you'll get with Clinton; Bill times ten.
Jesus said, "Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar" I believe that means each person has a duty and should vote for the person he believes will best run the country.
The bad thing is the pool of choices is very muddy.
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
So in the history of the United States Catholics should have only voted once so far? And it was OK to support him even though he was an adulterer?
Sorry but I think you vote for the person best for the job.
-
I don't agree with everything you've posted so please help me understand what you're conveying.
The candidates aren't living saints so we shouldn't vote at all?
God can't take good from evil? In the bible, Ruth was a Moabite who worshiped a false god. Her grandson was David the king who was a murderer and an adulterer
BUT from them came the Redeemer of the world.
The US is going to elect a president to get the country out of the mess it's in NOT
elect a Pope or canonize a saint.
The US has a habit of electing lawyers just like Canada, until recently when we elected a lifeguard. It's time the US elected a business man who has had many successes but also some failures in business that is willing to clean house and enforce the laws (immigration) and reverse some bad ones.
You know what you'll get with Clinton; Bill times ten.
Jesus said, "Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar" I believe that means each person has a duty and should vote for the person he believes will best run the country.
The bad thing is the pool of choices is very muddy.
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
So in the history of the United States Catholics should have only voted once so far? And it was OK to support him even though he was an adulterer?
How do you know he was an adulterer? I mean isn't it a tad bit suspicious that the only Catholic president in the History of the U.S. was a) branded an adulterer by baseless rumor b) Shot only 2 years into his term after launching a huge investigation into federal agencies?
And again you miss my point Evil is Evil. Period. That's the moral and just because it's the supposed lesser of two evils doesn't make it not evil.
Now if you have something intelligent to add I shall respond but if your just going to sit here and spew you closet Protestant propaganda I'm going to go do something else.
-
And again you miss my point Evil is Evil. Period. That's the moral and just because it's the supposed lesser of two evils doesn't make it not evil.
Now if you have something intelligent to add I shall respond but if your just going to sit here and spew you closet Protestant propaganda I'm going to go do something else.
So when you can't discuss like an adult.....attack. How childish.
Evil is Evil, I never said it wasn't but answer just one question.
Are you saying Catholics shouldn't vote in this election?
-
I don't agree with everything you've posted so please help me understand what you're conveying.
The candidates aren't living saints so we shouldn't vote at all?
God can't take good from evil? In the bible, Ruth was a Moabite who worshiped a false god. Her grandson was David the king who was a murderer and an adulterer
BUT from them came the Redeemer of the world.
The US is going to elect a president to get the country out of the mess it's in NOT
elect a Pope or canonize a saint.
The US has a habit of electing lawyers just like Canada, until recently when we elected a lifeguard. It's time the US elected a business man who has had many successes but also some failures in business that is willing to clean house and enforce the laws (immigration) and reverse some bad ones.
You know what you'll get with Clinton; Bill times ten.
Jesus said, "Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar" I believe that means each person has a duty and should vote for the person he believes will best run the country.
The bad thing is the pool of choices is very muddy.
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
So in the history of the United States Catholics should have only voted once so far? And it was OK to support him even though he was an adulterer?
How do you know he was an adulterer? I mean isn't it a tad bit suspicious that the only Catholic president in the History of the U.S. was a) branded an adulterer by baseless rumor b) Shot only 2 years into his term after launching a huge investigation into federal agencies?
And again you miss my point Evil is Evil. Period. That's the moral and just because it's the supposed lesser of two evils doesn't make it not evil.
Now if you have something intelligent to add I shall respond but if your just going to sit here and spew you closet Protestant propaganda I'm going to go do something else.
I apologize for my hasty, poorly written respond. The message holds true but my insults are caused by misinterpreted words. I though you said that Catholics only voted once and got an adulterer. I spoke very irrationality due to a irritable upbringing with protestant cousins that insisted on being in our face as much as possible. Your response which I misinterpreted sorta sent a trigger thinking back to a time when my cousin used similar arguments to justify civilian carpet bombings in the middle east. So yeah sort of a trigger and I apologize. I do however stand by my rational responses which consist of defense of JFK. I do believe his name was intentionally slandered due to his Catholicism. I also say that in a normal world you should pick the lesser of two evils. But not if they commit literal evil. On one hand we have Jew worshipers (i.e. most Republicans) on the other we have full on Jew ideas made into reality (i.e. Democrats).
I would like to again apologize but many suppressed emotions of anger emerged when misread your words. :sign-surrender:
-
And again you miss my point Evil is Evil. Period. That's the moral and just because it's the supposed lesser of two evils doesn't make it not evil.
Now if you have something intelligent to add I shall respond but if your just going to sit here and spew you closet Protestant propaganda I'm going to go do something else.
So when you can't discuss like an adult.....attack. How childish.
Evil is Evil, I never said it wasn't but answer just one question.
Are you saying Catholics shouldn't vote in this election?
Yes indeed I am saying a Catholic should refrain from voting. When the only two options are garbage and garbage one should refrain from staining their name with support to garbage. Because that's the only options provided to the modern voter. Trump talks a big game but in the end he doesn't posses Catholicism which is necessary for any nation's revival. I have a feeling he will only lead this nation to a fate much like nαzι Germany. He will use the suppressed emotions of hatred that most white folk posses due to years of liberal propaganda and people will snap. The country instead of invading others will descend into cινιℓ ωαr due to disagreements in the government. Then we will see the government just keep splitting up like Protestantism did until we have 29,000 denominations of the U.S. government.
-
We need to pray for the Candidates God gives us.
Then they can change or we just allow this world to
control us. Never feel less. :pray: :pray: :pray:
You know what? You're right. I'm voting fir Hilary and I'll pray she becomes a better person. Then I'll pray for the director of Planned Parenthood too after I donate 10k dollars and just pray they become a better person.
:roll-laugh1:
Perfect response!
-
We need to pray for the Candidates God gives us.
Then they can change or we just allow this world to
control us. Never feel less. :pray: :pray: :pray:
You know what? You're right. I'm voting fir Hilary and I'll pray she becomes a better person. Then I'll pray for the director of Planned Parenthood too after I donate 10k dollars and just pray they become a better person.
:applause: :applause: :applause:
Indeed. Aren't Catholics stereoptyped to automatically vote Democrat?
Just hope for the best, friend. :popcorn:
-
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
We can only vote for a Catholic? You're mixing up your spiritual life and your life as a citizen of a country. Certainly we are voting to retain our freedom, which is disappearing. The USA wasn't started by "Christians" and there was a lot of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ involved, BUT we have had the freedom to go to Church and worship God, and that is what matters. If we continue on with this slow slide to more and more socialism we will be communist pretty soon and lose the freedom to vote.
Trump isn't the best choice but he has stepped forward and he has been willing to finance his own campaign, which keeps him from "owing" anyone. This alone to me shows he may be sincere. All we can do is pray and hope for the best. But to put him down just because he isn't Catholic is a little short sighted I think. God uses many types of governments and many types of rulers. We no longer have Christendom with Catholic monarchs, and we are at the end of an age, so voting to retain our freedoms to worship, to me, is very important.
-
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
We can only vote for a Catholic? You're mixing up your spiritual life and your life as a citizen of a country. Certainly we are voting to retain our freedom, which is disappearing. The USA wasn't started by "Christians" and there was a lot of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ involved, BUT we have had the freedom to go to Church and worship God, and that is what matters. If we continue on with this slow slide to more and more socialism we will be communist pretty soon and lose the freedom to vote.
Trump isn't the best choice but he has stepped forward and he has been willing to finance his own campaign, which keeps him from "owing" anyone. This alone to me shows he may be sincere. All we can do is pray and hope for the best. But to put him down just because he isn't Catholic is a little short sighted I think. God uses many types of governments and many types of rulers. We no longer have Christendom with Catholic monarchs, and we are at the end of an age, so voting to retain our freedoms to worship, to me, is very important.
Spiritualism should go hand in hand with nationality. Check out the Catholic Voting Guide thread and that will explain perfectly why voting for Trump to prevent a "greater evil" is a flawed concept. Just to clear things up I am in no way supporting the Democrats but rather I am condemning the support of a man that holds very few Catholic virtues to heart.
-
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
We can only vote for a Catholic? You're mixing up your spiritual life and your life as a citizen of a country. Certainly we are voting to retain our freedom, which is disappearing. The USA wasn't started by "Christians" and there was a lot of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ involved, BUT we have had the freedom to go to Church and worship God, and that is what matters. If we continue on with this slow slide to more and more socialism we will be communist pretty soon and lose the freedom to vote.
Trump isn't the best choice but he has stepped forward and he has been willing to finance his own campaign, which keeps him from "owing" anyone. This alone to me shows he may be sincere. All we can do is pray and hope for the best. But to put him down just because he isn't Catholic is a little short sighted I think. God uses many types of governments and many types of rulers. We no longer have Christendom with Catholic monarchs, and we are at the end of an age, so voting to retain our freedoms to worship, to me, is very important.
You realize that Trump and America's current political setup is the very definition of Fascism. Only people with money can run and win an election because running costs money. How has Trump stepped up in any way? Did he promise to end abortion? Did he promise to destroy planned parenthood? Did he condemn Israel and it's mass murdering ways? Does this man with two previous divorces promise to end the concept of constant divorcing and remarrying? Does he promise to end free flowing pornography on media outlets? These issues are what is destroying America. Not illegal immigrants (although they don't help), but a rotting of the soul and unless Trump has a magic wand imbued with the power of Christ, he's only going to make it worse by distracting people with small issues of little relevance, such as illegal immigration. He is just as bad as any given democrat.
-
My point is Trump is no better than everyone else. Even if he is the lesser of two evils doesn't matter because evil is evil. That's all I am saying.
No where do I say that the president needs to be a saint. I'm saying they should be Catholic to illicit a Catholics vote.
We can only vote for a Catholic? You're mixing up your spiritual life and your life as a citizen of a country. Certainly we are voting to retain our freedom, which is disappearing. The USA wasn't started by "Christians" and there was a lot of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ involved, BUT we have had the freedom to go to Church and worship God, and that is what matters. If we continue on with this slow slide to more and more socialism we will be communist pretty soon and lose the freedom to vote.
Trump isn't the best choice but he has stepped forward and he has been willing to finance his own campaign, which keeps him from "owing" anyone. This alone to me shows he may be sincere. All we can do is pray and hope for the best. But to put him down just because he isn't Catholic is a little short sighted I think. God uses many types of governments and many types of rulers. We no longer have Christendom with Catholic monarchs, and we are at the end of an age, so voting to retain our freedoms to worship, to me, is very important.
Spiritualism should go hand in hand with nationality. Check out the Catholic Voting Guide thread and that will explain perfectly why voting for Trump to prevent a "greater evil" is a flawed concept. Just to clear things up I am in no way supporting the Democrats but rather I am condemning the support of a man that holds very few Catholic virtues to heart.
The Catholic Voting Guide is in general discussions btw. I highly recommend consulting that thread for there are many who are wiser than me who speak on the subject there.
-
Just to clear things up I am in no way supporting the Democrats but rather I am condemning the support of a man that holds very few Catholic virtues to heart.
I think "very few" is an overstatement.
-
Republicanism is the modern day equivalent of Marie Antoinette's famed quote "Let them eat cake!"
-
... Marie Antoinette's famed quote "Let them eat cake!"
Except that she didn't say it.
-
... Marie Antoinette's famed quote "Let them eat cake!"
Except that she didn't say it.
Whether or not she did say it, the quote belongs to her name.
-
No it doesn't. I would suggest reading Louis Madelin History of Fr Rev. :cheers:
-
No it doesn't. I would suggest reading Louis Madelin History of Fr Rev. :cheers:
I'm not saying that she said it but that it's now associated with her name. But all of this is highly irrelevant to the actual thread itself. Although I do appreciate the book recommendation. Always looking for good reads.
-
Trump is a nationalist and he has promised to protect Christians
Trump is an admitted zionist supporter and they are the enemies of Jesus Christ and our Holy religion.
-
Trump posted some months ago on Twitter about the media covering up black on white crime. I can't think of any presidential hopeful in recent memory that would acknowledge such a thing, even cryptically. He's a servant of the Jews, and may be a crypto-Jew. His daughter married a Jew. Trump is appealing to Jew-approved white nationalists, such as Jared Taylor, the Jewy Steve Sailer, and the TakiMag writers. Even Jew-wise whites may not care, as his rhetoric produces a kind of Pavlovian enthusiasm that people can't see the forest for the trees. The Jєωιѕн establishment throwing discontented whites a bone.
-
He's admittedly not perfect but what other candidate comes close to saying this.......
http://www.dailystormer.com/yes-donald-trump-call-out-israel-for-funding-isis/
-
Two days ago, Trump was talking about how successful christians could be if we did not have this church tax exemption problem keeping us from being religiously political in church. He said we could form christian church voting blocks. He was obviously hinting at least at the moment about doing something about it if he were elected president. And, he is not done revealing his presidential policies. So, stay tuned. Trump really does want to have a great country, and he will realize, if he has not already(which I believe he has), that christian strength is the only way to achieve that. It has been successful with Putin and Russia. And, I hope he does the same.
-
He's admittedly not perfect but what other candidate comes close to saying this.......
http://www.dailystormer.com/yes-donald-trump-call-out-israel-for-funding-isis/
About a week ago, Trump mentioned israel by name as supporting isis.... :sign-surrender:
-
I believe he mentioned Obomba & Hillary as well. :scratchchin:
-
Two days ago, Trump was talking about how successful christians could be if we did not have this church tax exemption problem keeping us from being religiously political in church. He said we could form christian church voting blocks. He was obviously hinting at least at the moment about doing something about it if he were elected president. And, he is not done revealing his presidential policies. So, stay tuned. Trump really does want to have a great country, and he will realize, if he has not already(which I believe he has), that christian strength is the only way to achieve that. It has been successful with Putin and Russia. And, I hope he does the same.
Russia's strength draws from years of suffering and a strong sense of nationality. They are NOT christian by a long shot, given the fact that they have the world's highest rate of abortion to the point of negative population growth.
-
Here is the results of tonight's Republican New Hampshire DEBATE. Apparently many like's
this rude, crude, lewd dude.
Votes are still coming in. Took me a long time to get on the site.
Thank you for voting!
Donald Trump 60.37% (4,191 votes)
Marco Rubio 11.26% (782 votes)
John Kasich 8.28% (575 votes)
Chris Christie 7.59% (527 votes)
Ted Cruz 6.73% (467 votes)
Jeb Bush 4.57% (317 votes)
Ben Carson 1.2% (83 votes)
Total Votes: 6,942
-
Votes are still coming in. Took me a long time to get on the site.
What site?
-
He's admittedly not perfect but what other candidate comes close to saying this.......
http://www.dailystormer.com/yes-donald-trump-call-out-israel-for-funding-isis/
About a week ago, Trump mentioned israel by name as supporting isis.... :sign-surrender:
I looked for it, but all I get is the same story about him suggesting it, but not actually saying it.
What he did say was that his relationships were more important than speaking the truth.
-
Here is the results of tonight's Republican New Hampshire DEBATE. Apparently many like's
this rude, crude, lewd dude.
Votes are still coming in. Took me a long time to get on the site.
Thank you for voting!
Donald Trump 60.37% (4,191 votes)
Marco Rubio 11.26% (782 votes)
John Kasich 8.28% (575 votes)
Chris Christie 7.59% (527 votes)
Ted Cruz 6.73% (467 votes)
Jeb Bush 4.57% (317 votes)
Ben Carson 1.2% (83 votes)
Total Votes: 6,942
It was from ABC. Cannot find the link. Trump's numbers are to
embarrassing and may have lead to be scrubbed from the internet.
-
Well, anyway, thanks to you, at least it can be found on CathInfo.
-
Video from ABC:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/N2ei8mt55xU[/youtube]
.
-
It does not show the poll afterwards. That was the link I was looking
for.
I did not watch the debate. I have my mind already made up.
About an hour after the debate, I decided to use my search engine
to search for "Republican Debate New Hampshire Poll" and ABC
news cane up. They had clips of the debates followed by a
poll with the lists of candidates.
-
Somebody please spell it out for me what the problem with Cruz is. That's who I am leaning toward. I know his wife works for Goldman Sachs. But he doesn't seem to be as much of a jewhawk as Bush, Graham, or Rubio. Why is he not the right choice? I have seen insinuations too unclear to recognize what they are getting at. And throwing Carson's campaign under the bus is not going to be very persuasive with me.
-
Somebody please spell it out for me what the problem with Cruz is. That's who I am leaning toward. I know his wife works for Goldman Sachs. But he doesn't seem to be as much of a jewhawk as Bush, Graham, or Rubio. Why is he not the right choice? I have seen insinuations too unclear to recognize what they are getting at. And throwing Carson's campaign under the bus is not going to be very persuasive with me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sA_BO3wj20
Arab Christians Boo Ted Cruz for Pro-Israel Remarks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHO77XX-hiE
Cruz tells them " If you will not stand with Israel, I will not stand with you."
Weather he would attend a gαy wedding or not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfXxGd2c5zg
All he had to say was "no". It would be a sin to say anything else.
Ted Cruz Flip-Flop Compilation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftY8UjxeqTk
-
Somebody please spell it out for me what the problem with Cruz is. That's who I am leaning toward. I know his wife works for Goldman Sachs. But he doesn't seem to be as much of a jewhawk as Bush, Graham, or Rubio. Why is he not the right choice? I have seen insinuations too unclear to recognize what they are getting at. And throwing Carson's campaign under the bus is not going to be very persuasive with me.
Ted Cruz, speaking in 2014 to the group In Defense of Christians, said "If you will not stand with Israel and the Jews, then I will not stand with you."
Here's an interview from this year. He's a typical Israel-firster: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCBaXnkxKQE#t=92
He's also an anti-Russia hawk, and a globalist who supports a transpacific free trade agreement. I'd still say on balance he's better than Jeb! and Rubio, and he is also more solidly pro-life than Trump.
-
Another issue about Cruz. He forgot to report a $500,000 dollar
loan from Goldman Sachs to the FEC for his 2012 run for the Texas Senate Seat.
I did hear a replay of the debate from last night and the exchange between
Senator Rubio by Governor Christi was fierce.
These debates are no way gentlemen like as it was between Kennedy-
Nixon Debate of 1960. The problems of the country is now a million times
worse than it was in 1960.
A tactic of the mass media I heard is that from now on they will ignore
Trump and pretend that he does not exist. This is the reason the poll
from ABC news disappeared.
-
Trump's pro life credentials aren't great, but if you never want Roe v. Wade to be overturned then don't vote for trump......then all the Mexicans (who largely vote democrat) can come here freely and vote.
I don't see how any of the other candidates are viable options.
As for him strongly hinting that Israel is behind Isis, what more could he say? He's trying to become the president of America....he has to have at least a bit of tact.
-
Trump's pro life credentials aren't great, but if you never want Roe v. Wade to be overturned then don't vote for trump......then all the Mexicans (who largely vote democrat) can come here freely and vote.
I don't see how any of the other candidates are viable options.
As for him strongly hinting that Israel is behind Isis, what more could he say? He's trying to become the president of America....he has to have at least a bit of tact.
That is the question. Are immigration and globalization and Islam, and just generally bulldozing all PC scruples, etc., of such immediate concern that they can override a weak pro-life platform? Or in other words, do Americans have to work those out first - stop the bleeding, as it were - before turning to the more fundamental moral illnesses? I tend to think yes, but I'm not 100% sure and the situation looks hopeless from most every angle. I don't think that Americans need to ignore their nation's legitimate secular problems (which do have a moral dimension, in the final analysis) and just be single issue voters going to the most pro-life candidate no matter his other faults. I could be wrong.
-
I agree. Going with the most 'pro life candidate' on paper has not worked. GWB's pro life Credentials were some of the best......and what did he do to overturn R v. W?
Right now immigration is a serious threat. We are headed in the same direction as Europe...where Sweden has become the rape capital of the west.
I honestly even believe Trump would do more to stop abortion than any of those other snakes.
-
I honestly even believe Trump would do more to stop abortion than any of those other snakes.
That's a case that can be made based on him being a doer at heart. Who is better, the candidate with a strong pro-life platform who likely won't get it done, or the one with a weak pro-life platform who may well get it done? Anyway, it's a case.
-
I honestly even believe Trump would do more to stop abortion than any of those other snakes.
That's a case that can be made based on him being a doer at heart. Who is better, the candidate with a strong pro-life platform who likely won't get it done, or the one with a weak pro-life platform who may well get it done? Anyway, it's a case.
I'd like to know what suggests that he'd get it done. He seems much more adamant about Israel and yet can't bring himself to say it. If it's a given that you can't be anti-Israel and be president, why beat up these other guys for their pro-Israel positions?
Trump is only pro-life because he knows someone who might have been aborted and turned out to be a good guy. What happens next week when he meets someone who killed their child and then went on to be a great gal?
There's an abortion issue at the US Supreme court right now. Which of the candidates has made a statement to the court or to the public on the issue?
-
I honestly even believe Trump would do more to stop abortion than any of those other snakes.
That's a case that can be made based on him being a doer at heart. Who is better, the candidate with a strong pro-life platform who likely won't get it done, or the one with a weak pro-life platform who may well get it done? Anyway, it's a case.
I'd like to know what suggests that he'd get it done.
He's a doer who has done a lot in his time. He's forceful and gets what he wants, or close to it. It's the same thing that suggests he'll get the wall built and repeal Obamacare and so on. He does things. That's a big part of his appeal vis-a-vis the other candidates.
He seems much more adamant about Israel and yet can't bring himself to say it. If it's a given that you can't be anti-Israel and be president, why beat up these other guys for their pro-Israel positions?
I don't think that's a fair or informed assessment on either count. He doesn't seem more adamant about Israel, and obviously some skepticism and criticism is better than none. That shouldn't have to be pointed out.
Trump is only pro-life because he knows someone who might have been aborted and turned out to be a good guy. What happens next week when he meets someone who killed their child and then went on to be a great gal?
That's what he said publicly, at least. And a lot of people become pro-life over things like that, rather than by learning about natural law and ensoulment.
There's an abortion issue at the US Supreme court right now. Which of the candidates has made a statement to the court or to the public on the issue?
I don't know. Cruz? I said that Cruz is more solidly pro-life than Trump.
-
Somebody please spell it out for me what the problem with Cruz is. That's who I am leaning toward. I know his wife works for Goldman Sachs. But he doesn't seem to be as much of a jewhawk as Bush, Graham, or Rubio. Why is he not the right choice? I have seen insinuations too unclear to recognize what they are getting at. And throwing Carson's campaign under the bus is not going to be very persuasive with me.
David Duke explains Cruz's Zionist Globalism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOIeJiKZLJA
-
Thanks to everybody for the info about Cruz. I suppose if Trump isn't nominated, I will vote third party or write in Buchanan. The David Duke piece was very persuasive that Cruz is beholden to the tribe.
-
Trump also dropped for I think the first time a bombshell in last nights debate by connecting isis funding with "banking". And, cutting off the bank rolling is how you defeat isis. We all know who the bankers are. What more do we need? I really have to tune out all the positions and rhetoric of the other candidates. Because, they are just using pro life and any other flip flopped conservative position against us by at the very least seeking to steal votes from Trump.
-
The Top Campaign Donor is George Soros
Daily Stormer
Andrew Anglin
Breitbart:
The bipartisan Open Secrets blog reported that a small number of Americans, led by George Soros, donated $100 million to Presidential Super PACs in the second half of 2015.
Federal Election Commission filings of 21 different Super PACs supporting the top 13 major party candidates show “29 individuals or organizations who gave $1 million or more” for a total of $99.4 million collected in a six-month period. Adding in the 13 campaign committees, to total raised in the second half of 2015 was $260 million.
Democrat former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pocketed the largest individual single Super PAC donation with a $6 million coming from liberal billionaire George Soros’ ‘Priorities USA Action.’
Other top 10 individual donors to Priorities USA Action to help Hillary Clinton included: $3 million from Haim Saban, $1.6 million from Laure Woods, and $1.5 million from Donald Sussman.
Soros also gave $2 million to another Super PAC backing Clinton called American Bridge.
The largest individual contributor to a Republican was hedge fund manager Paul Singer who endorsed Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL).
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) in November and made a $2.5 million contribution to Conservative Solutions PAC. Singer recruited $3.5 million from two billionaire friends: Kenneth C. Griffin and Cliff Asness, who often give to the same candidates as Singer.
Clinton’s led all candidates by raising a total of $115.6 million in total campaign and Super PAC donations in 2015, about the same as her total in 2007.
Paul Singer is also – obviously – a Jew.
All the top donors for all these people are Jews, as we cover regularly.
Trump is right in pointing out that voters do not appear to appreciate the fact that he is self-funding. If they did appreciate that, both left and right would be voting for him. It is possibly the most important fact ever. We have a situation here where politicians are for sale to the highest bidder, which is a terrible situation whatever the details, but it’s made even more terrible by the fact that the highest bidders are all Jews.
This is a complete disaster.
Share
-
For the voters of Ted Cruz, BEWARE:
Ron Paul: Cruz not a Libertarian. He's owned by Goldman Sachs
Infowars
Ted Cruz isn’t a free-market libertarian, Ron Paul warned his son’s former supporters on Friday.
“You take a guy like Cruz, people are liking the Cruz — they think he’s for the free market, and [in reality] he’s owned by Goldman Sachs,” he said of the Texas senator on Fox Business’ Varney & Company. “I mean, he and Hillary have more in common than we would have with Cruz and Trump or any of them so I just don’t think there is much picking.”
“It’s hard to find anybody — since Rand is out of it — anybody that would take a libertarian position, hardcore libertarian position on privacy, on the war issue and on economic policy.”
Paul also warned that Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders wasn’t much better during a Mises Institute conference on Jan. 30.
“[Socialists] will not listen to the argument that there’s a difference between somebody getting bailed out by the Federal Reserve… versus somebody who produces a good product and we [the People] vote them their money [because] they haven’t cheated, stolen or given us a bad product,” he said. “I think it’s sort of an envy and resentment and I’ve talked to them but I have to tell you, I haven’t converted many die-hard progressives.”
“Some progressives, if you watch them on the Internet, will have really close agreements and might be talk about the same issues, but boy they don’t want you to even introduce the notion that libertarians are with them on this because they’re terrified we might encroach on their power to redistribute wealth [by force].”



-
Ted Cruz is an Evangelical Protestant and he made this statement:
"If you do not stand for Israel. We do not stand with you".
We have to much Jєωιѕн control and if it is not broken up will
destroy this country and the world.
-
]There's an abortion issue at the US Supreme court right now. Which of the candidates has made a statement to the court or to the public on the issue?
I don't know. Cruz? I said that Cruz is more solidly pro-life than Trump.
Cruz and Rubio
http://www.lifenews.com/2016/02/03/cruz-and-rubio-ask-supreme-court-to-uphold-texas-law-saving-10000-babies-from-abortion/
-
Larry Nichols & (or) Wayne Madsen are claiming that Rubio & Cruz are both ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs... :reporter:
-
On O' Reilly yesterday Trump referred to the Billary as 'evil'. O'R tried desparetly(sp?) to get him to take it back but he wouldn't. :roll-laugh1:
-
On O' Reilly yesterday Trump referred to the Billary as 'evil'. O'R tried desparetly(sp?) to get him to take it back but he wouldn't. :roll-laugh1:
At lease the Republicans will not be doling out super delegates like
the Democrats did for Hillary in the New Hampshire Primary.
They count delegates not votes at the Conventions.
-
Larry Nichols & (or) Wayne Madsen are claiming that Rubio & Cruz are both ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs... :reporter:
You think?
Here's Rubio attempting to hug his wife:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/rubio%201_zpsmzxil2gh.jpg)
Here's a description of what's going on in the photo above, courtesy of a poster over at Heartiste:
Very interesting Rubio photo, Corey. How many of the diseases of modernism can we see in just this one photo? He has fag-face and at the same time he has the face of a scheming jew. And who dresses like that?
The woman is completely repulsed by him but she also appears to be an anorexic and a bulimic, the facial thinness in conjunction with the nasal-labial lines being indications of the poor condition of her intestinal flora, which bring on those conditions and other “mental” issues. She won’t hug him but clutches the phone, which she may not be able to put down as the skin of her palm has possibly grown around it.
Note the star of david pattern near the hem of her dress.
The hair indicates depression. She is confused. What color should her hair be and how should it be styled? She can’t decide and won’t listen to advice. So she just lets it grow out, like sidewalk grass outside a derelict building.
Two very unhappy, confused modern people.
I'd say it's a spot-on description. Then, there's this photo from the same website. The folks were discussing it in the comments section:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/rubio%202_zpsfesfi5yb.jpg)
First, here's a breakdown of the above photo by a guy, funnily enough, named Mel Gibson:
Way too much makeup and photoshopped skin on the subjects, shirts too ironed and pressed, each picture and plant perfectly arranged in the background, and the lighting excellent. This looks exactly like a stock photo you’d see in a doctor’s office magazine.
But go deeper – aside from his hilarious balding, this is a couple the Hivemind wants you to see. A pretty blonde, powerful with her hands in her pockets and by standing in front to lead, while her brownish husband hangs on her shoulder, his smile large like a submissive chimpanzee. He’s not the focus.
Go even deeper – her smile betrays her. She’s not happy. She’s unfulfilled. She’s forcing it; it’s fake. And him, even if you didn’t know him as Marco the Robot, something is off. I can’t quite point it out – maybe it’s my instinct of revulsion for a man who leans in like that and allows his woman to BE like that. I don’t know. It’s like he’s stuck in the Uncanny Valley.
Good eye, Mel. A funny guy called Captain Obvious really made me chuckle, when he termed the people who push this phenomenon of metrosɛҳuąƖ appeal as the Gl0b0-H0m0 Infantilization Agenda.
Then, there was mendo's observation:
He doesn’t have his arm around her waist, or even at the small of her back. Instead, it’s resting on her shoulder, in a “let me just leave this here for a sec” rather than the ownership quality of grabbing hold of her and saying “you’re mine.”
Trump almost always has his arm around Melania’s waist. Or just around her body. Or holding her hand by his side.
Plenty of other keen observations in that comment thread. But returning to the main point: I must admit, I am suspicious, and I'm of the same mind as Madsen and Nichols.
-
Larry Nichols & (or) Wayne Madsen are claiming that Rubio & Cruz are both ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs... :reporter:
You think?
Here's Rubio attempting to hug his wife:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/rubio%201_zpsmzxil2gh.jpg)
Here's a description of what's going on in the photo above, courtesy of a poster over at Heartiste:
Very interesting Rubio photo, Corey. How many of the diseases of modernism can we see in just this one photo? He has fag-face and at the same time he has the face of a scheming jew. And who dresses like that?
The woman is completely repulsed by him but she also appears to be an anorexic and a bulimic, the facial thinness in conjunction with the nasal-labial lines being indications of the poor condition of her intestinal flora, which bring on those conditions and other “mental” issues. She won’t hug him but clutches the phone, which she may not be able to put down as the skin of her palm has possibly grown around it.
Note the star of david pattern near the hem of her dress.
The hair indicates depression. She is confused. What color should her hair be and how should it be styled? She can’t decide and won’t listen to advice. So she just lets it grow out, like sidewalk grass outside a derelict building.
Two very unhappy, confused modern people.
I'd say it's a spot-on description. Then, there's this photo from the same website. The folks were discussing it in the comments section:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/rubio%202_zpsfesfi5yb.jpg)
First, here's a breakdown of the above photo by a guy, funnily enough, named Mel Gibson:
Way too much makeup and photoshopped skin on the subjects, shirts too ironed and pressed, each picture and plant perfectly arranged in the background, and the lighting excellent. This looks exactly like a stock photo you’d see in a doctor’s office magazine.
But go deeper – aside from his hilarious balding, this is a couple the Hivemind wants you to see. A pretty blonde, powerful with her hands in her pockets and by standing in front to lead, while her brownish husband hangs on her shoulder, his smile large like a submissive chimpanzee. He’s not the focus.
Go even deeper – her smile betrays her. She’s not happy. She’s unfulfilled. She’s forcing it; it’s fake. And him, even if you didn’t know him as Marco the Robot, something is off. I can’t quite point it out – maybe it’s my instinct of revulsion for a man who leans in like that and allows his woman to BE like that. I don’t know. It’s like he’s stuck in the Uncanny Valley.
Good eye, Mel. A funny guy called Captain Obvious really made me chuckle, when he termed the people who push this phenomenon of metrosɛҳuąƖ appeal as the Gl0b0-H0m0 Infantilization Agenda.
Then, there was mendo's observation:
He doesn’t have his arm around her waist, or even at the small of her back. Instead, it’s resting on her shoulder, in a “let me just leave this here for a sec” rather than the ownership quality of grabbing hold of her and saying “you’re mine.”
Trump almost always has his arm around Melania’s waist. Or just around her body. Or holding her hand by his side.
Plenty of other keen observations in that comment thread. But returning to the main point: I must admit, I am suspicious, and I'm of the same mind as Madsen and Nichols.
As to the bottom pic, he is insecurely brandishing his wedding band. Also, when did it become not rude to have your hands in your pockets.
Rubio is a judaized wetback fαɢɢօt. The NWO will be fully behind him as soon as Bush drops out. The Bushes will probably even endorse him.
-
So Rubio hugs his wife in the first photo (the one where she isn't wearing any wedding ring but clutches her phone) and he gets criticized for doing it wrong, then in the second photo he's criticized for not hugging her at all. Whether he hugs or doesn't, he can't win.
I'm lost as to which we're supposed to think is worse: this perceived weak image of Rubio or the alleged crudeness, rudeness and lewdness of Trump?
-
I understand that a good number of Catholics fall into the trap of ignoring the laws of charity when talking about public figures, but I think the post by Laramie is over the top.
It's one thing to say someone is controlled by Jews because he has Jєωιѕн donors or has appeared for photo ops with Jєωιѕн leaders, etc. Those are pieces of evidence which support your assertion.
Or, you might accuse someone who supports a sodomite agenda of being a sodomite himself. That's a piece of evidence that would fit your proposed conclusion.
But, here we have a man being accused of one of the four sins which cries out to heaven for vengeance because he's not sufficiently photogenic?? Come on, guys. At least pull together a scrap of remote evidence before you accuse a man of such a heinous sin.
My head pretty much completely exploded when you say Rubio's photos with his wife should be more like how Trump poses with the woman with whom he's committing adultery!
:facepalm:
-
Perspective:
...as recently as the 1960s, the electorate would not accept a divorced and remarried candidate. In 1963, New York Gov. Nelson Rockefeller’s bid for the 1964 Republican nomination effectively ended when he divorced his wife and married Margaretta “Happy” Murphy, herself divorced.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/for-gop-presidential-candidates-rules-to-love-by/2011/12/12/gIQAdHVwyO_story.html
Even that article has dated itself because it was written in 2011 and said the following which no longer seems to be true:
Rule 3. Don’t have an affair.
Extramarital affairs, especially those uncovered in the course of a campaign, are still a problem with American voters. Cain, who was polling well in the GOP race this fall, saw his campaign falter because of sɛҳuąƖ harassment allegations. But he ultimately suspended it because of an alleged extramarital affair.
That it was charges of an affair, rather than of harassment, that delivered the knock-out punch fits with what we know about public opinion. While attitudes toward sɛҳuąƖ harassment are still in flux, Americans are strongly against extramarital sex.
-
I understand that a good number of Catholics fall into the trap of ignoring the laws of charity when talking about public figures, but I think the post by Laramie is over the top.
It's one thing to say someone is controlled by Jews because he has Jєωιѕн donors or has appeared for photo ops with Jєωιѕн leaders, etc. Those are pieces of evidence which lead support your assertion.
Or, you might accuse someone who supports a sodomite agenda of being a sodomite himself. That's a piece of evidence that would fit your proposed conclusion.
But, here we have a man being accused of one of the four sins which cries out to heaven for vengeance because he's not sufficiently photogenic?? Come on, guys. At least pull together a scrap of remote evidence before you accuse a man of such a heinous sin.
My head pretty much completely exploded when you say Rubio's photos with his wife should be more like how Trump poses with the woman with whom he's committing adultery!
:facepalm:
I haven't accused the man of anything, though I've stated I'm suspicious.
The gαydar goes off when I see this guy.
The metrosɛҳuąƖ look is a product of Gl0b0 H0m0!
-
-
Here is bill donahue of the catholic league talking about trump and his language - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glIOFh9G5Gg
http://www.newsmax.com/BillDonohue/trump-election-vote/2016/02/10/id/713649/
-
A Poll from the Wall Street Journal end of the debate in South Carolina:
… Who won the GOP Debate in South Carolina? 2/13/16
•Trump69%
•Bush6%
•Rubio12%
•Cruz5%
•Carson2%
•Kasich7%
12,325 Votes
Apparently the majority likes this rude, crude, and lewd dude.
-
Apparently the majority likes this rude, crude, and lewd dude.
Apparently the majority of the country is rude, crude and lewd.
Because Trump puts into words what they're already thinking.
Democracy comes to fruition: "might makes right" is a dangerous premise.
.
-
A political science professor who claims his statistical model has correctly predicted the results of every election in the last 104 years has forecast that the odds of Donald Trump becoming America’s next president currently range from 97 percent to 99 percent.
The professor is Helmut Norpoth of Stony Brook University, reports The Statesman, the campus newspaper at the public bastion on New York’s Long Island.
Specifically, Norpoth predicts that Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of beating Bernie Sanders.
The predictions assume Trump will actually become the 2016 presidential nominee of the Republican Party. (RELATED: Trump Has Never Voted In A Republican Primary)
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/24/political-science-professor-odds-of-president-trump-range-between 97%-and 99%.
-
I looked over the list of libertarian candidates last night. Unfortunately their qualifications appear to range from desperately under-qualified to shouldn't go outdoors without a helmet. The one or two who seemed to be on the right side of abortion sounded as neocon on other issues as Lindsey Graham.
The likelihood of me voting for the Republican nominee is decreasing daily and I don't even consider voting democrat at any level of office anymore. I will vote even if I just go and write in Pat Buchanan. Does anybody know of anybody in a minor party who may interest a true Catholic?
-
The Donald's Odds against Hillary
Buchanan.org
Thursday 2-25-2016
PrintFriendlyEmailGoogle GmailTwitterFacebook38Google+Reddit1TumblrStumbleUponShare39
By Patrick J. Buchanan
In a Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump race – which, the Beltway keening aside, seems the probable outcome of the primaries – what are the odds the GOP can take the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court?
If Republicans can unite, not bad, not bad at all.
Undeniably, Democrats open with a strong hand.
There is that famed “blue wall,” those 18 states and D.C. with a combined 242 electoral votes, just 28 shy of victory, that have gone Democratic in every presidential election since 1988.
The wall contains all of New England save New Hampshire; the Acela corridor (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland); plus Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois and Wisconsin in the Middle West; and the Pacific coast of California, Oregon, Washington – and Hawaii.
Changing demography, too, favors the Democrats.
Barack Obama carried over 90 percent of the black vote twice and in 2012 carried over 70 percent of the Hispanic and Asian votes. These last two voting blocs are the fastest-growing in the USA.
A third Democratic advantage is simple self-interest.
Half the nation now receives U.S. government benefits – in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, welfare, student loans, rent subsidies, school lunches and Earned Income Tax Credits, etc.
Folks who rely on government benefits are unlikely to rally to a party that promises to cut government. And as half the nation pays no income tax, these folks are unlikely to be thrilled about tax cuts.
Bernie Sanders, who promises free college tuition and making Wall Street and the 1 percent pay for it, knows his party.
While these realities of national politics would seem to point to inexorable Democratic dominance in coming decades, there are worms in the apple.
First, there is the strangely shrunken and still shrinking Democratic leadership base. As the Daily Caller reports, under Obama, Democrats have lost a net of more than 900 state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 U.S. House and 13 Senate seats. Such numbers suggest a sick party.
Republican strength on Capitol Hill is again as great as it was in the last years of the Roaring ’20s.
Second, due to Trump, viewership of the Republican debates has been astronomical – 24 million for one, 23 million for another.
The turnout at Trump rallies has been unlike anything seen in presidential primaries; and what’s more, the GOP voter turnout in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada set new records for the party.
Yet voter turnout for the Clinton-Sanders race has fallen, in every contest, below what it was in the Clinton-Obama race in 2008.
Bernie’s millennials aside, the energy and excitement has been on the Republican contest, often a sign of party ascendancy.
Not only would Trump at the top of the GOP ticket assure a huge turnout (pro and con), he is the quintessence of the anti-Washington, anti-establishment candidate in a year when Americans appear to want a wholesale housecleaning in the capital.
As a builder and job creator, Trump would surely have greater cross-party appeal to working-class Democrats than any traditional Republican politician. Moreover, when Bernie Sanders goes down to defeat, how much enthusiasm will his supporters, who thrilled to the savaging of Wall Street, bring to the Clinton campaign?
This is the year of the outsider, and Hillary is the prom queen of Goldman Sachs. She represents continuity. Trump represents change.
Moreover, on the top Trump issues of immigration and trade, the elites have always been the furthest out of touch with the country.
In the 1990s, when Bill Clinton fought the NAFTA battle, the nation rebelled against the deal, but the establishment backed it. When Republicans on Capitol Hill voted for most-favored-nation status for China, year in and year out, did Republican grass roots demand this, or was it the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable?
On immigration, where are the polls that show Middle Americans enthusiastic about increasing the numbers coming? Where is the majority demanding amnesty or open borders?
The elites of Europe are as out of touch as America’s.
Angela Merkel, Time’s Person of the Year in 2015, is at risk of being dumped in 2016 if she does not halt the next wave of Middle Eastern refugees who will be arriving on Europe’s shores when the seas calm in the spring in the Aegean and the Mediterranean.
If we believe the immigration issue Trump has seized upon is explosive here, look to Europe. In the Balkans and Central Europe, even in Austria, the barriers are going up and the border guards appearing.
Mass migration from the Third World to the First World is not only radicalizing America. It could destroy the European Union. Anger over any more migrants entering the country is among the reasons British patriots now want out of the EU.
America is crossing into a new era. Trump seems to have caught the wave, while Clinton seems to belong to yesterday.
A note of caution: This establishment is not going quietly.
Share Pat's Columns!
-
**DRUDGE POLL** WHO WON THE 10TH REPUBLICAN DEBATE '16?
2/25/2016
TRUMP 63.89% (77,010 votes)
CRUZ 17.82% (21,478 votes)
RUBIO 12.7% (15,312 votes)
KASICH 3.6% (4,341 votes)
CARSON 1.98% (2,389 votes)
Total Votes: 120,530
-
Well, yeah. He's basically guaranteed the nomination at this point. You'll be seeing a Sanders/Trump election this November.
-
Well, yeah. He's basically guaranteed the nomination at this point. You'll be seeing a Sanders/Trump election this November.
The only way Berne will head the Democratic ticket if Hilary gets
indicted for her classified state department email treason, and the
murder of Vince Foster in the 1990's. The Clinton's have a trail of
dead bodies.
The media is now treating this as a non issue.
-
Well, yeah. He's basically guaranteed the nomination at this point. You'll be seeing a Sanders/Trump election this November.
The only way Berne will head the Democratic ticket if Hilary gets
indicted for her classified state department email treason, and the
murder of Vince Foster in the 1990's. The Clinton's have a trail of
dead bodies.
The media is now treating this as a non issue.
Hillary couldn't manage her household. She failed. As Secretary of State. She lied about Bengazi. She lied about being in the middle of gunfire and battle.
She lied about emails. She attacks religion saying that Christianity needs to change and accept her elite ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs that donate to her campaign. If she cared about poor people, she would call Arkansas home. Most grandparents are home raising grandchildren thanks to Bush one Bush ll, 8 years of Clinton and Obama. The last 16 years and more people out of work and loss homes. Maybe Hillary should stay home and babysit her grandchildren.
And it seems that Catholic media And bishops are enforcing Bernie Sanders which is a disgrace.
-
Watch this video before it is taken off YouTube:
H.W. Bush gives the Satanic Throat Cut gesture at Trump during the last
Republican Debate-
https://youtu.be/tRTbTDb2kWw
-
WARNING: Many of the audio clips play automatically and the content is not suitable for all audiences... well, it's really not suitable for any audience, but I'm linking to this anyhow as this is the person about 1/6 of this country would like to see lead us.
Donald Trump Said A Lot Of Gross Things About Women On “Howard Stern” (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/donald-trump-said-a-lot-of-gross-things-about-women-on-howar?bffbmain&utm_term=.ck6YRmZYg#.uleYDoQYk)
-
WARNING: Many of the audio clips play automatically and the content is not suitable for all audiences... well, it's really not suitable for any audience, but I'm linking to this anyhow as this is the person about 1/6 of this country would like to see lead us.
Donald Trump Said A Lot Of Gross Things About Women On “Howard Stern” (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/donald-trump-said-a-lot-of-gross-things-about-women-on-howar?bffbmain&utm_term=.ck6YRmZYg#.uleYDoQYk)
Is he still the lesser of two evils? Seriously I'm curious on how the pro Trump Catholics on here can defend him after reading that. Even if he only said half of this he has already proven he is NOT compatible with any Catholic teachings.
His foreign policy is to bomb them until they shut up. His plan to stop abortion? I don't know haven't heard a plan yet only his stance. His plan to stop the free flowing porn trade in the US? He probably thinks porn is good.
Bottom line is Trump is a rude, crude, lewd and disgusting dude. He has no agenda that will actually save this country (even by protestant standards). I urge my fellow Catholics to not sign your name to his petition for office. Matthew 12:36-37 " But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.” I think this definitely applies to voting. For voting is a formal letter of consent and if idle words shall be held accountable then you can bet a written letter of consent will be held accountable.
-
I previously thought I would vote for Cruz if nominated and would consider Trump if nominated. I'm leaning not do so for either at this point. Does anybody know anything about Chad Koppie? He is seeking Cinstitutionalist Party nomination.
http://2016.presidential-candidates.org/Koppie/
Below is link to his site when he ran for senate from IL.
http://chadkoppieforillinois.com/issues/
Trump is a nut and maybe NWO. I am convinced that the rest of the mainstream field is NWO.
Of everybody else I looked at, they all appeared to be wrong on abortion, over the top protestants, NWOish, Zionist, or incapable of chewing gum and tying their shoes at the same time.
-
WARNING: Many of the audio clips play automatically and the content is not suitable for all audiences... well, it's really not suitable for any audience, but I'm linking to this anyhow as this is the person about 1/6 of this country would like to see lead us.
Donald Trump Said A Lot Of Gross Things About Women On “Howard Stern” (http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/donald-trump-said-a-lot-of-gross-things-about-women-on-howar?bffbmain&utm_term=.ck6YRmZYg#.uleYDoQYk)
Yep. Pretty gross.
-
Look, keep things in perspective. We currently have a likely ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ president and a tranny first lady. Before him we had the bush clinton crime families. And, you are now all of a sudden losing your grip because of Trump? He was just endorsed by senator jeff session today. Sessions is perhaps the most effective good guy in government. And, this stern interview was probably 20 years ago. A lot has happened since then. 9/11 can sober one up real fast. Listen to this question and answer given by his son donald jr. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IqfRbjcpDY His son says gov. is going to be much smaller as a result of a Trump presidency. His son has 5 kids, and is a dedicated outdoorsman/competetive shooter as can be seen in this video. So, he will defend the 2nd amendment. A tyrant would not do that, a tyrant would take the guns. Donald jr. appears to be intelligent. He is very well spoken, and I think you will like him if you have not heard him speak yet.
-
Look, keep things in perspective. We currently have a likely ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ president and a tranny first lady. Before him we had the bush clinton crime families. And, you are now all of a sudden losing your grip because of Trump? He was just endorsed by senator jeff session today. Sessions is perhaps the most effective good guy in government. And, this stern interview was probably 20 years ago. A lot has happened since then. 9/11 can sober one up real fast. Listen to this question and answer given by his son donald jr. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IqfRbjcpDY His son says gov. is going to be much smaller as a result of a Trump presidency. His son has 5 kids, and is a dedicated outdoorsman/competetive shooter as can be seen in this video. So, he will defend the 2nd amendment. A tyrant would not do that, a tyrant would take the guns. Donald jr. appears to be intelligent. He is very well spoken, and I think you will like him if you have not heard him speak yet.
It would be possible to keep an open mind to the lesser of two evils in Trumps case if he were in fact a lesser of two evils. Washington and everyone in it is a 1000 year old bag of hot air. None of them actually do anything. Trump, and all Republicans for that matter, says he is pro life but what is their actual plan to end it? The only plans I've heard from Trump are "Build that wall and bomb everyone in the middle east. Guilt by association!"
As for his son, he isn't running for president and he is highly irrelevant. Maybe you need to keep it in perspective. Tyrants don't need to take the peoples guns he only needs to turn them on someone else. Seriously there are many other things that stand equally as important as the 2nd amendment.
Stalin said that everyone in Russia was going to be fat and happy. Marx said that no one will ever need to work again with his ideology at the helm. Hitler said a thousand year reich was the future of Germany. Luther said priests can have wives. See where I'm going with this? You can talk all you want but lets look at the facts. Trump has no pro life plan only a stance. Trump has said many disgusting things about women and has since failed to apologize or even retract the statements. Trump's plan to bring peace to the middle east is to literally bomb it till it shuts up.
Trump is not a good man, and his ideas are certainly not for the good of mankind.
-
http://patriotpost.us/opinion/40963
The above article amply docuмenting his life history is all any sensible man needs to know about the lecherous pagan worldling named Donald Trump.
-
And, this stern interview was probably 20 years ago. A lot has happened since then. 9/11 can sober one up real fast.
Actually, the excerpts were from over 20 different interviews up to as recently as 2008.
-
Reality dictates that there are 2 choices--- Trump or the Billery. :reporter:
-
Reality dictates that there are 2 choices--- Trump or the Billery. :reporter:
Then abstain. So you got Satan on the Left and Lucifer on the right. Tell me how exactly you can justify choosing one?
-
Trump is a nationalist and he has promised to protect Christians
Trump is an admitted zionist supporter and they are the enemies of Jesus Christ and our Holy religion.
Trump and Rand Paul are the only two R Candidates who refused to go to the suck-up-to-Israel handout in Palm Springs.
-
I never thought I would even consider Trump. I've been for Rand Paul for four years. He has been muscled out by tptb, as Ben Carson is also.
The Pope is the one who began to push me toward Trump, and then Vincente Fox, with his f---ing wall quote pushed me further.
-
... and then Vincente Fox, with his f---ing wall quote pushed me further.
Why is that?
-
Rand Paul at the Wailing Wall paying homage to the Jews.
The wailing wall is not the remains of the Harold's Temple that was
destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. According to the first century
Jєωιѕн Historian Josephus, the wailing wall is the remains of the
Roman Fortress of Antonio.
When Our Lord when he was talking about the future of the Temple.
He said that there would not be one stone on top of an another. He
meant the Harold's Temple.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-israel-western-wall-photos-2013-1
-
Reality dictates that there are 2 choices--- Trump or the Billery. :reporter:
Then abstain. So you got Satan on the Left and Lucifer on the right. Tell me how exactly you can justify choosing one?
Exactly. Or write someone in. Or vote a 3rd party candidate, if there are any decent ones. [If it makes you feel any better, given that the system is rigged anyway.] A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, which both those 2 choices do.
-
MO is anyone not voting for Trump is voting for the Billery. Character is between him & God. :detective:
-
MO is anyone not voting for Trump is voting for the Billery.
Why do you think that?
Both Rubio and Cruz fare better in head-to-head polling against Clinton than Trump does. The first two beat her by small margins, but she beats Trump more handily.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/
-
Trump is doing well, I see. :scratchchin:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/trump_zpsxwmwbgvb.jpg)
We shall enthrone a lord of darkness to build an enormous wall with hideous black gates to protect us legions of evil hill people--all armed with weapons that the master endorses!
-Laramie Hirsch
Toxic Trad, and Vile Faceless Minion
-
MO is anyone not voting for Trump is voting for the Billery.
Why do you think that?
Both Rubio and Cruz fare better in head-to-head polling against Clinton than Trump does. The first two beat her by small margins, but she beats Trump more handily.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/
Bogus polls-- Only Trump can beat the Billery. :detective:
-
Trump took down the GOP establishment. He made the neo-Cohens reveal their true face. I'll take that as a tiny victory.
-
Neither Cruz nor Rubio are born in USA. As such, they are not even eligible to be President. :detective:
-
Neither Cruz nor Rubio are born in USA. As such, they are not even eligible to be President. :detective:
My understanding is that Cruz's mother was a U.S. citizen who had not renounced her citizenship at the time he was born. If that is correct, then he is Constitutionally eligible.
-
How Republican Jews Utterly Failed To Prevent Rise of 'Toxic' Donald Trump (http://forward.com/opinion/334517/how-republican-jews-utterly-failed-to-prevent-rise-of-toxic-donald-trump/)
There is no sugarcoating it — these are the darkest days for Republican Jews like myself. Donald Trump, the most likely Republican candidate for president, has built within our party the nearest thing America has ever seen to a European nativist working class political movement. Such movements, to put it mildly, have never been good for the Jews or allies of free thought and the free market.
:roll-laugh1:
-
It is very true that if it comes down to Hillary vs. Trump, most will vote for Hillary, or not vote at all.
I spent many years around those who call themselves libertatians :rolleyes: and those who actually think themselves "conservatives" :rolleyes: :rolleyes: (they are, in actuality, liberals of yesteryear ... there is nothing conservative about them, but they are convinced that is what they are :tinfoil:). They hate Hillary, but they hate Trump more and have said they will vote for the former rather than the latter.
-
MO is anyone not voting for Trump is voting for the Billery.
Why do you think that?
Both Rubio and Cruz fare better in head-to-head polling against Clinton than Trump does. The first two beat her by small margins, but she beats Trump more handily.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/
Bogus polls-- Only Trump can beat the Billery. :detective:
If the polls are bogus, I'd say that's the best news I've heard all week given that these are the same people that say Drumpf is leading nationwide Rep primary polls. Bogus polls means the moral degenerate* will be a distant memory by November.
*Actually, that's too generous as it implies a previous higher level of morality, but a man who's never found a need to ask God for forgiveness has always been morally reprehensible.
-
edit
-
MO is anyone not voting for Trump is voting for the Billery.
Why do you think that?
Both Rubio and Cruz fare better in head-to-head polling against Clinton than Trump does. The first two beat her by small margins, but she beats Trump more handily.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/01/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-poll/
Bogus polls-- Only Trump can beat the Billery. :detective:
If the polls are bogus, I'd say that's the best news I've heard all week given that these are the same people that say Drumpf is leading nationwide Rep primary polls. Bogus polls means the moral degenerate* will be a distant memory by November.
*Actually, that's too generous as it implies a previous higher level of morality, but a man who's never found a need to ask God for forgiveness has always been morally reprehensible.
Some polls are accurate and others are not. The nationwide polls showing Trump beating the Billery seem genuine as his crowds nationwide dwarf anyone else.
Would you rather see the Billery as Prez again? :detective:
-
Neither Cruz nor Rubio are born in USA. As such, they are not even eligible to be President. :detective:
Nope. Jus sanguinis. Since Cruz's mother is a citizen that gave birth in a foreign jurisdiction, Ted Cruz is an American national. Rubio was born here on American soil regardless of the parent's nationality so he's a citizen. This is called jus soli.
-
Even some protestants get it.
What Wouldn’t Jesus Do? (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/opinion/campaign-stops/what-wouldnt-jesus-do.html?_r=2)
AMONG the most inexplicable developments in this bizarre political year is that Donald Trump is the candidate of choice of many evangelical Christians.
...If this embrace strikes you as discordant, it should. This visionary and inspiring man humiliated his first wife by conducting a very public affair, chronically bullies and demeans people, and says he has never asked God for forgiveness. His name is emblazoned on a casino that features a strip club; he has discussed anal sex on the air with Howard Stern and, after complimenting his daughter Ivanka’s figure, pointed out that if she “weren’t my daughter, perhaps I would be dating her.” He once supported partial-birth abortion and to this day praises Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. He is a narcissist appealing to people whose faith declares that pride goes before a fall.
Mr. Trump’s character is antithetical to many of the qualities evangelicals should prize in a political leader: integrity, compassion and reasoned convictions, wisdom and prudence, trustworthiness, a commitment to the moral good.
When Bill Clinton was president, evangelicals ranked moral probity high on their list of leadership qualities. Supporters of Mr. Trump, a moral degenerate, justify their support by saying we’re electing a president rather than a pastor. Why a significant number of evangelicals are rallying round a man who exposes them as hypocrites is difficult to fathom.
Part of the explanation is that many evangelicals feel increasingly powerless, beaten down, aggrieved and under attack. A sense of resentiment, or a “narrative of injury,” is leading them to look for scapegoats to explain their growing impotence. People filled with anger and grievances are easily exploited. As the great Christian apologist C. S. Lewis wrote, “We must picture hell as a state where everyone is perpetually concerned about his own dignity and advancement and where everyone has a grievance.”
Enter Donald Trump, alpha male.
Mr. Trump’s evangelical supporters don’t care about his agenda; they are utterly captivated by his persona. They view him as the strongest, most dominant, most assertive political figure they have ever seen. In an odd bow to Nietzschean ethics, they respect and applaud his Will to Power. And so the man who openly admires tyrants like Vladimir V. Putin and praised the Chinese crackdown in Tiananmen Square because it showed “strength” has become the repository of their hopes.
Set aside the fact that Mr. Trump is a compulsive and unrepentant liar. Set aside, too, that he has demonstrated no ability for statecraft or the actual administration of government and has demonstrated much incompetence at business to boot.
Bracket for now the fact that Mr. Trump has been more erratic, unprincipled and proudly ignorant when it comes to public policy than perhaps any major presidential candidate in American history.
What stuns me is how my fellow evangelicals can rally behind a man whose words and actions are so at odds with the central teachings of our faith. They overlook, rationalize and even delight in Mr. Trump’s obsessive name-calling and Twitter attacks, his threats and acts of intimidation, his vindictiveness and casual cruelty (including mocking the disabled and P.O.W.s), all of which masquerade as strength and toughness. For some evangelicals, Christianity is no longer shaping their politics;with Mr. Trump in view, their faith lies subordinate.
Yet it goes beyond that. Trumpism is not a political philosophy; it is a purposeful effort, led by a demagogue, to incite ugly passions, stoke resentments and divisions, and create fear of those who are not like “us” — Mexicans, Muslims and Syrian refugees. But it will not end there. There will always be fresh targets.
Mr. Trump’s approach to life is not new. In “The Republic,” Plato writes of Thrasymachus debating Socrates over the meaning of justice. Thrasymachus, a cynical Sophist, insists that justice has no intrinsic meaning but is merely a pretty word for what is in the interest of the stronger party. Life is a competition to get more money and more power; that is what defines success. “Injustice, if it is on a large enough scale, is stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice,” he argues.
Almost four centuries later, a carpenter from Nazareth offered a very different philosophy. When you see a wounded traveler on the road to Jericho, Jesus taught, you should not pass him by. “Truly I say to you,” he said in Matthew, “to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to me.”
At its core, Christianity teaches that everyone, no matter at what station or in what season in life, has inherent dignity and worth. “Follow justice and justice alone,” Deuteronomy says, “so that you may live and possess the land the Lord your God is giving you.” The attitude of Thrasymachus is foreign to biblical Christianity. So is Trumpism. In embracing it, evangelical Christians are doing incalculable damage to their witness.
Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the last three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.
-
Donald Trump Is a Scam. Voters Should Back Away
Trump is a misogynist and philanderer. He demeans women and minorities. His preferred forms of communication are insults, obscenities and untruths.
On Sunday, Trump's apparent reluctance to disavow David Duke until late in the day was extremely distasteful. The Ku Klux Klan is an evil, unholy movement representing the worst of America. Anyone who will not immediately denounce their support is unfit to be president.
Trump claims he will "protect Christians." We already have a Protector, and He is not Trump.
The grievances of Trump's supporters are legitimate. Politicians for too long have promised to represent the best interests of all Americans before an election, only to represent the interest of their cronies after the election. But Trump's followers are being fooled into believing that he can help them.
Trump is promising many things that he cannot possibly deliver, but the most frightening part is Trump's stated willingness to ignore the authority of the Supreme Court, Congress and the U.S. Constitution if he were to become president.
Trump has been surrounded by controversy for decades because of his untruthfulness, questionable business practices, reported association with organized crime, and abrupt changes in fundamental positions. Many of these controversies involve defrauding the working class and decisions that compromised American workers. He has taken a political position both pro and con on virtually every subject and major political party. This should give ... great pause and concern about supporting such a mercurial and chameleon-like candidate. Past performance is the best predictor of future behavior.
Trump said he wants to make it easier to sue newspapers that criticize him. When it was pointed out to him Sunday that he would have to amend the Constitution's freedom of speech and freedom of press clauses, Trump was unmoved, simply noting that England has weaker protections for the press.
...We are already concerned about the expansion of executive power to dangerous and unconstitutional extremes in the current and previous administrations. Plus, in just the past year we have seen Christians put out of business and jailed for living according to the dictates of their faith.
Trump ... may claim to be your friend and protector now, but as his history indicates, without your full support he will turn on you, and use whatever power is within his means to punish you.
This is a critical time in American history and we call on all Christians to pray for personal repentance, divine forgiveness and spiritual awakening for our nation. It is not the time for Donald Trump.
-
A Final (I think) Few Remarks on Voting as a Moral Act
BY Mark Shea
Posted 12/16/11 at 1:00 AM
Just a couple of things, prompted by some interesting and reasonable remarks by various readers. First, one reader objects to my proposition that how voting changes the voter is vastly more significant than how the voter’s vote changes the outcome of an election:
If everyone thought about voting the way you do, then the worst candidates would always win elections. The pure of heart would never vote. Would the sacrifice of the widow in any possible scenario end with that result?
I don’t see how my reader’s logic makes any sense. First, of course, it relies on the perpetual straw man being advanced throughout this argument: that the refusal to support grave intrinsic evils worthy of the everlasting fires of hell is to demand “purity of heart” from a candidate. That is, I repeat, rubbish. It is not “perfectionism” to demand that we not be asked to support grave evil. It is absolute bare minimum human decency. I’m not looking to elect St. Francis of Assisi. I’m looking to not be asked to put my soul at risk for everlasting damnation. No matter how it’s spun, I do not believe I should take my puny penny of choice and give it to the service of grave evil that Mother Church warns is worthy of the fires of hell. And frankly, if everyone thought the way I do, we would not be stuck with the utterly dreadful Ruling class we have because we would not stand for being manipulated into a perpetual choice between two parties who try to force us to support their preferred grave evil, all while scheming to strip the rest of us of our most basic civil rights. It is nonsense to say that an electorate intolerant of grave evil would produce a political class committed to grave evil, just as it is nonsense to say that a political class committed to supporting grave evil will produce a virtuous or happy civilization. Good trees bear good fruit and bad trees bear bad fruit, as our increasingly corrupt civilization attests with eloquence.
My reader continues:
You can’t pretend that voting is just about your soul, Mr. Shea, though it undoubtedly is about that. You make a good point. But focusing on yourself in this situation is not the Catholic way. And getting involved in societal change at the grassroots, or whatever you believe to be the ‘real’ way society gets better [perhaps some presumption there on your part?] is not a reason to elide doing your part to make it better in a ‘macro’ way, so to speak, also.
I believe the catechism urges us to vote as part of our responsibility as citizens.
I don’t pretend that voting is just about my soul. It is, obviously, a public act ordered toward our relationship with the state. But to characterize voting one’s conscience as “focusing on yourself” is a radically poor understanding of the act. The focus is not on self when voting one’s conscience. It is, at least for a well-formed Christian, on God as all moral acts are. The counsel of Christ to a paganized world seeking such things as power, winning, control, food, shelter, money (which is largely what politics concerns itself with) is this:
Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well. (Matthew 6:31-33)
Seeking first his kingdom means, among other things, not allowing the desire for power or winning to predominate over anything God absolutely forbids—such as grave moral evil. ... it is clear that we cannot under any circuмstances support a gravely and intrinsically immoral act. What we may do ... is support a candidate who supports a gravely and intrinsically immoral act if, in doing so, we are not supporting the grave evil he supports, but trying to support some proportionate good. We are not bound to support such a candidate and, if there is no proportionate good, we are bound not to support such a candidate.
So here’s the deal: I see no proportionate good in supporting candidates from either party who support grave evil. I do, however, see a proportionate good in refraining from voting should no candidate appear on the ballot who does not advocate grave evil. Why? Because while my vote, as a public act, does have an infinitesmally small effect on the outcome of an election (much as an air molecule has an infinitesmally small effect on an oncoming train) the overwhelmingly large impact my vote has is on me. That’s not “focusing on myself”. That’s focusing on God and my duty to obey him. The notion that politics is the “real” way a society gets better, and that the actions of individuals acting in obedience to God is somehow vaguely self-centered, or narcissistic, or unrelated to the common good is one of the more curious ways that Catholic teaching has been supplanted by the groupthink and power politics of the postmodern era. The world was not changed by the early Church jockeying for political power and disobeying their consciences in order to play ball with corrupt powers and “win”. It was changed and healed by people who sought first the kingdom and refused to play ball by doing such “minor” compromises as offering a pinch of incense to Caesar—even at the cost of their lives. When Caesar stops asking me to do things that are directly repugnant to the teaching of the Church, I will happily play ball. Lots of life is negotiable. But grave intrinsic evil is not negotiable and I will have to give an account of my soul for how I acted when some political player asked me to back him as he sought to do things I know are evil.
Another reader remarks:
When a dear, pious, and prayerful friend of mine in the throes of very nearly this same discussion threw up her hands in exasperation and said, “What should we do? Just sit at home and pray?” I knew I’d found a worm in our hearts.
I hear you. Just as I find it extremely ominous that Christians keep talking as though “not wanting to go to hell” is the height of fussy prissy perfectionism, so I find it astounding to hear Christians talk as though politics is the primary way of salvation while prayer, trust in God, and obedience to conscience are the last, not the first, resort. We don’t come out and say it (partly because we aren’t fully aware we think this way and partly because we dimly sense that if we said it out loud we would realize how faithless it really is) but many of us have deeply internalized the conviction that piety is fine for ineffectual types without the ruthlessness to get dirty and get the job done, but the *real* action is in the political arena. In the same way, all the stuff which suggests that voting one’s conscience and refusing to cooperate with evil is narcissistic makes it clear that the whole concept “seek first his kingdom and his righteousness and all these things will be added to you” is, at bottom, disbelieved by not a few Christians. The pressure to play ball with corrupt power and not make waves with “selfish, perfectionist” desires to not commit sin worthy of hell is portrayed as “realism”, when in fact, it is the height of unrealism to think one vote out of 50 million has any more power to change the outcome of an election. My vote will not change a national election, but it will change me. That’s hard-headed realism. And if enough voters start to embrace that realism and seek first his kingdom, instead of seeking first “winning”, we will see a real change for the better in our political climate.
Copyright © 2013 EWTN News, Inc. All rights reserved.
-
Not sure how to embed a video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tzEhdaRxck
Is Donald Trump a Hillary Plant?
Published on Aug 7, 2015
Donald Trump is a stooge for Hillary Clinton. He's a plant. He's a ringer to sink the chances of Republican candidates who actually have a chance of defeating Hillary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djFitvQOyhw
Donald Trump Is Running For Hillary Clinton 2016 CURVEBALL Exposed
-
Zionists Use Donald Trump to Fix Another Election (http://www.libertyroundtable.com/2015/07/16/zionists-use-donald-trump-to-fix-another-election/)
Written by Henry Makow // July 16, 2015 //
Donald Trump is an Illuminati agent tasked with getting Hillary Clinton elected.
Like a turd that won’t flush, Donald Trump is back again to serve his Illuminati Jєωιѕн masters. This time around, his role is to win the GOP nomination and throw the election to Hillary Clinton, the Illuminati bankers’ preferred candidate.
If this seems farfetched, consider that Trump is allegedly leading the other GOP candidates by a large margin. He catapulted into the lead by pretending to champion ordinary Americans who are fed up with illegal immigration. Calling Mexicans “rapists” is a little extreme but he needed to get attention fast.
The Illuminati Jєωιѕн bankers have a long history of manipulating US Presidential elections. An obvious example is when they dusted off Theodore Roosevelt in 1912 to split the Republican vote, defeat Taft and elect their pawn Woodrow Wilson.
In 1940, they got a Democrat, Wendell Wilkie, to run for the Republicans, and ensured FDR’s reelection, and US entry into World War Two.
In 1992 election, they elected Bill Clinton by running Ross Perot in order to split the Republican vote. If Perot hadn’t run, Bush Sr. would have been re-elected. (Apparently, he had angered the Zionists by referring to their control of Capitol Hill.) Perot got 20 million votes. Clinton got 45 million and Bush got 39 million.
Trump was drafted to run in 2012 but they decided he wasn’t needed. Then as now, Trump tailored his position to co-opt the opposition. He is “Christian, pro-life, anti gαy marriage and so for the death penalty especially for terrorists.”
“I’m a Protestant, I’m a Presbyterian,” he told the Christian Post. “And you know I’ve had a good relationship with the church over the years. I think religion is a wonderful thing. I think my religion is a wonderful religion.”
He attends church “as much as I can. Always on Christmas. Always on Easter. And when there’s a major occasion. And during the Sundays. I’m a Sunday church person. I’ll go when I can.” Now, there’s conviction.
His real loyalty is to Mother Israel. Recently he said, “there has never been a greater enemy to Israel than Barack Obama. It’s incredible the way he treats them, the way he’s speaking to them. I think he treats our known enemies much better.”
Other stories linked there provide the flavour of Trump’s relation to Israel:
Donald Trump’s son-in-law agrees to acquire Israeli insurer Phoenix
By Michael Rochvarger | Jul. 7, 2014 | 3:50 AM | 1
Report: Tycoon Donald Trump’s daughter converting to Judaism
By Haaretz Service | Oct. 30, 2008 | 12:00 AM
FOLLOW THE MONEY
We can thank Brother Nathaniel in 2011 for alerting us to the hokey nature of the
Trump campaign and the fact that his David Axelrod (aka “handler”) is another Illuminati Jew by the name of Michael Cohen. He is a Trump advisor again in 2015 saying Trump speaks for the “silent majority.”
Cohen supported Obama in 2008, but has “grown disappointed with the president, so much so that he now describes himself as ‘offended’ by the administration’s agenda. America, Cohen said, has become a “third-world nation,” echoing words that have become a familiar refrain of Trump’s.
Michael joined The Trump Organization in 2006 following a career as a private attorney and “personal advisor to some of the world’s wealthiest individuals.”
Last summer, Cohen rented a Hampton’s mansion for one month for $150,000 without even looking at it. He sued the owner for $500,000 because it was in disrepair.
Another Trump backer is Steward Rehr, an Illuminati Jєωιѕн billionaire, who made his fortune as a pharmaceutical distributor. He is the 183rd richest man in America (139 of the top 400 are Jєωιѕн) and one of the 400th richest men in the world. (Trump isn’t in the top 400.)
If Americans think Trump and his backers are going to change anything, I have some real estate in Florida …. His role is to take a fall.
Politics is a charade put on by the Illuminati. Their mass media puts lipstick on this pig.
We don’t realize how we are totally manipulated. Our political, economic and cultural lives are psy ops.
-
Forgot to put the bold emphasis from the original in this last sentence of the above article:
We don’t realize how we are totally manipulated. Our political, economic and cultural lives are psy ops.
I can see from some posts here on CI that the manipulation is working.
p.s. Best quote from CathInfo on the US electoral system:
:popcorn: It's all just theater for the goi masses.
Another good description:
"Emotional con game"
-
Alex Jones set up a hotline for those to call in and report elections frauds.
Many calls came in from Texas from voters said they voted for Trump.
When they rechecked their votes, their votes were flipped to other
candidates.
I live in a state that has a caucus. You go in and vote for delegates
for you favorite presidential candidate. When all the rules were
spelled out in participating in the caucus. I decided to leave and not
vote.
Proves that these caucuses are controlled by Political Cronies
and hacks.
Trump lost all the caucus states and the primary vote in Texas.
-
Forgot to put the bold emphasis from the original in this last sentence of the above article:
We don’t realize how we are totally manipulated. Our political, economic and cultural lives are psy ops.
I can see from some posts here on CI that the manipulation is working.
What's manipulation? I don't understand.
:facepalm:
-
Great article by Ann Coulter on "kkk" and Trump.
http://www.vdare.com/articles/ann-coulter-trump-wins-disavowal-game-then-super-tuesday?content=inciting+a+mob&page=no-campaign
-
I was surprised what Romney said about Trump today. I saw a previous
video in which Romney praised Trump.
Show's that he is in the globalists bag.
This is from The San Diego Union-Tribune on a survey if Romney criticisms
of Trump of his attacks on him helped:
Cruz 11%
Kasich 3%
Rubio 10%
Trump 71%
Romney should have kept his big fat mouth shut. Let the voters
decide.
Source:http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/polls/2016/mar/who-does-mitt-romneys-criticism-donald-trump-help/results/
-
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/poll_who_won_the_republican_presidential_debate_03.html
Poll: Who won the Republican Presidential debate?
Businessman Donald Trump 63.95% (22,060 votes)
Ohio Gov. John Kasich 18.49% (6,379 votes)
U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas 8.52% (2,939 votes)
U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio 6.73% (2,323 votes)
I don't know. 2.3% (795 votes)
Total Votes: 34,496
-
He handled himself well, considering how they came after him. It was hardly a "policy debate" as they touted and obviously a coordinated ambush on Herr Drumpf. I would like to think viewers are savvy to that, and disapprove.
-
This is pretty disgusting, but did anyone else catch this cruz moment during tonight's debate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJlroyg0l1k
-
An Establishment in Panic
By Patrick J. Buchanan
3-4-16
Friday - March 4, 2016
Donald Trump "appeals to racism."
"[F]rom the beginning … his campaign has profited from voter prejudice and hatred" and represents an "authoritarian assault upon democracy."
If Speaker Paul Ryan wishes to be "on the right side of history … he must condemn Mr. Trump clearly and comprehensively. The same goes for every other Republican leader."
“Maybe that would split the (Republican) party," but, "No job is worth the moral stain that would come from embracing (Trump). No party is worth saving at the expense of the country."
If Republican leaders wish to be regarded as moral, every one of them must renounce Trump, even if it means destroying their party.
Who has laid down this moral mandate? The Holy Father in Rome?
No. The voice posturing as the conscience of America is the Washington Post, which champions abortion on demand and has not, in the memory of this writer, endorsed any Republican for president – though it did endorse Marion Barry three times for mayor of D.C.
Anticipating the Post’s orders, Sen. Marco Rubio has been painting Trump as a "scam artist" and “con artist," with an “orange" complexion, a “spray tan" and “tiny hands," who is “unfit to lead the party of Lincoln and Reagan."
The establishment is loving Rubio, and the networks are giving him more airtime. And Rubio is reciprocating, promising that, even if defeated in his home state of Florida on March 15, he will drive his pickup across the country warning against the menace of Trump.
Rubio, however, seems not to have detected the moral threat of Trump, until polls showed Rubio being wiped out on Super Tuesday and in real danger of losing Florida.
Mitt Romney has also suddenly discovered what a fraud and phony is the businessman-builder whose endorsement he so avidly sought and so oleaginous accepted in Las Vegas in 2012.
Before other Republicans submit to the ultimatum of the Post, and of the columnists and commentators pushing a “Never Trump" strategy at the Cleveland convention, they should ask themselves: For whom is it that they will be bringing about party ѕυιcιdє?
That the Beltway elites, whose voice is the Post, hate and fear Trump is not only undeniable, it is understandable.
The Post beat the drums for the endless Mideast wars that bled and near bankrupted the country. Trump will not start another.
The Post welcomes open borders that bring in millions to continue the endless expansion of the welfare state and to change the character of the country we grew up in. Trump will build the wall and repatriate those here illegally.
Trump threatens the trade treaties that enable amoral transnational corporations to ship factories and jobs overseas to produce cheaply abroad and be rid of American employees who are ever demanding better wages and working conditions.
What does the Post care about trade deals that deindustrialize America when the advertising dollars of the big conglomerates are what make Big Media fat and happy?
The political establishment in Washington depends on Wall Street and K Street for PAC money and campaign contributions. Wall Street and K Street depend on the political establishment to protect their right to abandon America for the greener pastures abroad.
Before March 15, when Florida and Ohio vote and the fates of Rubio and Gov. John Kasich are decided, nothing is likely to stop the ferocious infighting of the primaries.
But after March 15, the smoke will have cleared.
If Trump has fallen short of a glide path to the nomination, the war goes on. But if Trump seems to be the near-certain nominee, it will be a time for acceptance, a time for a cease-fire in this bloodiest of cινιℓ ωαrs in the GOP.
Otherwise, the party will kick away any chance of keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House, and perhaps kick away its future as well.
While the depth and rancor of the divisions in the party are apparent, so also is the opportunity. For the turnout in the Republican primaries and caucuses has not only exceeded expectations, it has astonished and awed political observers.
A new “New Majority" has been marching to the polls and voting Republican, a majority unlike any seen since the 49-state landslides of the Nixon and Reagan eras.
If this energy can be maintained, if those throngs of Republican voters can be united in the fall, then the party can hold Congress, capture the While House and reconstitute the Supreme Court.
Come the ides of March, the GOP is going to be in need of its uniters and its statesmen. But today, all Republicans should ask themselves:
Are these folks coming out in droves to vote Republican really the bigoted, hateful and authoritarian people of the Post’s depiction?
Or is this not the same old Post that has poured bile on conservatives for
generations now in panic that America's destiny may be torn away from
it and restored to its rightful owners.
Source: http://buchanan.org/blog/an-establishment-in-panic-2-124906

         


-
This is pretty disgusting, but did anyone else catch this cruz moment during tonight's debate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJlroyg0l1k
What was that on the left side of his lips. Did he lose a tooth? Or
something else? Cannot deny it. It is on video.
-
:cowboy: Shhh. No tears. Only Trump now. :cowboy:
-
Which 2016 Candidates are members CFR:
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=41715
Date: Friday, 4-Mar-2016 14:33:02
The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), based in Washington, D.C.......
Wikipedia‘s description of the CFR as promoting “globalization, free trade, reducing financial regulations (taxes) on transnational corporations, and economic consolidation into regional blocs such as NAFTA or the European Union, and develops policy recommendations that reflect these goals” gives ample reasons for one to think of the CFR as both a proponent and integral part of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr.
CFR has two types of membership:
Term membership that lasts for 5 years and is available to those between 30 and 36. Only U.S. citizens (native born or naturalized) and permanent residents who have applied for U.S. citizenship are eligible.
Life membership must be nominated in writing by at least one CFR member and seconded by a minimum of three others. That suggests both the CFR’s elitist and establishment nature, as only a person who is perceived as being a “main stream” player who poses no threat to the establishment would be nominated and seconded.
CFR has a current membership of more than 4,900 — in New York, Washington, D.C., across America and abroad — including “top government officials, renowned scholars, business executives, acclaimed journalists, prominent lawyers, and distinguished nonprofit professionals.”
To my surprise, no 2016 presidential candidate is on the CFR’s membership roster as of March 2, 2016. However, two candidates arguably are CFR members in spirit:
Hillary Clinton: Though she herself is not a CFR member, her proxies Bill (husband) and Chelsea (daughter) are.
Ted Cruz: Shrewdly, Ted’s wife Heidi Cruz’s name is not on the CFR current membership roster. However, Wikipedia lists Heidi Cruz as a “historical member” of the CFR. Significantly, Heidi Cruz was a member of the CFR-sponsored Independent Task Force on the Future of North America, launched in October 2004. The Task Force advocates a greater economic and social integration between Canada, Mexico, and the United States as a North American region.
Isn’t it interesting and noteworthy that Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz precisely are the preferred candidates of their respective party’s big campaign donors?
In Ted Cruz’s case, according to CBS News:
The long-believing benefactors are New York hedge fund billionaire Robert Mercer, Texas natural gas billionaires Farris and Dan Wilks, and private-equity partner Toby Neugebauer. They honed their plan to help Cruz before he began his steady rise in polls — even before he announced his presidential bid in March…. Mercer gave $11 million, Neugebauer gave $10 million, and the Wilks brothers and their wives together gave $15 million…. Neugebauer, 45, said he met Cruz years ago through Cruz’s wife Heidi, then a manager at Goldman Sachs.
Another billionaire Cruz supporter is Las Vegas casino mogul and “GOP megadonor” Sheldon Adelson, who donated $100 million in 2012 to get Republicans elected. Adelson and his wife were donors to Lindsey Graham’s presidential campaign before Graham dropped out of the race in December.
See also “Ted Cruz’s undisclosed $1M loan from Goldman Sachs”.
As I scrolled through the 4,900 names on the CFR membership roster, I found some CFR members of interest:
Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton’s secretary of state
Zoë Baird, lawyer whom Bill Clinton nominated to be attorney general.
Warren Beatty, actor.
Michael Bloomberg, former mayor of New York.
Richard Blum, husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Sidney Blumenthal, former aide to Bill Clinton & longtime confidant of Hillary Clinton.
John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to UN.
Stephen Breyer, Supreme Court justice.
Tom Brokaw, retired NBC News anchor.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser.
Tory Burch, fashion designer.
Thomas Daschle, former U.S. senator (D-SD).
George Clooney, actor.
Katherine (Katy) Couric, Yahoo!News anchor.
More at the Link http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=41715
-
Ginrich: Establishment Scared of Trump because He "Didn't belong to a
secret society"
Video
https://youtu.be/QO6QwySsm-M
-
http://buchanan.org/blog/oligarchs-super-pac-anti-trump-strategy-124921
The Oligarchs’ Super-PAC Anti-Trump Savagery
Tuesday - March 8, 2016 at 12:40 am
This post was viewed 1,042 times.
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars Votes: 4.95 Stars!
Share Pat's Columns!
PrintFriendlyEmailGoogle GmailTwitterFacebook224Google+Reddit5TumblrStumbleUponShare229
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Narrow victories in the Kentucky caucuses and the Louisiana primary, the largest states decided on Saturday, have moved Donald Trump one step nearer to the nomination.
Primaries in Michigan, Mississippi and Idaho on March 8, and in Florida, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina on March 15, may prove decisive. If Marco Rubio does not win his home state of Florida, he is cooked, as is Gov. John Kasich if he does not win Ohio.
Ted Cruz already looks to be the last man between Trump and a GOP nomination that has gone, in the last seven elections, to George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney.
All five of those nominees since 1988 seem appalled by Trump’s triumphs, and only slightly less so by the Cruz alternative.
Not in memory has the leadership of a party been so out of touch. The Republican rank and file are in revolt, not only against the failures of their fathers but the policies of their present rulers.
Some among the GOP elites, who have waited patiently through the Obama era to recapture control of U.S. foreign policy, are now beside themselves with despair over Trump’s success.
Fully 116 members of the GOP’s national security community, many of them veterans of Bush administrations, have signed an open letter threatening that, if Trump is nominated, they will all desert, and some will defect – to Hillary Clinton!
“Hillary is the lesser evil, by a large margin,” says Eliot Cohen of the Bush II State Department. According to Politico’s Michael Crowley, Cohen helped line up neocons to sign the “Dump-Trump” manifesto.
Another signer, Robert Kagan, wailed in the Washington Post, “The only choice will be to vote for Hillary Clinton.”
Are they serious?
Victory for Clinton would mean her remaking the Supreme Court, killing all chances that Roe v. Wade could be overturned, or that we could get another justice like Antonin Scalia before 2021.
What are these renegades and turncoats so anguished about?
Trump calls the Iraq War many of them championed an historic blunder. Trump says that, while a supporter of Israel, he would be a “neutral” honest broker between Israel and the Palestinians in peace negotiations, as was Jimmy Carter at Camp David.
Trump says he would “get along very well” with Vladimir Putin, as Richard Nixon got along with Leonid Brezhnev and Mao Zedong.
Trump would launch no new crusades for democracy. He would not oppose Russia bombing ISIS. He would build that wall on the border. He would transfer from U.S. taxpayers to rich allies more of the cost of defending themselves.
Do not most Americans agree with much of this?
Yet this neocon ultimatum about deserting should the voters nominate Trump testifies eloquently to their loyalty.
With every ex-president and ex-nominee repudiating Trump, and foreign policy elites going rogue, the GOP hierarchy is saying: We will cut Trump dead, just as the Rockefeller-Romney crowd cut Barry Goldwater dead.
This is pure my-way-or-the-highway politics.
But it raises anew the question: Can the establishment stop Trump?
Answer: It is possible, and we shall know by midnight, March 15. If Trump loses Florida and Ohio, winner-take-all primaries, he would likely fall short of the 1,237 delegates needed for nomination on the first ballot.
How could the anti-Trump forces defeat him in Ohio, Florida and Illinois? With the same tactics used to shrink Trump’s victory margins in Virginia, Louisiana and Kentucky to well below what polls had predicted.
In every primary upcoming, Trump is under a ceaseless barrage of attack ads on radio, TV, cable and social media, paid for by super PACs with hoards of cash funneled in by oligarchs.
But Trump, who is self-funding his campaign, has spent next to nothing on ads answering these attacks, or promoting himself or his issues. He has relied almost exclusively on free media.
Yet no amount of free media can match the shellfire falling on him every hour of every day in every primary state.
Our Principles PAC, backed by Nebraska’s billionaire Ricketts family, has poured millions into trashing Trump. American Future Fund is dumping $1.75 million in Florida this week; Club for Growth $1.5 million.
Hedge-fund billionaire Paul Singer is backing the Conservative Solutions PAC, which has dumped millions into anti-Trump ads and plans to spend more than $7 million between March 1 and 15, with $4 million of that going into Florida. The super PAC pile-on is unprecedented.
How well Trump fares in Michigan and Mississippi, measured against how well he was doing in polls last week, will reveal just how successful super PAC savagery has been in changing hearts and minds.
Can millionaires and billionaires who back open borders, mass immigration, globalization and the disappearance of nation states into transnational collectives overwhelm with their millions spent in ads the patriotic movements that arose this year to the wonderment of America and the world?
Has that proud 18th century boast of Americans, “Here, sir, the people rule!” given way to the rule of the oligarchs?
Share Pat's Columns!
-
Hagmann & Hodges-Trump Victimized by NWO Delphi Techniques:
http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/03/08/hagmann-and-hodges-trump-victimized-by-delphi-technique/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=hagmann-and-hodges-trump-victimized-by-delphi-technique
-
Link doesn't work for moi..... :confused1:
-
Link doesn't work for moi..... :confused1:[/quote
It works for me.
Perhaps you need to update your computer.
Check if your update option is on.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
Seriously, Tom Monahan? He did get rich off the backs of others, namely his underpaid employees. How can some people make a living when the likes of Tom Monahan and others like him have all the wealth and own all the means of production.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
Seriously, Tom Monahan? He did get rich off the backs of others, namely his underpaid employees. How can some people make a living when the likes of Tom Monahan and others like him have all the wealth and own all the means of production.
Not to mention his pizza is trash and made up of man-made ingredients never meant for the human body to properly digest and absorb. So yes, he is a predator whether he knows it or not. The ingredients in his pizzas most likely cause cancer. He is part of the problem.
-
Which 'man made ingredients' are you referring to? :detective:
-
Which 'man made ingredients' are you referring to? :detective:
Namely MSG. Here is a link http://evidenceofmsgtoxicity.blogspot.com/2011/11/cancer-msg-and-cancer.html
I would venture to say that all of Domino's Pizza ingredients are genetically modified or created in a lab somewhere like most of the food in the grocery stores. Our bodies were not meant to take in such "foods". When ingested this will have a negative impact in our bodies.
-
Here is another link http://www.survive-and-thrive-cancer.com/MSG.aspx#.VuDQtH0rKt8
-
edit
-
Which 'man made ingredients' are you referring to? :detective:
Namely MSG. Here is a link http://evidenceofmsgtoxicity.blogspot.com/2011/11/cancer-msg-and-cancer.html
I would venture to say that all of Domino's Pizza ingredients are genetically modified or created in a lab somewhere like most of the food in the grocery stores. Our bodies were not meant to take in such "foods". When ingested this will have a negative impact in our bodies.
Venturing to say is not evidence of any contaminated substance actually being used in a Domino's.
If they are actually doing so I would agree. Thanks for the info though.
:sleep:
-
Which 'man made ingredients' are you referring to? :detective:
Namely MSG. Here is a link http://evidenceofmsgtoxicity.blogspot.com/2011/11/cancer-msg-and-cancer.html
I would venture to say that all of Domino's Pizza ingredients are genetically modified or created in a lab somewhere like most of the food in the grocery stores. Our bodies were not meant to take in such "foods". When ingested this will have a negative impact in our bodies.
Venturing to say is not evidence of any contaminated substance actually being used in a Domino's.
If they are actually doing so I would agree. Thanks for the info though.
:sleep:
If you do not want to believe that MSG causes cancer, then don't. Look in your cupboard and see how many of the things in there might have MSG. Its in most processed foods. Do you not believe that Dominoes uses MSG? Every fast food place does.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
Seriously, Tom Monahan? He did get rich off the backs of others, namely his underpaid employees. How can some people make a living when the likes of Tom Monahan and others like him have all the wealth and own all the means of production.
Really...give your head a shake. As for his underpaid employees, they received the same minimum wage as most other people in the food industry because their tips are taken into consideration. These same employees were mostly part time students who couldn't fit any other kind of work into their study schedules. Also the very unskilled who couldn't get any full time work. Everyone has to start somewhere.
What was he supposed to pay his employees????? Are you willing to pay $60.00 for a pizza????
Tom may have great wealth now but it was achieved through hard work and great risk on his part. You have no idea how many charitable acts this man is responsible for nor do you know the many feet he has set on the right path by his Christian living of God's commandments.
Know your subject before you open your mouth.
The man is no saint ....but he tries.
-
Not to mention in this world you only get wealthy through dirty deeds and he is VERY wealthy.
Not true. What about Tom Monahan (sp) unless you consider Dominos Pizza a dirty deed and even some actors/actresses like Mother Delores Hart, James Cagney etc.
I'm sure there are many wealthy good people. You just don't hear about them because they mind their own business and ARE good people. Good people don't make good news copy
Seriously, Tom Monahan? He did get rich off the backs of others, namely his underpaid employees. How can some people make a living when the likes of Tom Monahan and others like him have all the wealth and own all the means of production.
Really...give your head a shake. As for his underpaid employees, they received the same minimum wage as most other people in the food industry because their tips are taken into consideration. These same employees were mostly part time students who couldn't fit any other kind of work into their study schedules. Also the very unskilled who couldn't get any full time work. Everyone has to start somewhere.
What was he supposed to pay his employees????? Are you willing to pay $60.00 for a pizza????
Tom may have great wealth now but it was achieved through hard work and great risk on his part. You have no idea how many charitable acts this man is responsible for nor do you know the many feet he has set on the right path by his Christian living of God's commandments.
Know your subject before you open your mouth.
The man is no saint ....but he tries.
Tom also doesn't own Dominoes he sold in in the 90's, so if they're dumping MSG into it he isn't to blame. So good ol' Tom seems to be ok, but that is irrelevant because the original quote was talking about Donald Trump.
-
BREAKING: Black Trump supporter shot and killed by Chicago protesters
Christian Times Newspaper has learned that an African-American supporter of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has died after allegedly sustaining gunshot wounds in the aftermath of Friday night’s chaos in Chicago.
Robert King Bullock, aged 37, was a resident of Chicago’s Evanston suburb. According to Bullock’s friend, who also attended the Trump rally, Robert was an avid chef, and he recently obtained his Masters of Business Administration and planned to open a local restaurant.
This source spoke with CTN on the condition of anonymity, and asked to be referred to as “Terry.” He called for Bullock’s death to serve as a reminder to anti-Trump groups and the mainstream media.
“Rob was a black man, but he supported Trump because he got tired of Democrats saying his race was the thing holding him back,” Bullock’s friend told CTN.
“[Rob] lost his job because of Obamacare. He lost his brother to black-on-black gang violence. Now he lost his life because he believed in a white man. His race didn’t have a damn thing to do with what held him back.”
Bullock and Terry were separated in the chaos that followed the protesters’ interruption of the planned Trump rally, which led to widespread violent scuffles and the event’s cancellation. It is believed that he attempted to make his way to a nearby bar to charge his dead cell-phone and reconnect with Terry.
Multiple sources have confirmed that protesters and Trump supporters continued to clash as they moved from the UIC Pavillion to their vehicles and nearby locations. It is believed that Bullock, at some point after leaving the event center, was confronted by protesters, beaten, then allegedly shot two times in the abdomen and left shoulder by a small to medium-size handgun.
The following picture allegedly was taken as police walked the crime scene north of the UIC Pavillion, where the Trump rally was held.
http://christiantimesnewspaper.com/breaking-black-trump-supporter-shot-and-killed-by-chicago-protesters/
-
BREAKING: Black Trump supporter shot and killed by Chicago protesters
This is not a true story. It is from a click-bait website. The disclaimer on the site says the stories are not necessarily factual.
-
It seems highly certain that Sen Ted Cruz is a Freemason. Sen Rubio just doesn't have the nerve for this, even if on paper his positions are good. Gov Kasich is pointless. Ms Clinton or Mr Sanders will be the Liberal on the ballot paper. There are concerns with Mr Trump, but by default, and by the skill of his campaign, and soundness of positions on Health and immigration, he seems to be the only choice for the American voter.
-
I also could not have said it better.... :ready-to-eat:
-
Larry Nichols & (or) Wayne Madsen are claiming that Rubio & Cruz are both ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs... :reporter:
You think?
Here's Rubio attempting to hug his wife:
(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt260/LaramieHirsch/rubio%201_zpsmzxil2gh.jpg)
Here's a description of what's going on in the photo above, courtesy of a poster over at Heartiste:
Very interesting Rubio photo, Corey. How many of the diseases of modernism can we see in just this one photo? He has fag-face and at the same time he has the face of a scheming jew.
Oh crap, JezusDeKoning, they exposed one of our most cryptoish-Jew candidates!!! What ever will we do?