Count me among the Democrats who are totally delighted that Donald Trump is running for the Republican nomination for President, that he is a frontrunner in polls of Republican voters, that he cannot be prevented from participating in the Fox News debate, that he is sucking oxygen from other Republican candidates, that the Republican Party establishment cannot figure out what to do about him.
I generally like Robert Naiman, but this is just hairsplitting and shilling for Dems. The point is they are all extremists in Washington, who have no trouble killing on a whim or destroying a nation's life-support infrastructure for dubious political (but concretely economic and ideological) abstractions: Bush, Cheney, Obama, Hillary and all the odious congresscritters stoking the death machine at home and abroad. There is no credibility left. We should stop pretending there is some sort of real democratic process at work here. Basta. Time to dig deep, to the roots, and tear up the whole rotten tree.
The Republican Presidential candidates have become so obviously cartoonish that it baffles me how Americans cannot see through this elaborate piece of theater. The job of the GOP is to speak and behave in ways that are overtly ridiculous, evil, insane and stupid. The intended result is to frighten and disgust reasonable people into supporting another Democratic candidate who will of course do evil, insane and stupid things like expanding America's imperial wars, strengthening the police state, cutting Social Security and Health Care, outsourcing US jobs, etc. (Conversely, the disgusting and awful rhetoric of the GOP candidates also serves to condition Americans, to coarsen their sensibilities, so that the brutal policies of the next Democratic president seem acceptable.) This is the how the surreal and absurd McCain/Palin ticket paved the way for the atrocities of Barack Obama.
According to Wayne Madsen Reports (ex-NSA agent), Scott Walker is THE COUSIN of George Walker Bush. A pissed-off relative that knows what a piece of chit Walker is phoned in the info.
Indeed, Scott Walker was GWB's campaign chairman for his election to Texas Governor, and his co-chair for his shady 2000 and 2004 elections. Twice he referred to GWB as "my cousin" while at the mic.
Note the beady eyes devoid of life just like GWB. And the total lack of any education (Walker did not go to college or even finish high school; he's illiterate.) So the election choices are going to be GWB's cousin or his brother or his toady Hillary. Reminds me of the 2004 election: My choice was a Skull and Bonesman (GWB) or a Skull and Bonesman (Kerry).
Just how the hell did that happen?
You call this democracy? (in a pig's eye.)
"Is our children learning yet?" - GWB
Trumps purpose is to make the other crazies seem sane.
That photo illustrates the best argument and poster for birth control I can imagine-
Spot on, flapdoodle64 !
Whatever extreme idea the GOP concocts today finds its way into the heart of the Democrats' agenda within one to five years. Paul Ryan and Scott Walker have been especially effective at expediting extreme ideas that give the Democrats cover to accelerate their rightward movement.
Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) can't stop gushing about how great it is to work on budget cuts with Paul Ryan.
The most widely broadcast rationalization for Dubya's success is that he made many Texans and later many murkins feel like he was one of them and that he was a guy they would want to have a beer with.
Exactly. That's why the headline labelling Trump an "extremist" is pure propaganda. This kind of editorializing shouldn't be allowed in CD.
Sanders is still the preferred candidate, but that does not mean any other candidate should be labelled this way, whether Republicans or Democrats. Let readers decide for themselves who are the extremists, who are less, who are more, and who are not.
Kitty wants Mr. Trump to give him his hairball back.
I have long since decided that oligarchs are totalitarians, regardless of the party they belong to.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
That's a pretty scary criteria since bush was a short-tempered drunk who reportedly tortured illegal immigrants on his ranch in Texas. One minute he's your buddy, and the next you're swinging upside down from a tree... Just like all Americans are doing financially now....
And I think bush's "success" had a lot more to do with voting fraud via his pal at diebold computer company than anything else. I predict that Jeb (bush) or his cousin Scott Walker will win by a handful of votes again. The same One Percenters will rule on high like they always have since they killed Kennedy.
In 2012 John Dean published an excellent analysis of Scott Walker, concluding that he was worse than Dean's old boss, Nixon: a potential dictator obsessed with power and revenge. The real problem with Trump is that he may make Walker seem moderate - which seems to be the emerging line from faux liberals like Chris Matthews. Walker should not be underestimated.
(From WI) Walker hasn't been shy about being an extremist. He is simply smarter than Trump, since Walker takes the game seriously. He actually says very little, and sticks closely to the scripts that are written for him. Trump does just the opposite. In WI, Walker (quietly) picked up where Thompson left off. That is, what Thompson did to the poor, Walker is now doing to the middle class. How we can determine his success here: While the middle class rails against Walker, and what he has done to crush out workers' rights and protections, they will re-elect him if he run for governor again.
On a broader scale, he has as much chance of becoming president as Thompson did.
There is one major aspect that liberal media wouldn't touch: Clinton/Gore targeted the poor. In Gore vs. Bush, the poor -- and the masses who "get" why this matters to the country/economy as a whole -- voted third party or withheld their votes. That was a lot of votes for Gore to throw away.
A key issue concerning 2016: Millions of the poor, etc., voted for Obama in hopes that he could launch a legit discussion about our poverty crisis. He raised the issue a few times, Dems and libs aren't interested. This year alone, Dems agreed to virtually end food stamps for the elderly poor and the disabled who are on Social Security. Reportedly, the Dems plan extreme cuts in Social Security Disability -- far deeper than those made by the Clinton administration. As a result of Clinton's cuts, the disabled/seriously ill became the fastest-growing group of homeless people, and they did very poorly on the streets. President Obama finally restored benefits, undoubtedly saving lives. Nevertheless, the Clinton wing remains hell-bent on reversing all the progress made from FDR until Reagan/Clinton.
So, the war on the poor continues, as do the Dem efforts to "reform" Social Security. Of course this will have an impact on 2016.