Recommended Posts

If Trump is not willing to embrace economic freedom...

Roger,

Just so we understand, Trump is going to be perfectly willing to embrace all the economic freedom within the borders of the USA people could ever want.

And all the economic freedom they could ever want to pay import tariffs to countries that charge US businesses tariffs or otherwise use their governments to create market advantages against US businesses.

Then there's that matter of US businesses using foreign government money on foreign soil to create advantages against their own competitors within the USA. These US businesses will be able to do what they want (Trump would negotiate with them, never force them to do anything), but their products will not come into the US for free, not when their production inputs include foreign government money.

As to outright prohibitions, I don't think he is going to prohibit trade at all. Not with anybody. The issue will be more along the line of tariffs. In fact, once he gets rid of the EPA, I expect to see a lot more business between foreign companies and US companies than right now. This business will simply have a diminished role for the crony corporatists of today.

It's this elite cartel of thieves that is redistributing America abroad he has an issue with. Economic freedom does not mean elites selling out the country with sweetheart deals to other elites overseas and leaving 95 million plus out of work in a US population of a little over 300 million.

Trump is against the economic freedom of the elite crony corporatist mafia so to speak. Against the economic freedom of gangsters.

Some think this is immoral.

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump is not willing to embrace economic freedom...

Roger,

Just so we understand, Trump is going to be perfectly willing to embrace all the economic freedom within the borders of the USA people could ever want.

[...]

It's this elite cartel of thieves that is redistributing America abroad he has an issue with. Economic freedom does not mean elites selling out the country with sweetheart deals to other elites overseas and leaving 95 million plus out of work in a US population of a little over 300 million.

Trump is against the economic freedom of the elite crony corporatist mafia so to speak. Against the economic freedom of gangsters.

Some think this is immoral.

:smile:

Michael

What about the "economic freedom" of the elite crony corporatist mafia farmers in Iowa, getting ethanol subsidies that drive up prices and distort the economy and milk the taxpayers? He is definitely *not* against that. He thinks their subsidies/mandates should be *increased,* not abolished.

I think *that* is immoral. Don't you? [EDIT: perhaps you meant to say that he would embrace all the economic freedom in the USA that people *should* ever want? With him deciding what we should want, of course?]

Ironically, the ethanol subsidy was one of two kinds of political demagoguery mentioned by William F. Buckley in his 2000 article in which he told us in no uncertain terms what he thought of Donald Trump, the great conservative (not). The pandering/handouts kind. Buckley said we might have to put up with that kind if that were the only choice other than a trust-me/corrupting/narcissistic kind, which he said was exemplified by Trump.

Also ironically, we now don't even have to choose. We can have both kinds of demagoguery all wrapped up in one tidy little package. A two-fer. How nice.

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger,

I don't like the ethanol business, but compared to the gridlock that will keep the really big international cronies in place if Cruz gets in, or all the crony deals the other candidates will make (the still viable ones) if by some miracle their campaigns turn around, it's a blemish, not a deal-killer, not for me at least.

And if, as I strongly suspect, Trump will surround himself in office with the Breitbart conservatives (for lack of a better term for people like Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, etc.), they will nag him to death to get him on the straight and narrow with things like the ethanol subsidies. Expect a deal of some sorts with Iowa corn farmers with Trump, not just gobs of government money.

In fact, with Trump, I expect to see a Convention of States to fix parts of the Constitution. I think he will push it.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The annointed one”

by Kelleigh Nelson

Cruz is a co-sponsor of S. 306 that categorizes home schools as private schools and allows Title 1 federal dollars to follow the students to private schools. Fed regulations follow all fed dollars. ... Cruz has stated that “School Choice is the most compelling civil rights issue of the 21st century. Right Teddy, once choice is passed, all federal regulations will go with the federal tax dollars.

There’s more in the article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The annointed one”

by Kelleigh Nelson

Cruz is a co-sponsor of S. 306 that categorizes home schools as private schools and allows Title 1 federal dollars to follow the students to private schools. Fed regulations follow all fed dollars. ... Cruz has stated that “School Choice is the most compelling civil rights issue of the 21st century. Right Teddy, once choice is passed, all federal regulations will go with the federal tax dollars.

There’s more in the article.

Seems my Ted Cruz/Benny Hinn connection wasn't so far off earlier:

Rafael Cruz

Rafael%20Cruz.gifRafael Cruz is a pastor based in North Texas serving as the Director of Purifying Fire Ministries, ministering in the U.S., Mexico and Central America. He is his son's best campaign surrogate. He has never pastored a church, and he did not fight communism. [Link] In fact, Cuban peers dispute Rafael's story of fighting for Castro. [Link]

Purifying Fire Ministries was founded by Suzanne Hinn, ex-wife and then wife again of Trinity Broadcasting Network televangelist, Benny Hinn. (Watch Suzanne Hinn preach about the Holy Ghost Enema). Hinn is a preacher of the Prosperity Gospel (also known as Word of Faith), a false teaching that Christians can receive massive amounts of wealth, physical healing from illness, beauty, fame, miracles, and financial prosperity by “sowing a seed” or sending money to Hinn’s ministry.

Hinn's preaching deals in faux emotions and invented manifestations of the Holy Spirit at the most convenient and opportune fundraising moments. They also know where the money is today, and have hitched their wagons to the New Apostolic Reform, (NAR) or Dominionism.

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


    


 Ted Cruz, who established himself as Iowa’s prohibitive favorite in early January with an intimidating show of force, is suddenly under siege one week before the caucuses as rival Republicans pummel him and as opposition to his presidential candidacy from the state’s political and business elite hardens.


Although Cruz is campaigning aggressively, his advisers are concerned about the barrage and are now scrambling to reset expectations for him here. They insisted Monday that the Texas senator always has been the “underdog” in Iowa and argued that a second-place finish to Donald Trump should be interpreted as a mark of grit and catapult him onward in the nominating contest.



Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more Trump insults and attacks Cruz, the more I like him.

I still think they will be Prez and VP nominees together, going down in a flames in a landslide loss to Hillary and whoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Veep and perp? Hillary and Oprah. Hillary and Bill. But, who is younger, male, and can swing a state her way? Hillary and Kasich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ain't good:

 

 

I like Ted Cruz, but if this thing goes viral, I predict it will backfire on his campaign in a very painful manner.

 

A candidate can be religious and have an elevated moral posture, that's a plus, but when celebrities do groveling things like this video, it comes off to non-Christians as trying to jam Christianity down their throats through politics. It gives them an ick feeling.

 

But even within the Christian world, Tea Party Christians who support other candidates will not like the insinuation that Ted Cruz is The One Chosen by God, the candidate the Tea Party prayed for for years. What? Don't they get a vote in that prayer? 

 

Glenn Beck & Co. might as well make an ad titled: Now Comes the Savior.

 

Election-wise, not good on so many levels...

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A stealth video of a prayer meeting? Wow, what a stunning revelation...

Personally, I'm not keen on the Moral Majority (or whatever its current incarnation is in this video) - nor People for the American Way (who somehow got the video). They're both creepy and evil and anti-liberty, in one way or another.

Interesting, though, that Trump now appears to have *both* of these groups working on his behalf, if not as an active part of his campaign. To me, *that* is the ominous development, not this video's icky content.

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger,

My point is about public perception, not the reality of this group or that.

If that video goes viral, the public perception will not be what Beck and the layers of hands intend.

It will be negative.

If that happens, at least they will be able to tell themselves they are martyrs for God.

(That's not a quip. It makes me sad to say that.)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, was this video produced by a bona fide Cruz and/or Beck supporter - or by a mole who then got it to the People for the American Way?

If this was proudly posted on a Beck or Cruz or Evangelical web site, they are completely off their rockers to have done so. (I'm agreeing with you about the complete lack of perspective and judgment in waving this around as a godly display for Cruz.)

But if it was snagged by an infiltrator, that's a whole different story. Breach of trust and/or privacy at the very least. But then, that's politics, eh?

I'd be curious to know what was the situation with the making of that video. If you know, please fill me in.

Google is my friend - this video originated by Beck's operation and was shown on The Blaze, *before* being picked up by People for the American Way's project, Right Wing Watch. So, as I feared, they *are* completely off their rockers. Very bad lack of perspective and judgment in waving this around as a godly display for Cruz. They will turn off as many Evangelicals as they win over - if not more.

REB

P.S. - It sort of illustrates that he who lives by the Word, dies by the Word - at least, politically. :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger,

I should have given the original link where I found the video. When you asked just now, I couldn't remember. So I had to do some Google searches myself. Then I came across it.

I got it from Real Clear Politics Video.

Glenn Beck: Ted Cruz Is The Candidate "We Prayed For... When We Started the Tea Party"

And I remembered why I didn't link from RCP. That quote in the headline is mashed up out of order and, although the substance is more or less accurate, the wording isn't the way Beck & Co. expressed it. And I'm a stickler for accuracy when presenting quotes. If it's a paraphrase or mashup or one is going from memory, etc., then one should say so. He shouldn't misquote and think people won't notice.

Do you have a link for the video on TheBlaze? I looked and couldn't find it.

There is this from Right Wing Watch: Glenn Beck And David Barton Agree That Ted Cruz's Campaign 'Is The Moment That We Prayed For', and it has a link to TheBlaze within the text, but it links to an article where Beck endorsed Cruz, not to an article with the video in question.

I think this thing was filmed with Beck's sanction and knowledge because the camera is too close and clear for a hidden one. It looks to me like the backstage filming Beck sometimes has people do for archives and sporadic other uses. However, I doubt he was pleased that the footage got leaked to Right Wing Watch.

The ghost of Judas seems to be bopping around over there.

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger,

I should have given the original link where I found the video. When you asked just now, I couldn't remember. So I had to do some Google searches myself. Then I came across it.

I got it from Real Clear Politics Video.

Glenn Beck: Ted Cruz Is The Candidate "We Prayed For... When We Started the Tea Party"

And I remembered why I didn't link from RCP. That quote in the headline is mashed up out of order and, although the substance is more or less accurate, the wording isn't the way Beck & Co. expressed it. And I'm a stickler for accuracy when presenting quotes. If it's a paraphrase or mashup or one is going from memory, etc., then one should say so. He shouldn't misquote and think people won't notice.

Do you have a link for the video on TheBlaze? I looked and couldn't find it.

There is this from Right Wing Watch: Glenn Beck And David Barton Agree That Ted Cruz's Campaign 'Is The Moment That We Prayed For', and it has a link to TheBlaze within the text, but it links to an article where Beck endorsed Cruz, not to an article with the video in question.

I think this thing was filmed with Beck's sanction and knowledge because the camera is too close and clear for a hidden one. It looks to me like the backstage filming Beck sometimes has people do for archives and sporadic other uses. However, I doubt he was pleased that the footage got leaked to Right Wing Watch.

The ghost of Judas seems to be bopping around over there.

:smile:

Michael

I found mention of its first being played on The Blaze on a secondary source, Real Clear Politics, but that is not left-wing like People for the American Way and their project, Right Wing Watch, where we first saw the video. So, while Beck clearly will not be happy with how PAW and RWW are "persecuting him for righteousness sake" and all that, I don't think they were trying to keep it hidden or in-house. They just got all wrapped up in their godly fervor and didn't realize how/that it could and would be used against their boy, Ted.

Anyway here's the link to RCP with the mention of The Blaze (and it mentions that they, RCP, *got* the clip from Right Wing Watch):

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/01/26/glenn_beck_ted_cruz_is_the_candidate_we_prayed_for_when_we_started_the_tea_party.html

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Creepy.

Beck has been losing it during the past year (and a half?). He's been doing some good things, but then also wallowing in self praise about his godliness while trying to pretend to be Christ-like and humble and not wallow in self praise. It's as if Beck has fired everyone in his life who had the confidence to tell him when he's being foolish and vain.

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump">@realDonaldTrump</a>, trembling at being questioned by <a href="https://twitter.com/megynkelly">@megynkelly</a>, channels Monty Python: <a href="https://t.co/6k5sNQ8VJb">https://t.co/6k5sNQ8VJb</a></p>— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) <a href="
27, 2016</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ted Cruz will be in the spotlight at tonight’s debate and I expect they will give him center stage. He will be the one they keep looking at after some good natured joshing and possibly some rancorous humiliation of Trump. Rand Paul won’t miss his chance. I saw Christie say, he did not think Trump was afraid of Megyn. HA! Then why phrase it like that unless it was a jibe? I still cannot be sure Trump’s absence will raise everyone else in the Iowa Caucus but it may. Ratings. Outcome. Perception. Local Iowan press and pundits. The groundswell of sentiment.

Cruz Control. Top Gun. Ted Talk. Teddy Bear. Cruz. Cruz. Cruz. Yeah I would go with the simpler chant at a rally.
Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ted Cruz will be in the spotlight at tonight’s debate...

Peter,

It's a shame it won't be in front of 24 million people.

:smile:

Michael

Let's see if the total viewership of both events tonight is 24 million. If not, then that might indicate that Trump has lost support by this gambit, and that it will reflect in the caucus results Monday night.

:unsure:

REB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, REB, we have to wait until Monday night. I remember Iowans love to lie to pollsters. Fox will spin the debate as wunnerful, wunnerful.

Michael wrote about Cruz during tonight’s Fox, Republican debate: It's a shame it won't be in front of 24 million people.
end quote

That remains to be seen. A lot of people will tune in just to see how it goes without Trump. His speeches get boring so even if CNN is covering him or if Fox has him in a little video box during the debate, I don’t think Trump will get many viewers. I guess he won’t take my suggestion and appear in the first debate. Thump. Thump. Thump. I predict the panelists will be joyous and rambunctious without The Donald.

If it is a choice of Trump over Clinton then it is a no brainer. So, why support Cruz over Trump, Michael? I won’t support Trump until or if it appears Cruz cannot win. Do Objectivists matter? Do the conservatives at the National Review matter? I think they do if you stand for what this forum is called, Objectivist Living. Then it does matter. Robert Tracinski wrote an interesting article a week ago and here are some excerpts:

The Line in the Sand. The Intellectual Leadership of the Right Stands Against Trump by Robert Tracinski
I have been predicting that Donald Trump is headed for trouble because he's seeking the Republican nomination while making war on the ideological leadership of the right . . . . First, they point out Trump's record of ideological incoherence, or rather his history of sympathy for the other side. Glenn Beck writes that "three policies provided the fuel that lit the tea-party fire: the stimulus, the auto bailouts, and the bank bailouts. Barack Obama supported all three. So did Donald Trump."
Second and more profound is the fact that Trump offers as his alternative to the current state of the country, not a coherent set of ideas, but himself and his own imagined personal greatness. David Boaz describes Trump's "promise that he's the guy, the man on a white horse, who can ride into Washington, fire the stupid people, hire the best people, and fix everything. He doesn't talk about policy or working with Congress. He's effectively vowing to be an American Mussolini, concentrating power in the Trump White House and governing by fiat."

"The right" is a broad ideological persuasion, and these people stand for ideas that are different and often conflicting variants within that persuasion. What unites them against Trump is that they stand for ideas, rather than for the power and aggrandizement of a single man, which is the essence of Trumpism . . . . That bring us to the function of this National Review symposium, which is quite simply to draw a line in the sand. This is something we need to do for our own integrity, first and foremost. For political commentators on the right, the fundamental challenge posed by Trump is whether we actually meant all that stuff we've been saying for decades, or whether we are willing to chuck it all out to jump on somebody's political bandwagon. I'm happy to see that most of us are not.

. . . . But it would be very strange if Trump were able to cruise to the Republican nomination in the face of the united opposition of virtually the entire intellectual leadership of the right. I don't think that's possible, and I think it would be immensely destructive if it happened, because it would mean an entire political organization has become unmoored from any basic principles.

. . . . Before we can debate what the right is and what it should stand for, we have to agree that it is something and should stand for something, which is the common theme of the wide-ranging rejection of Trump. That's the line in the sand we need to draw.
end quote

THUMP THUMP THUMP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...