Code Trump

Trumpby C. Edmund Wright   2/15/16
The Gallop Leftward Continues • Donald Trump is now officially the Code Pink Republican. Or maybe he’s the Daily Kos or Huffington Post Republican. How about the Debbie Wasserman Schultz Republican? I think that fits. Heck, we all saw it and we all heard it. Trump went full left loon on George W. Bush and 9/11, sounding like the most impassioned truther from the left. Did Maxine Waters do his debate prep?

Trump snarked childishly that Bush did not keep us safe on 9/11. Apparently Mr. Trump is not intellectually very curious about history. If he were, he would know that 9/11 was dreamed up, contemplated, financed, planned, and practiced on Bill Clinton’s watch. This planning and practicing continued during the days of the hanging chads in Florida.

This is not to defend George W. Bush and his neocon nation-building fantasies and his capitulation to unions regarding the TSA and so on. I’ve been critical of Bush and Karl Rove since 2001 on these and many other issues.

But the truth matters.

And the truth is that the single biggest failure by the American intelligence community was foisted onto the CIA and the FBI by Clinton appointee Jamie Gorelick with her infamous “wall of separation” between the two agencies. They had their hands tied behind their backs — thanks to a Clinton appointee.

Seriously Donald, is a cheap shot at lowly Jeb worth the worst kind of leftist revisionist history that will no doubt harm the Republican nominee in the fall? Apparently it is. This was simply shameful, not to mention contextually not true.

But? Will it matter to his botlike followers? It should, but it probably won’t. If it bothers you, you are not a bot. If it doesn’t, you are. Period. This was a devastating and unforgivable mistake. It was a colossal screwup. Why? Because this kind of thing is guaranteeing a Democrat win in 2016 however — something millions are not situationally aware enough to understand. More on that later.

First, let’s remember that for a long time Trump has been the Chuck Schumer Republican — and the Nancy Pelosi Republican — two titles he again gladly claimed just recently. He is also the ‘blame business for ObamaCare’ Republican and let us not forget that he is still apparently the Planned Parenthood Republican.

Because they do good work, you know.

Those two realities alone should shame and embarrass anyone who has been on Team Trump — but Trump nation is a universe seemingly immune to reality and reason when they point to the conclusion that maybe the Donald is not a good choice.

And the ObamaCare absurdities that the long time universal care advocate is holding onto are frightening — if one would but consider the ramifications. Alas, ramifications are understood only in the context of reality and logic. Oh well.

And the signs are everywhere, though to listen to most talk radio hosts, one would think none of this is happening. If Red State or National Review accurately quotes Trump, the problem is Red State and National Review — not Trump. Hell, how can he lose? How can you argue with that?

In Iowa, Trump was the pro ethanol “outsider” Republican, an atrocity futher magnified by Governor Terry Branstad and his crony lobbyist son — who were harassing the lone candidate bold enough to stand up against the corn scam all across Iowa. Anybody but Cruz, they whined.

If Trump were the alpha male his drones claim, he’d put that corn product in his jet and see if it would even generate thrust. He says it’s “terrific” after all.

Trump then called any Republican against the corn scam “in the pocket of big oil.” Talk about another Daily Kos talking point. Do you like ethanol subsidies? Are you in big oil’s pocket. I wish I were. I just happen to like net positive energy that is not propped up by lobbyists and green energy wackos and despicable cronies.

Oh, and let’s not forget — speaking of Iowa — that late in the Iowa campaign Trump was the “Scalia is a racist” Republican. Nice touch, Donald, in light of Scalia’s untimely passing. Sorry to remind you.

Meanwhile, Trump has long been the Bernie Sanders Republican, agreeing with the avowed Socialist nut case in his final appeals across New Hampshire on almost everything. It was such a joke that many independent voters were trying to decide between Sanders and Trump.

And to top it off, he came out recently and doubled down on being the crony capitalist Republican — a title he’s held for a long time — by reiterating his support for confiscatory eminent domain even for private projects. Donald has never met a winner or loser he wasn’t happy for government to pick.

And all of this is fine with his adoring fans. This is problematic, because we are not a nation who should ever adore our politicians in this way. It’s unhealthy, it’s un-American and it’s profoundly nonconservative. More to my first point, however, is the fact that this will guarantee a Democrat win in November.

If we cede that Bush was at fault for 9/11 — and Trump just absolutely proclaimed it — we cannot win. If we cede that it was Bush, and not Fannie and Freddie and not the EPA and not Chris Dodds and Barney Frank (and Jamie Gorelick) at fault, then we cannot win. Trump did this a few months ago, stating categorically that “I don’t think the Democrats would have done that.”

Uh… earth to Donald — it was the Democrats who did that. How did this escape this supposedly macro-economically gifted mind? Maybe — just maybe — being born wealthy and then running rent-controlled WTFapartments and strip clubs and reality TV shows and beauty pageants and casinos is not quite the same as understanding the entire economy and how it works. If being rich were proof of having the right prescriptions for the macro economy, then George Soros and the Michael Bloomberg are far more qualified to be president than Trump. From where I sit, they both started out much poorer than Trump, have not declared four bankruptcies, and are now much richer than Trump.

I only say this because A: Trump supporters point to his wealth as proof of his economic genius without any circumspection and B: he did just say some ridiculously idiotic things about the macro economy. He said it. Not me. Him! He was wrong, and being rich doesn’t change the fact that he was and is totally wrong about this.

No Republican can win the White House if Bush, or any other Republican, or Republicanism or conservatism, is blamed for 9/11 and for 2008. Not gonna happen. If Trump continues down this road, this is the danger. This is why the Karl Rove/Bush strategy of never contesting anything from the bully pulpit for eight years still haunts us today. Now Donald is doubling down on it.

To take the 9/11 truther stance simply to score a few cheap points against Jeb is petty and vindictive and childish — not to mention inaccurate and infinitely damaging. Barack Obama ran against George Bush twice — practically ignoring John McCain and Mitt Romney. He won, as a Democrat.

If Trump wants to run against W, perhaps he should do it as a Democrat. Trump-Sheehan 2016. Or as his sophomoric fans would say, GO TRUMP!!!!!!!!


CEdmundWrightC. Edmund Wright is contributor to StubbornThings, American Thinker, Breitbart, Newsmax TV, Talk Radio Network and author of WTF? How Karl Rove and the Establishment Lost…Again. • (811 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Code Trump

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Thank you, C. Edmund Wright. We are brothers from another mother, as they say. I don’t have the time or skill to say all that I’m thinking. But you’ve said it.

    And, goodness forbid, note the lunatic Trumpkins who can’t handle the reality of this situation and are trashing this good man on American Thinker.

    I read an article recently wherein a pregnant female reporter road around the various trains and busses in New York to see who would give up her seat to her. After hours or days of doing this, she found only gone good Samaritan in the lot. The rest, as one commenter noted, shared “New York Values.”

    Trump shares “New York Values” and they are not good ones. For Trump to join the lunatic fringe and blame George W. Bush for 9/11 is, well, lunatic. And his inability to criticize planned parenthood shows you once and for all that he is no step up from the Establishment GOP. Ted Cruz remains the only good candidate for president.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Trump shares “New York Values” and they are not good ones.

      The whole nonsense about there being no such thing as “New York Values” is another example of the media playing down obvious truths.

      It makes me think about the studies which show how much more aggressive rats become the more crowded they are. Some of these studies where made in order to draw analogies to human behavior in overcrowded cities. On basis of that, New Yorkers are just a bunch of rats reacting as is to be expected in overcrowded conditions. Like fish who don’t know they are surrounded by water, New Yorkers are not cognizant of their environment and the damage resultant therefrom.

  2. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I thought the Saturday night debate was Trump’s worst performance, by far. He was generally negative and seemed somewhat out of control. To my mind, he was not the winner on this night.

    But according to Drudge’s online poll, Trump won with something like 55-60% with Cruz coming in second with something like 20-22%. I had to ask myself, was I watching the same debate that these people were?

    As to Trump’s attack on George W. Bush and 9/11, unless it was a complete loss of control on Trump’s part, I believe it was made with Paulbots in mind, who claim to be conservatives and with an eye on the general election. Say what one will, George W. Bush is held in very low regard by a large portion of the population and I don’t think a lot of people are very discriminating as to hating him for 9/11 or something else. Trump is simply waving the red flag in front of the collective bull.

    Interestingly, Rubio got in the best response to Trump by saying he thanked God that Bush and not Gore was president when 9/11 happened.

    While I believe Clinton and his administration were largely to blame for letting the 9/11 plotters brew their poison, I think the Bush administration is given a very easy pass on this. We should not forget that Bush was sworn in as president on January 20, 2001. Therefore, he was in office for almost eight months before 9/11 occurred. Yes, I know that because of the problems involved with the Florida vote count, there were delays in getting administrative positions filled, but the fact remains that the security of the nation was passed over to Bush many months before the attacks.

    I think Trump will probably walk back his comments a bit. But if he wishes to keep the story bubbling, he will point out some of the facts I just mentioned.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      But according to Drudge’s online poll, Trump won with something like 55-60% with Cruz coming in second with something like 20-22%.

      I suspect there’s a lot of libertarian-loony aligning behind Trump. Rand (or Ron) Paul would often win (or finish high) in various straw polls, which tend to gauge absolute zealousness.

      What I’m reading from the Trumpkins is scary. They are totally impervious to any criticism of Trump. They are mindless robots.

      As to Trump’s attack on George W. Bush and 9/11, unless it was a complete loss of control on Trump’s part, I believe it was made with Paulbots in mind, who claim to be conservatives and with an eye on the general election.

      I agree, thus further solidifying the idea that “libertarian” equals “liberal.” Trump is a liberal. There’s never been much doubt in my mind. Given his recent comments, he can rightly be called a Leftist. You wouldn’t want this lunatic selecting Supreme Court Justices, for instances.

      In fact, I think he’s jumped the shark as far as I’m concerned. I would have stayed home if Jeb Bush was nominated. I still will hold my nose and vote for him if Rubio is nominated. But there’s no way I’m voting for Trump. Hell…one might as well vote for Bernie Cuckoo Sanders.

      I agree with you about not giving Bush a pass. And I agree with Trump to some extent that this “He kept of safe” stuff is over-rated. But Trump went way beyond that into the Alinsky lunatic range. This guy is nuts…unfortunately, this guy represents a lot of low-information voters.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        Trump is a liberal. There’s never been much doubt in my mind. Given his recent comments, he can rightly be called a Leftist. You wouldn’t want this lunatic selecting Supreme Court Justices, for instances.

        My biggest concern about Trump is how he would act as regards nominating Supreme Court Justices.

        I am not sure it is correct to say Trump is a liberal. I also don’t think he is a conservative.

        It should never be forgotten that he is a businessman and many, probably most successful businessmen are for whatever works. They are not known for their ethical underpinnings. It is called being practical.

        I have watched Trump pretty closely and it is clear to me that the man will say anything which he believes will help him reach his goal. I believe it is almost impossible to know what the man would actually do (good or bad) if elected president.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          I am not sure it is correct to say Trump is a liberal. I also don’t think he is a conservative.
          It should never be forgotten that he is a businessman and many, probably most successful businessmen are for whatever works.

          If Trump is no more than a “pragmatic” politician, then whether he is a doctrinaire liberal/Leftist or not makes little difference. He will always stick his finger in the air and feel the wind coming from the Left, which is where this culture is headed. That makes a farce out of his idea of “Make America Great Again.” By using the same tired formula, Donald?

          He went out of his way in the last debate to hit George Bush from the Left. As Rush said this morning, this stuff is even further Left than Harry Reid was willing to go. One has to ask oneself why this gratuitous bit of slandering if it doesn’t represent his views?

          I totally reject the idea that Trump is a pragmatic businessman just dealing with the marketplace of set ideas that are out there. He is a moral idiot if he can look at Planned Parent hood and do little but praise it. And he is a moral coward if he simply bashes George W. Bush over the head for 9/11 and lays little blame at the doorstep of Clinton and the Left.

          I would suggest, Mr. Kung, that we be careful not to play the opposite pole of the Trumpkins and simply dismiss this guy’s words as clever marketing. And although I do believe, as you say, that he will say anything if he thinks it will help HIM, that is then a direct refutation of his “Make America Great Again” slogan. You can’t make America great by slandering America, by being yet another blame-America-firster.

          I think now we can know exactly what Trump would do as president. He would do nothing constructive. He would simply further the agenda of the Left. His “New York Values” demand it. He thinks these values are normal. He is a blow-hard. He is not only not politically incorrect. He is the paragon of political correctness as we see him parroting the same shtick of the Left.

          No, I won’t be voting for this Leftist lunatic. I’d vote for Rubio or Kasich (reluctantly). But not for Trump. I’ll stay home.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            I totally reject the idea that Trump is a pragmatic businessman just dealing with the marketplace of set ideas that are out there.

            Perhaps I should have put quotation marks around the word “practical” to emphasis my sarcasm.

            When I say whatever works, I mean whatever works for that businessman’s goals. Of course, money and power are ultimate goals, but below that everything is flexible. The ends justify the means is probably Trump’s motto.

            Other than power, I don’t know what his ends are. Why is he running for president?

            Never forget, I warned the fact that Trump is running and able to gain so much traction is a sign of grave illness in our body politic.

            He may be a cankerous demagogue, but his rise was, to a very large degree, a result of the GOPe allowing the political immune system to shrivel away.

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            I’d vote for Rubio or Kasich (reluctantly). But not for Trump. I’ll stay home.

            I would not vote for Rubio under any circumstances. He is an open borders amnesty proponent. Eddie Haskell should never be president.

            You can’t make America great by slandering America, by being yet another blame-America-firster.

            Perhaps I missed something, but when did Trump slander America?

          • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

            I believe we are now approaching the point to were Trump is damaging the Republican chances in the presidential election.

            His groundless attacks on Cruz are so obnoxious that they are creating a large number of conservative enemies who will likely not vote for him should he win the nomination.

            The whole Republican primary season has been a lesson in the wisdom of Reagan’s 11th commandment. By the time things are over, the party may be shattered beyond hope thus gifting the presidency to the Democrats.

            • Timothy Lane says:

              And thus total control of the Supreme Court, since there will be 5 liberals voting in unison to wreck the Bill of Rights.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              His groundless attacks on Cruz are so obnoxious that they are creating a large number of conservative enemies who will likely not vote for him should he win the nomination.

              I am one of those people. I voted for Romney. I voted for McCain. But I won’t vote for Bush. And now I won’t vote for Trump. Why bother? He’s simply a Leftist. I used to believe he was just a liberal. And one can say that he’s just pandering to the Left to get elected. But when is the last time we’ve seen anyone in office not run as a conservative and then turn conservative?

              Trump is dead to me. He is an incoherent, vile, immoral man and quite likely a megalomanic. We don’t need another creep in the White House.

              Of course, the Establishment Republicans (who are inherently liberal and gutless) expect Rubio to now sweep in and take it. And that is certainly a possibility and then we are right back to where we started. Rubio would nominate Harriet Miers or her ilk for the Supreme Court. We’d hear big, blustery words about the Constitution and limited government (something he’d have in common with libertarians) but then govern like a Progressive east-corridor Establishment Republican liberal (termed “moderate”).

              Ted Cruz is really our one and only choice. But he can’t fix it all. The rot goes far deeper than any one president can fix. We are now a corrupt republic in decline.

              • David Ray says:

                I remember Bush trying to pawn off that tepid Myers on us.
                Luckily we withstood and got Alito instead.

                Liberals wage war for a Supreme oligarcy to hand them every BS anti-American edict they can dream up. We fight to keep Bush from accomodating them. (Cruz would fight on the judicial front. Trump would apologize.)

              • Timothy Lane says:

                Maybe Rubio could promise to appoint Cruz to the Court. The latter is unpopular enough in the Senate that they might vote for him to get him out of there. He’d make a good replacement for Scalia.

  3. Timothy Lane says:

    Trump does have a personality cult, as have many politicians before him (including Barry Screwtape Obama). Naturally, the cultists will support him no matter what, and attack anyone who criticizes him in any way. But much of his support comes from working-class voters hard-pressed by globalization who see Trump as the only candidate who might fight against it. As long as they think he’s on their side, they won’t care about other issues.

    The Truther lunacy stems partly from liberal paranoia (hence the belief that Bush was actually responsible, or at least knew about it in advance), and partly from a failure to understand the nature of intelligence work. There were vague reports that Al Qaeda wanted to attack the US, but there were no specifics that could have been used to prevent the 9/11/01 disaster. We should be glad that an alert official blocked one of the hijackers from entering. Without that, the last plane might have crashed on Pennsylvania Avenue, not in Pennsylvania.

  4. Timothy Lane says:

    In commenting on the Trump phenomenon elsewhere, I have pointed out that I oppose him, but that many support him because they think he will (or at least is a lot likelier than the Beltway Bandits to) place American interests (including those of the working class) above globalism. This can sometimes cause him to sounds like Sanders. But it was the total failure of the globalist elites than provoked the Trump revolt. Scammon and Wattenberg, in The Real Majority, noted that if you confront a basically moderate voter with an immoderate situation, you can get an immoderate response. They were discussing the crime explosion of the 1960s, but it also applies to the problems created by globalism today. The link is:

    http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/15/how-the-lefts-immigration-tactics-created-donald-trump/

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      What a soundbyte up for grabs for whatever campaign wants to make us of it. Hillary is now barking. If you’ve been listening to Rush this morning, you’ve heard it. It’s hard to believe that won’t come back and hurt her. Remember how Howard Dean’s scream seemed to torpedo his campaign a few years back? Hillary sounds desperate and unhinged.

      In commenting on the Trump phenomenon elsewhere, I have pointed out that I oppose him, but that many support him because they think he will (or at least is a lot likelier than the Beltway Bandits to) place American interests (including those of the working class) above globalism. This can sometimes cause him to sounds like Sanders.

      Trump is the near perfect mindset for a command economy. What I’ve read about his views, he’s not a free market guy. He would have government force companies to do what he wanted. And this is no different from what is common now, particularly on the Left, but on the right as well.

      Trump’s greatest achievement, if he does achieve politically, is to convince people that he is something different. In ways, of course, he certainly is. He comes from our celebrity culture. No one really cares that he is in business. It’s his celebrity that matters. And much of his celebrity is in his products.

      After all, arguably Romney had a less controversial business career. But he didn’t have Trump’s celebrity. It’s how Trump’s business success adds to his celebrity status that matters, and not the other way around.

      But his ideas are not new. He’s FDR without the manners.

      • David Ray says:

        I’m so sick of hearing how Trump can solve this because he’s a “business man”. So is George Soros. Neither of those sell-outs impress me. (Rich does not necessarily = smart, wise or moral.)

        BTW; if Trump had come after my house like he did Mrs. Coaking’s, he would’ve found out I’m a former Marine.

  5. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Maybe Rubio could promise to appoint Cruz to the Court. The latter is unpopular enough in the Senate that they might vote for him to get him out of there. He’d make a good replacement for Scalia.

    Timothy, you might be on to something. The only flaw I can think of in this plan is that all these so-called “conservatives” in the Senate are not really conservative and would prefer a Harriet Mier type…”moderate” to liberal.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      I suspect Cruz would prefer to follow in the footsteps of Taft (I believe) who was appointed to the court after serving as president. He would only be something like 53 years old if he won two terms.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Yes, Taft was named Chief Justice by his fellow Buckeye, Warren G. Harding. I believe his replacement was Charles Evans Hughes, a moderate who nevertheless gave the New Dealers a few ulcers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *