Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
I believe he's right on the money. Maybe Mapp and his cronies should read this too…
Interesting take on Trump.
William J. Bennett, Host of Bill Bennett's Morning in America Show, is one of America's most important, influential, and respected voices on cultural, political, and education issues. He has one of the strongest Christian world views of any writer in modern times.
What I See Happening In a Trump Presidency
By Bill Bennett
They will kill him before they let him be president. It could be a Republican or a Democrat that instigates the shutting up of Trump.
Don’t be surprised if Trump has an accident. Some people are getting very nervous: Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
It's about the unholy dynamics between big government, big business, and big media. They all benefit by the billions of dollars from this partnership, and it's in all of their interests to protect one another. It's one for all and all for one.
It’s a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich, everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We’re the patsies. But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists are scared. The over-the-top reaction to Trump by politicians of both parties, the media, and the biggest corporations of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are all threatened and frightened.
Donald Trump can self-fund. No matter how much they say to the contrary, the media, business, and political elite understand that Trump is no joke. He could actually win and upset their nice cozy apple cart.
It's no coincidence that everyone has gotten together to destroy The Donald. It's because most of the other politicians are part of the a good old boys club. They talk big, but they won’t change a thing. They are all beholden to big-money donors. They are all owned by lobbyists, unions, lawyers, gigantic environmental organizations, and multinational corporations – like Big Pharmacy or Big Oil. Or they are owned lock, stock, and barrel by foreigners like George Soros owns Obama or foreign governments own Hillary and their Clinton Foundation donations.
These run-of-the-mill establishment politicians are all puppets owned by big money. But there's one man who isn't beholden to anyone. There's one man who doesn't need foreigners, or foreign governments, or George Soros, or the United Auto Workers, or the teacher's union, or the Service Employees International Union, or the Bar Association to fund his campaign.
Billionaire tycoon and maverick Donald Trump doesn’t need anyone’s help. That means he doesn’t care what the media says. He doesn’t care what the corporate elites think. That makes him very dangerous to the entrenched interests. That makes Trump a huge threat to those people. Trump can ruin everything for the bribed politicians and their spoiled slave masters.
Don’t you ever wonder why the GOP has never tried to impeach Obama? Don’t you wonder why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell talk a big game, but never actually try to stop Obama? Don’t you wonder why Congress holds the purse strings, yet has never tried to de-fund Obamacare or Obama’s clearly illegal executive action on amnesty for illegal aliens? Bizarre, right? It defies logic, right?
First, I'd guess many key Republicans are being bribed. Secondly, I believe many key Republicans are being blackmailed. Whether they are having affairs, or secretly gay, or stealing taxpayer money, the National Security Agency knows everything.
Ask former House Speaker Dennis Hastert about that. The government even knew he was withdrawing large sums of his own money from his own bank account. The NSA, the SEC, the IRS, and all the other three-letter government agencies are watching every Republican political leader. They surveil everything. Thirdly, many Republicans are petrified of being called racists, so they are scared to ever criticize Obama or call out his crimes, let alone demand his impeachment. Fourth , why rock the boat? After defeat or retirement, if you’re a good old boy, you’ve got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win.
But Trump doesn’t play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice, cozy relationship between big government, big media, and big business. All the rules are out the window if Trump wins the Presidency. The other politicians will protect Obama and his aides but not Trump. Remember: Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama's birth certificate. He questioned Obama's college records and how a mediocre student got into an Ivy League university. Now, he's doing something no Republican has the chutzpah to do. He's questioning our relationship with Mexico; he's questioning why the border is wide open; he's questioning why no wall has been built across the border; he's questioning if allowing millions of illegal aliens into America is in our best interests; he's questioning why so many illegal aliens commit violent crimes, yet are not deported; and he's questioning why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad.
Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the short end of the stick. Good question! I'm certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that tab is now up to $5 billion. Trump will ask if Obamacare's architects can be charged with fraud for selling it by lying. Trump will investigate Obama's widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention Obama's college records. Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up Benghazi before the election. How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012 election?
Obama, the multinational corporations and the media need to stop Trump. They recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked, telling the raw truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake a sleeping giant. Trump's election would be a nightmare. Obama has committed many crimes. No one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump gets in and gets a look at the cooked books and Obama's records, the game is over. The jig is up. The goose is cooked. Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama bundler Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of customer money. Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails or for accepting bribes from foreign governments while Secretary of State, or for misplacing $6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi. The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison.
Obamacare will be de-funded and dismantled. Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters. Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone involved. That’s why the dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump.
Yes, it's become open season on Donald Trump. The left and the right are determined to attack his policies, harm his businesses, and, if possible, even keep him out of the coming debates. But they can't silence him. And they sure can't intimidate him. The more they try, the more the public will realize that he's the one telling the truth
Posted : November 21, 2015 11:17 pm
I haven't heard or read anything from Bennett in years - not since his "hypothetical" statement about aborting black babies to reduce crime. He was crazy then, and it appears he's nuttier than a fruitcake now.
This piece is filled with innuendo, logical and factual fallacy and specious arguments, that are too numerous to mention. But thanks for posting. It was an entertaining break.
Posted : November 22, 2015 12:23 am
Topic starter
Know his name. Haven't been following his commentary. Deemed it 'thought provoking'. Take it from there.
Posted : November 22, 2015 12:41 am
Good grief!
What a load of crap! (excuse the language.)
Posted : November 22, 2015 8:42 am
All the above and not any remote connection to relocating ...
Posted : November 22, 2015 8:51 am
Topic starter
-- moved topic --
Posted : November 22, 2015 3:04 pm
Topic starter
All the above and not any remote connection to relocating ...
No remote connection to relocating OT? Off hand I'd say it would have a great deal of importance to those making the decision to relocate. Inserting a new commander in chief could very well have profound effects on whether to move or not; the economy could rise or fall; the effects of terrorist attacks on the mainland would most certainly ring the relocation bell for some; illeagal immigration; job loss; the list goes on. On this we must disagree, ms. Tart.
But, then again, by inserting this post I have thus been able to observe the political reactions of those from sides of the aisle.
Posted : November 22, 2015 4:23 pm
Not sure how stuff like this gets traction beyond people being too lazy to do minimal searching to verify something they are reading on the internet before re-posting or forwarding as "true." Unscrupulous people post all kinds of nonsense knowing that it will be passed along without any critical consideration. "Oh! This supports something I believe! Must be true!" Not!
All I did was search "Bill Bennett Trump" and I found a board with the OP on which most discredited it, and the following from FOX. If you want to skip the extraneous stuff you can go directly to 3:30 on this video to where Hannity asks Bennett if he is okay with a Trump presidency:
In the interest of transparency I should disclose I am a Liberal Democrat, and a New Yorker. Most I know here in NYC have had their fill of Donald Trump and his arrogance, his ego, and his name plastered over so much of the City - he kind of reminds me of a dictator the way he behaves and erects so many monuments to himself. I shudder to think what he'd do after putting up the Trump Wall between the USA and Mexico. I might wish him on my worst enemy, but not my country.
Posted : November 23, 2015 2:03 am
All the above and not any remote connection to relocating ...
No remote connection to relocating OT?
No, which is precisely why it was moved to this forum.:D
In my most humble opinion, anyone who even considers Mr Bennett, "one of America's most important, influential, and respected voices on cultural, political, and education issues" (or for that natter views Mr Trump as a viable candidate for the US Presidency) is off his or her rocker.
Posted : November 24, 2015 2:11 pm
Topic starter
GOOD SHOW OT! Pip Pip and all that rot!
I always enjoy your 'humble opinions' on this, and other topics. Keep up the splendid words…
Can't say for sure but I think it was Taco Bell who brought the phrase: "Think outside the box" back into popularity some years ago; not as popular as "Yo Quiero Taco Bell", though. However, when it comes to politicians, candidates who are brave enough (with an ego not suitable for prime time) to speak on issues many want to hear, thinking out of the box becomes extremely controversial...
Mr. Bennett's observations aside, I would immensely enjoy entertaining your thoughts on Trump's continuing popularity among the many polls being taken. Judging by your 'humble opinions', myself and many others are just a bunch loonies. The many news outlets, left and right, must also be loony for their positive views on Trump, including Mr. Bennett, of course. I just hope there are enough folks in the white suits and butterfly nets out there to contain all the loonies…
Therefore, it is my 'humble opinion' that the definition of loony is the person currently sitting in the big chair up in DC. And I don't feel I'm alone with that definition, with the possible exception of you and the previous posters here, of course. But, in due course, the decisions will be made for us, a new king will be crowned and the earth will continue to revolve on its axis (at least until we all burn up due to climate change, LOL)…
So I will close with the the statement made by one of my favorite presidents, Ronald Reagan, who said: "Are you better off now than you were (almost) 8 years ago"?
Carry on OT. Can't wait for all the spiffy rebuttals. TALLY HO!
Posted : November 27, 2015 7:02 pm
Novanut:
Umm... did you not read my post? Bill Bennet did not write the opinion you posted that is attributed to him. I even provided a link to a Fox News video of Bennet being interviewed in which he says he does not care to see Trump as POTUS.
I can see now why you find Trump appealing. Like so many in the conservative movement you choose to see the world selectively. If it supports your view, exploit it. If it contradicts your view, ignore it. If you can't ignore it, make up some new "facts" to refute it (John Kerry is a bona fide Viet Nam War hero. Barack Obama was born in the United States, and is not a Muslim-though his religion shouldn't matter ;)).
Trump is a tactless ringmaster, a bully. and a liar. HERE IS A LINK to an amusing article that illustrates my point: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/donald-trump/12015350/Donald-Trumps-river-of-blood-golf-course-claim-is-disputed-by-historians.html. Is this really the guy you want in charge? Where is the outrage at his twisting history to suit his agenda? His disrespect for soldiers from the North and South? And what does the Trump "family crest (Hold on, I have to vomit!)" have to do with the Civil War, or any American war for that matter?
Lastly (for the moment anyway,) please, please, please provide some support for this claim of yours and site just a few of the "many news outlets, left and right," with "positive views on Trump."
Posted : November 28, 2015 3:46 am
Novanut:
Umm... did you not read my post? Bill Bennet did not write the opinion you posted that is attributed to him. I even provided a link to a Fox News video of Bennet being interviewed in which he says he does not care to see Trump as POTUS.
I can see now why you find Trump appealing. Like so many in the conservative movement you choose to see the world selectively. If it supports your view, exploit it. If it contradicts your view, ignore it. If you can't ignore it, make up some new "facts" to refute it (John Kerry is a bona fide Viet Nam War hero. Barack Obama was born in the United States, and is not a Muslim-though his religion shouldn't matter ;)).
Trump is a tactless ringmaster, a bully. and a liar. HERE IS A LINK to an amusing article that illustrates my point: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/donald-trump/12015350/Donald-Trumps-river-of-blood-golf-course-claim-is-disputed-by-historians.html. Is this really the guy you want in charge? Where is the outrage at his twisting history to suit his agenda? His disrespect for soldiers from the North and South? And what does the Trump "family crest (Hold on, I have to vomit!)" have to do with the Civil War, or any American war for that matter?
Lastly (for the moment anyway,) please, please, please provide some support for this claim of yours and site just a few of the "many news outlets, left and right," with "positive views on Trump."
(tu)
The selectivity of views that match one's viewpoint has a name - confirmation bias. We're all guilty of it to some degree. But some take it to the extreme, and no amount of logic or factual information you can provide will change that.
There have been studies done that show that the brain function between those with conservative and liberal viewpoints is different, although nobody says that one is born one way or the other, as viewpoints change over time. So it takes a lot of reasoning over the long term to get someone to change their mind.
Here's one short article, but there are many more if you plug "conservative and liberal brains different" into your search engine:
Posted : November 28, 2015 10:03 am
1. Judging by your 'humble opinions', myself and many others are just a bunch loonies.
2. The many news outlets, left and right, must also be loony for their positive views on Trump, including Mr. Bennett, of course.
3. I just hope there are enough folks in the white suits and butterfly nets out there to contain all the loonies…
1. Glad you were easily able to understand my opinion. I deliberately used simple words sparingly.
2. Which "many"? Regional outlets of Fox?
3. I agree.
Posted : November 28, 2015 11:28 am
Topic starter
I haven't heard or read anything from Bennett in years - not since his "hypothetical" statement about aborting black babies to reduce crime. He was crazy then, and it appears he's nuttier than a fruitcake now.
This piece is filled with innuendo, logical and factual fallacy and specious arguments, that are too numerous to mention. But thanks for posting. It was an entertaining break.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Politics/story?id=1171385&page=1
As one loony to another I suggest you do a little more digging.
Posted : November 28, 2015 11:39 am
Topic starter
1. Glad you were easily able to understand my opinion. I deliberately used simple words sparingly.
2. Which "many"? Regional outlets of Fox?
3. I agree.Good morning OT! Happy you checked in.
1. I always enjoy simple words. Makes me feel like a BiG person.
2. How about this one? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
3. As one loony to another, don't let those nets mess up your bun. :}
Posted : November 28, 2015 12:00 pm
Topic starter
"Umm... did you not read my post? Bill Bennet did not write the opinion you posted that is attributed to him. I even provided a link to a Fox News video of Bennet being interviewed in which he says he does not care to see Trump as POTUS."
I always enjoy those that start replies with Ummmm. I know right off the bat this person is 'smart'. Much smarter than us loonies. You also didn't need to make your declaration of transparency. The moment you wrote Umm… I understood who you were...
But, to answer your question, yes, I found it most interesting. Even the Fox link. Especially the later statement that he would vote for Trump if he received the nomination. I guess you forgot to include that in your reply. No problem. Your declaration as well as your adjectives in describing Trump says it all…
"I can see now why you find Trump appealing. Like so many in the conservative movement you choose to see the world selectively. If it supports your view, exploit it. If it contradicts your view, ignore it. If you can't ignore it, make up some new "facts" to refute it (John Kerry is a bona fide Viet Nam War hero. Barack Obama was born in the United States, and is not a Muslim-though his religion shouldn't matter wink)."
What amazing vision you possess! I had no idea I was being so selective in my views of the world! If it weren't for these darned old red blinders I wear I could be just like you, right? - sorry: Correct? And it's comforting to finally understand the real facts on Kerry and Obama. To think I'd been wrong all these years. Just like thinking that the Clintons who are fine, upstanding politicians with only the country's best interests at heart. Why, they are even caring enough to start a foundation to help the poor, uninformed masses. Now that's compassion!
Your LINK to the telegraph was most entertaining. That mean old Trump making up stories about his golf courses and such. Shameful! That's why I am happy to realize I can keep my insurance policy. And that loony who put up that youtube video about muslims was the real reason for those folks in Libya were killed…
Here's a link you might find interesting: http://thehillarydaily.com …or not…
As to your requests for other links I will have to provide them a little later. I'm having lunch with Bill Bennett… Keep those cute smily faces coming! TTFN!
Posted : November 28, 2015 1:36 pm
Polling data is not positive views. Just proves this country is full of old angry white people who can be whipped up into a xenophobic frenzy by a neofascist
Posted : November 28, 2015 2:11 pm
Polling data is not positive views.
Nor accurate. Early polls are in fact historically statistically inaccurate where any final election result is concerned.
Posted : November 28, 2015 2:56 pm
I haven't heard or read anything from Bennett in years - not since his "hypothetical" statement about aborting black babies to reduce crime. He was crazy then, and it appears he's nuttier than a fruitcake now.
This piece is filled with innuendo, logical and factual fallacy and specious arguments, that are too numerous to mention. But thanks for posting. It was an entertaining break.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Politics/story?id=1171385&page=1
As one loony to another I suggest you do a little more digging.
Oh, I read that a long time ago, when it came out, and knew where it came from. His attempt to squirm out of it was lame. I lived in DC when Reagan was in office and Bennett was in his heyday. There were plenty more Bennettisms in the local news that formed my opinion of him.
Posted : November 28, 2015 3:12 pm
I haven't heard or read anything from Bennett in years - not since his "hypothetical" statement about aborting black babies to reduce crime. He was crazy then, and it appears he's nuttier than a fruitcake now.
This piece is filled with innuendo, logical and factual fallacy and specious arguments, that are too numerous to mention. But thanks for posting. It was an entertaining break.
It's kinda funny to see people mocking others arguements and being completely unaware that there are scholarly papers out there that tackle the abortion and the effect on crime rates
http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/
Posted : November 28, 2015 3:29 pm
It's more than kinda funny that anyone would even come up with a hypothesis correlating abortion to the crime rate. The fact that there are alleged "scholarly" papers out there on the subject begs the question of the nouveau interpretation of the world "scholar". But garbagemen all too quickly became "sanitation engineers" ...
Posted : November 28, 2015 4:01 pm
I haven't heard or read anything from Bennett in years - not since his "hypothetical" statement about aborting black babies to reduce crime. He was crazy then, and it appears he's nuttier than a fruitcake now.
This piece is filled with innuendo, logical and factual fallacy and specious arguments, that are too numerous to mention. But thanks for posting. It was an entertaining break.
It's kinda funny to see people mocking others arguements and being completely unaware that there are scholarly papers out there that tackle the abortion and the effect on crime rates
http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/
I'm quite aware that there are scholarly papers out there, and Freakonimics is just one of many. Their analysis may turn out to be correct, but they made some assumptions that are suspect. And among those scholarly papers, there is, as of yet, no clear consensus.
One of several assumptions, as an example, is that abortions prevented unwanted children, and those unwanted children would have committed more crime. Not proven. Another is that there were several other reforms taking place over time that were not given enough weight (or any at all), that could have had an effect on the economic and social positions of youth coming of age when the crime rate started going down.
Bennett jumped the gun without benefit of consensus, because Freakonomics, which has since been proven fallible on several occasions, was popular back then. And unfortunately, he used race as the example to prove his point.
Posted : November 28, 2015 4:32 pm
Novanut:
"But, to answer your question, yes, I found it most interesting. Even the Fox link. Especially the later statement that he would vote for Trump if he received the nomination. I guess you forgot to include that in your reply. No problem."
You got me! Clearly I omitted Bennet's intent to vote for the Republican nominee because I didn't think you'd catch it. :S Or maybe, because it was just Bennet saying he would support the Republican nominee because he saw pretty much any of the Republicans as a better choice than Hillary. *-) Not really what one would call an endorsement; sounds more like what he believes to be the lesser of two evils. 🙁
Seems to me your man Bennet doesn't like your candidate Trump very much. Safe to say he will not be voting for Donald should Trump stomp off and run a third party campaign. Or maybe you didn't see that Mr. Integrity said he won't honor the agreement he signed if HE doesn't feel the RNC is treating him "fairly."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-isnt-ruling-independent-run/story?id=35335721
Now there is a man worthy of admiration, who leads by example! Putting the good of the little people above his own. That's Trump. If you don't see an issue his way you're, stupid, a loser, or both. What a diplomat! Sorry, what a winner!
Now, I'm not sure what all the Clinton bashing is about. Deflect much? If so, your Trump is showing. I thought we were discussing the merits, or lack thereof, of candidate Trump, and by extension, how his extreme confirmation bias (thanks Watruw8ing4) is oft used Republican shtick. And, by the way, Nova, I don't think you are "loony," that is your word used repeatedly to describe yourself. So while I won't profess to understanding "who you were" based on a couple of thread posts, I'll confess to having my suspicions. A tragic hero the likes of "Joe the Plumber."
Lastly (for the moment anyway), still waiting for support for this claim of yours of the "many news outlets, left and right," with "positive views on Trump."
Posted : November 28, 2015 6:29 pm
Topic starter
redeyesadie,
Ummm, "You got me! Clearly I omitted Bennet's intent to vote for the Republican nominee because I didn't think you'd catch it."
That's the NY transparency I love… Maybe my 'loonyness' is a teensy bit better?
Lunch, by the way, was splendid. I shan't bore you with the details…
I promised some of those positives LINKS and I shall deliver, but not right at the moment. I have other fish to fry.
Thanks to all the 'humble opinions' about Bennett & Trump… Keep em' coming!
Posted : November 28, 2015 6:48 pm
Novanut:
What I wrote was: "You got me! Clearly I omitted Bennet's intent to vote for the Republican nominee because I didn't think you'd catch it." See sarcasm: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm.
Followed by: "Or maybe, because it was just Bennet saying he would support the Republican nominee because he saw pretty much any of the Republicans as a better choice than Hillary. Not really what one would call an endorsement; sounds more like what he believes to be the lesser of two evils." See truth: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/truth.
Clearly you are aware of sarcasm, "That's the NY transparency I love…" Even though you fail to acknowledge it, "Maybe my 'loonyness' is a teensy bit better?" Your problem seems to be with truth.
Glad you enjoyed lunch with Mr. Bennet. Do tell. I promise I shan't be bored.
Posted : November 28, 2015 8:08 pm
Page 1 / 2
Next
