Cutting Through The Crap

Thursday, April 14, 2011

It's Official



The man who changes wives as often as he visits bankruptcy court, an egomaniacal real-estate baron whose main claim to political fame is the jumping onto the birther bandwagon like Hugh Hefner into a pile of Viagra, when even Ann Coulter -- Ann Coulter!!! -- thinks birtherism is bullshit (although she also lies about it, setting the tone, no doubt, for future disinformation campaigns), that guy now tops polls of Republicans -- and not just teabaggRs -- in presidential preferences. He, and a carefully affable but hate-filled religious zealot.

From nowhere, recognizing opportunity in the craziness of Republican majorities believing Obama is Kenyan and going for it like a tween girl to a Justin Bieber (whose hair he'd take if he could) concert, Donald Frigging Trump, famous for being occasionally rich and always famous, having flipped like a fish named Mitt to pander on every social issue, seeking stroking like Sarah, with the opposite of credibility on any subject you'd like to mention, is the favorite of the party that claims seriousness. Number one. Numero uno. رقم واحد.

And with that simple fact, everything I've been saying about the stupidity and unseriousness and dishonesty and gullibility and shallow thinking and hypocrisy of the current iteration of the Republican party is verified, substantiated, vindicated, validated, affirmed, redoubled, stamped indelibly and undeniably, confirmed without prejudice, to be one-hundred percent, decidedly, clearly, completely, entirely, altogether, downright, wholly, thoroughly, utterly, unreservedly, unconditionally and most sincerely ... true.

True.

TRUE.

TRUE!!!

[In fairness, here's a contrary take, from this point of view. I'd say it reinforces my point.]

[[Update, 4/15: now he's the clear leader. Because, perhaps, and according to a commenter below, he "speaks out." Doesn't matter, evidently, that what he says is bullshit. All it takes to get the attention of teabaggers is to talk really loud.]]


15 comments:

SeaSpray said...

I doubt he'd pull a Lewinski in the White House. ;)

I would vote for him because I just love the Celebrity Apprentice show - on 2 hrs every Sunday night right now! And I would vote for him because he has done such a good job with his children. Do I need any other reason?

Okay b--r-e-a-t-h-e now Dr S ...I'm teasing you. ;)

I am an absolute groupie of the show tho. I never used to care for him much. I felt he was full of himself and I don't respect people that behave that way.

However, because I love the Celebrity Apprentice show, he has grown on me. It was the earlier shows in which he would show off his possessions and tell the contestants in the (regular) apprentice ..it could all be theirs. Now ..there isn't anything wrong with setting goals, striving for and achieving success, but it just seemed so showy. Perhaps for the show. I love the show because of the competition and creativity and wish I could be in the mix with them. :)

I would never think he could be picked up by the evangelicals because I thought he cheated on wives (I really don't know his history tho ..just vague gossip)and saw him on the 700 club the other day and he seemed to be embraced. I am an evangelical Christian and I would not hold a candidate's past against them *IF* they straightened up their life ...because *we all* make mistakes. I still like Rudi Juliani (cheated on wife too)and have no doubt he could still take care of NY if needed. He certainly cleaned it up on his watch. Besides ..I am pretty sure ...you and most people gave Clinton a pass for the *Lewinskies* in the white House.

All that being said, I am beginning to pay attention to him politically. He is refreshing because he says what he really thinks. He is NOT afraid and not a panderer. I DO wish he'd drop the birth certificate thing as that is only giving ammo to the opponents. I don't get it. A-n-d ...even if he is right ...then what? Remove our president and Biden and Pelosi take over? That would hurt our country so much! He is intelligent and I can't help but wonder why ..unless he is using it for traction to increase publicity. I adamantly disagree with his position on it.

I saw Coulter the other nite. She wants Chris Christie. He is appealing. Although teachers l-o-a-t-h-e him.

SeaSpray said...

The appeal for many people is he is speaking out against the financial debacles, OPEC and weakness of our country. He is decisive, bold, and wants to see America strong and respected again. he wants jobs kept and brought back to this country. You can take issue whether these are valid concerns, but I believe given the financial climate across this country and the public's awareness of how BOTH parties spend recklessly and the perception that we are weakening as a world presence ...people are hungry for someone to come on the scene who will not care about reelection, but genuinely just want to do their best (regardless of popularity/keeping their job)to rebuild America. He is educated and savvy with finance. He is certainly trained in business and has held responsible positions. He works hard. he does bring a lot to the office. But ..is he a diplomat? Will he listen and compromise. Every president seems to think they will change things (GITMO), etc. and then end up keeping with the status quo set by previous administrations. Words come easy ...but actions not so easily carried out...regardless of political orientations. I would think he can compromise ..because his entire career is making deals.

He would certainly go in with more life experience than President Obama began with.

Interestingly he has never had one drop of alcohol, drugs or smoked. He said it was because his older brother told him never drink, never smoke and he didn't. his brother died because of alcoholism. He told his kids the same.

I will say ...he and their Mother have done an EXCELLENT job in raising their now adult children ..raised to be responsible ..had to be educated and in seeing them on show ..they do seem to be incredibly business savvy and responsible people. (Not a reason to vote for him - just nice to see they aren't Paris Hilton types)

I don't think he would stand a chance in election years of the past ...but because of the economy and perceived decreasing American presence in the world ...he has a serious shot at it.

Chris Christie would as well. (He is pro choice)People either love or hate him. Again ..no nonsense ..outspoken ..follows through with his agenda he ran on. He says he's not running and doing what he set out to do in NJ.

I hope they both get in the game. It would be most interesting.

SeaSpray said...

Dr S, a while back you asked what the Tea party people stand for. I never thought about it like that. I've just seen them as people who recognized that they no longer trust either party to do what they are voted into office to do. I never paid attention to pork spending, etc., and when I heard they did not even read the health care bill I saw red. I will stop myself here because I would go on and on ...I could NOT believe it. That angered many people. There has been a growing distrust of politicians. I think in the past ...people were apathetic and so Washington politicians maintained the status quo. But things have gotten so bad and perhaps because of increased public awareness because of instant news anytime - they are rising up. The tea party is comprised of dems, reps, and people of all ages and diverse backgrounds. It is people uniting wanting politicians to work for the good of the people and the country and not for their own reelections. Maybe I am wrong, but that is my perception.

So, people find politicians like Christie and other outspoken politicians refreshing. They are tired ..weary and mistrusting of establishment politicians. I think that these mavericks (right or wrong) have a serious shot at at getting elected. Romney, Huckabee, etc. do n-o-t-h-i-n-g for me. They feel like the same old, same old. It's got to get stirred up. Putting Trump or Christie in may force the others on both sides to stand up for what they really believe. Or ..they could play the game, i.e., lie and pander and then go back to business as usual when elected.

I do think Trump should be in a position in which he could be instrumental in financial/business decisions ..trade, etc. Not that he would want that.

He comes across strong and no nonsense. Our current president does not.

On a lighter note ...if he runs ...SNL will have a field day. :)

*Please note that I am not saying I will vote for these people, but wholeheartedly believe we need a strong leader who will not bow down to the status quo of politics as usual... to save their own skin.

Again ...people are fed up with both parties. Many reps and independents are turning against the old guard republicans. I don't think the dems are happy either and is reason they have embraced the tea partiers.

I also think the press has carried Obama. I am sure he is a good man, and great in academic circles ...but I still believe that at this point in time ...he is not Presidential material. Of course ..then there was McCain. I was not happy with the candidates in 08, but do think McCain at least had experience. And yes ..you can make the argument experience to perpetuate the wrong agenda, but I also think he would've been perceived as a stronger president. Then of course ...with the economy and spending ..perhaps no president would fair well at this time in history.

I am sorry about the length of these comments.

Sid Schwab said...

It's not the length, it's the content.

I rest my case.

Sid Schwab said...

Okay, that was a little rude. Fact is, though, that you've really confirmed my point: you claim Trump is qualified because he speaks out. You say he doesn't pander, when he's flipped 180º on all social issues, not to mention the birther thing. That's like saying you like Frank Sinatra because he doesn't sing.

And you claim teabaggers don't like either party, when they're funded, packaged, and delivered by Republican lobbyists and backers, and, in poll after poll, they line up entirely with the farthest right wing of the R party.

And you didn't answer what they DO stand for. Being upset isn't an answer.

Pieter B said...

After reading that, like this guy, I'm speechless.

Sid Schwab said...

Amusingly, I have that video scheduled for posting later today.

Anonymous said...

I doubt he'd pull a Lewinski in the White House. ;)

Can we have a rule that anyone who is still going on about that has to get a tattoo on her forehead that reads:
I am such a boring lay that I actually care about a BJ that happened more than a decade ago and did not involve me as a participant.
?

Molly, NYC

SeaSpray said...

"I am such a boring lay that I actually care about a BJ that happened more than a decade ago and did not involve me as a participant.
?
"
Ha ha! Seriously Molly? LOL! What do YOU have against BJs? Apparently you are given to projecting your own concerns onto others ..since you know nothing about me. From the way you write all uptight and snarly, it seems YOU need to LIGHTEN up a bit ..gee!

It was a ....get ready .....get ready ...here it comes .....coming ...brace yourself Molly ...it-was-a...*JOKE!* Boy ..that felt good to explain! :) There isn't an adult in the country who wouldn't remember *the Lewinsky* every time they see him. Mr SeaSpray liked him even more after that. :) Btw, I liked and STILL like President Clinton and wish HE was still president over this one. Obviously ..there is a time and a place for that in appropriate circumstances. Even Chris Matthews came down on him for being so stupid. JOkE MOlly - JOKE! Teasing ..Dr s.
************************
Trump doesn't have my vote. I'm just enjoying what he is saying while the wind blows on his wet finger in this direction - strength, recovery stuff. He will have to prove himself. All I am saying is it is so refreshing to hear Chris Christie and the like care more about doing their jobs for the good of the country/people over getting reelected. People are fed up with both reps and dems who keep doing the same old, same old.

I do not TRUST trump based on things he has said in the past and donations. I do appreciate hearing some of his ideas about OPEC,China and jobs and military. (He does know business and has EXPERIENCE) But,is he really just pandering and then will reverse? And being diplomatic with other countries vs autocratic in the board room ..I wonder. ?

My point in responding to this post (aside from totally procrastinating on doing our taxes, receipts and all that), is to point out what the draw to him and others might be.
**********
Peter B - That was good. Point taken. I adamantly disagree with the health care point tho. That new bill is a debacle. They did not read it and forced it through without regard to immediate and long term consequence. The system needed change, but should have opened up market for competition, and taken sections to work on. Also, NO PORK. Skateboard parks, do NOT give money to health care for helping the uninsured.

But, the NOT even READING it ..yet signing it into law affecting all of us for years to come? ANY politician ..and I mean any that is that irresponsible passing things they DON'T know the content of or understand should not be in that office. Sorry off track, but responding to the video. I agree about the jobs ..just not the health care at all.

P.S. Sorry MOLLY - TATS just aren't my thang!

I look forward to Celebrity Apprentice tomorrow night at 9-11 pm est. Love the creativity and competirtion. And a treat to see the charities get their large donations. :)

And now I-have-to-do-the-taxes. :(

Sid Schwab said...

See, here's the thing, Seaspray: while you parrot the Foxobeckian talking points (which, despite your protestations to the contrary, you do), how about actually saying what you don't like about the health care plan, other than the fact that "they" didn't read it. (Care to guess how many of "them" read Bush's medicare bill, or Ryan's budget?) Which things don't you like? Letting kids stay on their parents' plans? Eliminating exclusions for pre-existing conditions? Eliminating life-time limits? Or is it that it allows and encourages states to explore their own ideas?

While you're at it, explain how keeping health care in the hands of insurance companies does NOT allow competition. As opposed, say, to the public option, had that been included...

And when you say DO NOT give money to help the uninsured, are you saying we should continue to be the only industrialized nation that doesn't care about its poor? Is that the regular Christian, or the evangelical part? Enlighten me.

Finally. It's fine to say you don't like Obama. Many don't. But how about specifying what you don't like. And try to come up with something other than being a socialist, which he isn't (or, if you think he is, give examples.)

SeaSpray said...

Dr S - when it comes to parroting ...if the beak fits ...

I am teasing again. ;) It's just that you also predictably parrot the same old foxbeckian mantra. Just depends which ears you hear with I guess. But you clearly misunderstood my point when you wrote this, "And when you say DO NOT give money to help the uninsured, are you saying we should continue to be the only industrialized nation that doesn't care about its poor? Is that the regular Christian, or the evangelical part? Enlighten me."

Okay ..Dr S,I shall "enlighten" you. :)I said, "Also, NO PORK. Skateboard parks, do NOT give money to health care for helping the uninsured." Meaning,padding the bill with porkulous extras to by votes, etc., sends money off to skateboard parks instead of helping the sick/injured uninsured people. All money raised should go to the people the bill was actually intended for and not non medical fluff.

I would n-e-v-e-r say "DO NOT give money to help the uninsured," or "we should continue to be the only industrialized nation that doesn't care about its poor?"

Christian or not,we have a responsibility to help the poor. I would never ever think otherwise. I told you about my background a long time ago. I know first hand what it is like to be cold and hungry (when a young teenager), and to be the beneficiary of someone's kindness, etc. I learned compassion because of those times. It's one thing to talk about the poor, but entirely another when you've been through it. So, I am a firm believer in helping others. That does not mean I have to agree with every program or think there shouldn't be accountability.

Yes,there are some good things,but also they lied about the numbers when giving estimated cost. Nothing is free. I am extremely concerned about ending up with a lesser quality of care without easy and timely access to treatment, etc. or that funding won't be there for research or that treatments will be denied because of cost and age, etc. You can read about these things in so many places that have nothing to do with FOX. Dr S ..you know that just because a person has some kind of insurance, does not mean they will have doctors or care. Ever read Dr WhiteCoat's and other comments in his ED blog)that have nothing to do with FOX when this bill was passed? Or even stories from the UK? Etc., etc.,

And I said NO ONE deserves to be in that position if they don't read what they pass. The public got an eyeopener on that one. And they voted accordingly. And will in 2012.

SeaSpray said...

If they opened up purchasing insurance across state lines, it would force more competitive prices. Our ins actually comes out of the MIDWEST ..but we have a government ins. Like anything ..they better prices with better services offered to draw the customer in. One blogging doc thinks patients need to get their own skin in the game, give them the money to shop for the best rates on tests, physicians, hospitals, etc., because there can be a vast difference in cost. I don't recall all of it now.

We are fortunate, in that right now ..we have an excellent ins plan. But, it is just so wrong when some entry level ins employee can deny necessary tests ordered by the physician or that a surgeon (blogging urodoc) can have a surgery pre-approved and then the same ins company denies the claim after the surgery, even tho they approved it in the first place and then cause that same surgeon to go thru 2 more appeals in 6 mos before he is rightfully reimbursed. Just plain wrong. In one of our elevators at the hospital, someone wrote across the top inside door - HMOs SUCK!

I don't give ins companies a pass. My point was they could've begun tackling the most important problems first. Neither of us have the time and not enough space if you want me to systematically list all the things I think were wrong with how they pushed it through and my concerns for the future because they did.

I never one time even thought of the word socialist until reading what you wrote. That's funny. What do I consistently have to say in here? Stop generalizing. Conservatives are not cookie cutter people and we do not all look/sound the same.

Oh ..when you apologized for being rude earlier in comments ..I didn't think you were ..but thank you. :)

Sid Schwab said...

Very unconvincing -- and minor, compared to the entire bill -- quibbles. And you keep harping on the "not reading" concept. Isn't the content more important? It's a Foxobeckian complaint. Was the product good, overall, or not? Your objection -- crossing state lines -- represents a pretty small part of the whole. Not only that, it's not as simple as you make it. Fact is, many think it would lead to less competitive policies. Read this. Or this.

See, the thing is, not everything you hear on Fox "news" is accurate. And whereas you accuse me of parroting a certain line, how about showing me where I don't back it up with fact. Like the preceding.

And, okay, you don't think he's a socialist. What are your complaints about Obama? Which policies, and why?

Pieter B said...

It was a ....get ready .....get ready ...here it comes .....coming ...brace yourself Molly …it-was-a…*JOKE!*

No, it wasn't. Jokes are funny.

(He does know business and has EXPERIENCE)

His casino business went bankrupt three times. How TF do you go bankrupt running a friggin' casino?

Sid Schwab said...

Right. What he doesknow is how to manipulate bankruptcy law to steal money from those to whom he owes it. The opposite of taking responsibility; the opposite of ethical behavior. The perfect icon, in other words, of teabaggers.