Very, very quick one.
What was he thinking? The Pope, what was he thinking? OK, OK. I know his comments about Trump have been slightly misrepresented, he had a lot of qualifiers, and they were in response to a highly tendentious question by a typical sneering progressive "journalist." But . . . really?
First, full disclosure: I expressed mixed views about this Pope when he took office, and over time have begun to develop an increasingly negative view of him. I think he has revealed himself as a typical 1970s Latin American social justice warrior. I ran into those types, including priests, in my tours in Latin America, and found them tiresome, hypocritical, anti-American, and--ahem--insufferably Holier than Thou. Hypocritical? Yes. Many SJWs were foreigners; when the poop hit the fan, they relied on their foreign passports to get them out of town, leaving behind their local flocks to face the angry wolves. The Pope, likewise, reeked of hypocrisy when he implicitly criticized Trump for wanting to build a wall on our southern border to stem the tide of illegal migrants. The Pope, after all, lives behind massive walls, has an elaborate security apparatus, and commands jet planes and bulletproof vehicles for his safety and comfort. The Vatican, of course, is free to invite several thousand Central American migrants, including members of MS-13, along with thousands of "Syrian refugees" into the the confines of the Vatican and resettle them. Ain't gonna happen.
Back to the issue at hand. The Pope should not have answered the question as he did. He should have deflected it in any of many ways. Instead he got himself inserted into the US electoral process, all to the benefit of Donald Trump. The Donald is indeed a Lucky Man, and we all know what Napoleon had to say about that . . .
I suppose that with almost any Pope the question arises "Is the old boy going gaga?" Mind you, much the same question arises about Hellary.
ReplyDeleteThe College of Cardinals, for reasons no one has divined, elected this cretin. Nearly all recent popes have had theological doctorates or have put in time in the Holy See's diplomatic service. Francis is the exception on both counts and simply does not and cannot offer precisely worded observations on any topic. The evidence strongly suggests he wishes to ruin what's left of the Church's marriage canon, but received enough resistance to this plan among a synod of bishops he himself selected that he was forced to abandon the plan while lobbing words of resentment at various parties. He's let the misbehavior of some clerics slide and then been vindictively abusive to the Franciscan Friars. A bad man and a fool.
ReplyDeleteAdding to this Pope's problems is that growing up in Fascist Argentina did not help him acquire a very sophisticated understanding of a Free Market economy.
ReplyDeleteThe wanker reminds me of Barry Soetoro and anything that reminds me of Barry I file in the same cabinet as Slick Willy, Jimmy Carter, Hillary "Dodging Bullets" Clinton and Justin Trudeau.
DeleteArgentina was not a fascist state in 1947, it is not one now. It has never been one. They had a peculiarly abusive military regime during the period running from 1976 to 1979 which had a number of officers addled by anti-semitic conspirazoid thinking in its middle and lower ranks, but that's as close as they ever got to fascism. Francis was past 40 at the time.
DeleteHaving known Roman Catholics, liberal Protestants, and Evangelicals, it seems that self-righteousness and sanctimony, no matter what Hollywood tells you, is more strongly ensconced on the theological Left.
ReplyDeleteHave you looked in the mirror recently?
DeleteI did, quite impressive sight!
Delete- reader #1482
Having known Roman Catholics, liberal Protestants, and Evangelicals, it seems that self-righteousness and sanctimony, no matter what Hollywood tells you, is more strongly ensconced on the theological Left.
ReplyDeleteI wonder ...
ReplyDeleteHaving seen the press's inability to tell a straight story first hand, did the press actually, against the odds, get this story straight? Did the Pope actually know who was being discussed, or what the proposals were?
I've seen some reports that lead me to believe that an accurate tale involved no sales for the story.
Green Bear
The press often gets up in arms for what they *think* someone says. I'm similarly suspicious that what the press intends for pope fancypants to have said is actually what he did say... this is the same press expecting him to endorse gay marriage, and by the time he finally keels over, they will suddenly find themselves very surprised. Everything they *think* he says, points to it, but what he actually *does* say, doesn't.
DeleteSame kind of crap 'they' were pulling on Trump, fwiw.
- reader #1482
#1482 The press doesn't think, it feels.
DeleteWait: "what was he thinking?"
ReplyDeleteHe's from Argentina. You can't ask (or answer) that question.
The Pope reportedly said: “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the Gospel."
ReplyDeleteNo one seems to understand that the Pope was referring to those who think ONLY of building walls. Perhaps the hundreds of comments I have read today bashing the Catholic Church, and its head, should stop to read what was said and acknowledge the word "ONLY".
I am not a fan of Francis, but the vitriol that has been lobbed at Catholics, and their Church, by people who support Trump has been pure bile in print.
"Not surprisingly, Trump fired back. He immediately released a statement calling the Pope’s comments disgraceful, criticized him for questioning his faith, and suggested the Holy Father was acting as a pawn for Mexico."
What a vile man. If anyone is disgraceful, it is Donald Trump. And while his minions blather on about the walls around the Vatican, as if Trump does not employ security for his own home, and the wealth of the Catholic Church, I would ask: where are the Trump hospitals, Trump universities, Trump health care clinics and Trump homes for seniors, the very things that are provided by the Catholic Church all across the world?
So what should a faithful Catholic think about all this?
At times like this, it’s helpful to return to the Catechism. Here again is what the Church teaches on immigration:
2241 “The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”
But in the age of Trump, Catholic bashing now seems to be all the rage.
I hold no love or even, for the most part, respect for Trump, but he came out of this looking better than the pope did. Speaking as a lapsed Catholic who has moved into the ranks of the undecided, I believe Francis' comments were out of line, even when the full text of the exchange is read, not just the media's encapsulation of it.
DeleteIf Trump had voiced an opinion on this or that aspect of church doctrine, he would have been out of line, too. But he didn't. For a pope to pronounce judgment on a purely political matter, to the point of saying Trump's position is unChristian, is the type of religious interference in secular matters that free people rightly reject.
"Speaking as a lapsed Catholic who has moved into the ranks of the undecided, I believe Francis' comments were out of line, even when the full text of the exchange is read, not just the media's encapsulation of it."
DeleteWell, there you have it from a "lapsed" Catholic who is undecided, about what you did not say.
So Pope Francis was "out of line" but Trump's comments seem to resonate with you. Is the Pope not entitled to his opinion of Trump? Do you propose that we impose on the Pope rules that you would scream about if imposed on you (the cessation of your First Amendment rights)?
I do not apologize for the disgust I hold for Donald Trump. He is a bloviating bully.
Anonymous: You quote the Church's "teaching" re immigration. What blather. First, the CC bureaucracy has altered their "teachings" so many times through the ages and to such extent that it has little to do with the teachings of Jesus. You could start with the Council of Nicea if you like.
DeleteAs a reminder, it was Christ who said, "Render unto Ceasar the things that are Caesar's, and render unto God the things that are God's." Perhaps you might also want to remind Francis and the Vatican of this as well.
My background included twelve years in a Catholic school run by a wonderful order of independent, hard-working nuns and missionaries. I also witnessed throughout those years the fallout from the parish priest who, unknown to others then, abused altar boys. The most gifted of the nuns soon migrated out of the order but maintained their lives of service. Twenty years later, the priest was, like scores of others, unmasked as a prolific pedophile (over 200 counts) and embezzler of over $200K of archdiocese money. At the same time, one of my former classmates (a nun at one point) was also imprisoned in Nicaragua several years for her zealous activism. I think I have a balanced view of "the Church" (i.e. Roman Catholic, to be more precise) re its spiritual ideals vs. its "call to action" in the world.
This "bashing of Catholics" is something you seem to think is recent or tied to one candidate you have a personal animosity toward. Historically, that's a laughably myopic view. The Vatican long has been hated, even in contemporary times, by int'l organizations addressing over population problems due to its dogmatic proclamations on birth control. Making poor women believe that their souls will burn in Hell for all Eternity if they avail themselves of family planning is another of those dishonest "Christian" teachings. Speaking on behalf of Christ or God in many matters, isn't much different than the mandate ISIS lays claim to.
There is much to gain by the CC to get more Catholic immigrants into the US and to prevent the deportation of many illegal aliens here. Many of the latter have been shielded from US laws by churches, some providing sanctuary, as part of their activism, which calls into question the CC maintaining its church status in the US. Overall, the loss of welfare benefits to these followers would be considerable. Plus, the CC has suffered an exodus of followers to the evangelical faiths in part to the abuse scandals, so it needs to be seen as number one champion of "the poor." Of course, some of that poverty has been a result of years of its birth control mandates. Neither does it ever reprimand other countries as it does the US.
The vast amounts of money the CC has lost from lawsuits over priest abuse could have gone a long way to helping these foreigners. Instead of this, or selling off some Vatican treasures, the CC prefers to emulate St. Robin Hood and raid others' coffers.
I agree with Dip's lens on this Pope. The Church should put itself into its own confessional and focus on its own atonement, not stir up another Crusades with a SJW army.
Due to too many Anonymous responses, should have signed the above reply. Ms. Spotify will do.
DeleteMs. Spotify
@The Anonymous to whom I initially responded
DeleteI'm not about get into a weeing match, but in this case I'll take the chance since you seem to have taken a very Trumpian approach to the issue -- which is to say, aspersion-casting on matters that are more conducive to measured discussion.
Pope Francis has every right to say what he wants to say, and I'll never deny him that. I do, however, reserve the right to offer my opinion that he's out of line, especially given his stature and the nature of the office he holds. His First Amendment rights and mine are precisely equal (stipulating for the sake of discussion that he has such rights outside the United States). If your position is that "The pope said it, I believe it, and that settles it," then going any further with this isn't going to be productive.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that Trump is a bloviating bully. That, however, has nothing to do with the behavior of Francis, who threw the first figurative punch (albeit egged on by the reporter).
I might add that my religious faith has nothing to do with any of this. I mentioned that I was a lapsed Catholic as a matter of passing disclosure. Perhaps I should have been more precise by stating that I'm "unaffiliated," not "undecided," but it's interesting that you felt the need to insert a note of pursed-lipped innuendo into your response. Frankly, my sect-ual orientation is my business and no one else's.
Now please, unbunch your undies and enjoy the rest of the weekend.
"Pope Francis has every right to say what he wants to say, and I'll never deny him that. I do, however, reserve the right to offer my opinion that he's out of line, especially given his stature and the nature of the office he holds."
DeleteYes, you have a right to your opinion. I don't dispute that. But remember, when you bash the head of the largest faith in the world, you bash the faithful. Opinion is one thing, bashing is another.
" His First Amendment rights and mine are precisely equal (stipulating for the sake of discussion that he has such rights outside the United States)."
Those rights are granted by God, and only guaranteed by our Constitution.
"If your position is that "The pope said it, I believe it, and that settles it," then going any further with this isn't going to be productive."
When did I state that was my position? Oh, wait, I didn't. I am simply sick of the Catholic bashing I have been reading on [conservative] web sites for the last two days.
"it's interesting that you felt the need to insert a note of pursed-lipped innuendo into your response"
Please, tell me what kind of computer you own that allows you to see what condition my lips are in.
Zane
@Anonymous/Zane
DeleteWell, hello, Zane. Thank you for providing your name. That will make our exchange far more chummy.
Now I have to ask, only half-facetiously, how many times you flunked reading comprehension in school, because words and what they mean are the basis of effective communication, and it seems to be falling a little short here.
Let's take things in order, shall we? Let's begin.
1. I took issue with the pope. I disagreed with him. I did not "bash" him. There is a difference, a significant and meaningful difference, between expressing disagreement and bashing. Trust me, if I had truly bashed Francis, everyone would know it. It would have been unmistakable.
2. The distinction you made between God-given rights and constitutional First Amendment rights is a non-sequitur. The Constitution and the First Amendment may nominally derive their authority from the Almighty, but nowhere in the Bible, to my knowledge, is there a free-speech guarantee. And the First Amendment is enforceable only in the United States.
I
3. You didn't say "If the pope says it," etc. etc. Please read what I wrote one more time. I said "If your position is that..." I don't know whether that is your position, which is why I introduced it with a conditional clause.
4. There is a difference between literal speech and figurative speech, and a subset of the latter is sarcasm. If your screeds evoke the image of pursed-lippedness, it's fair to say so without imagining anyone would take the statement as literal fact.
This has gotten tiresome. My side of this weeing match is walking away from this now. There are hockey games to watch tonight. (At least when hockey players fight, they mean business. Well, sort of.)
The stage is yours, Zane, so have at it if you're so inclined. As for me, I'm out of this thread, effective.....now.
Predecessor-Anonymous,
ReplyDeletethe Pope's "only" is the thinnest of diplo-speak veneers to avoid complete disambiguation. It is completely evident to anybody not willfully in denial and whom he exclusively had in mind. Stop being disingenious and splitting hairs.
There is no broad vilification and bashing of Catholics, it's only this uncultured, uncouth "pope" who's getting some blowback.
The Argentine is a thorougly mediocre, shallow, animus-driven simpleton.
"the Pope's "only" is the thinnest of diplo-speak veneers to avoid complete disambiguation. It is completely evident to anybody not willfully in denial and whom he exclusively had in mind. Stop being disingenious and splitting hairs."
DeleteI'm not being disingenuous. The Pope has just as much right to his opinion re: Donald Trump as you do.
"There is no broad vilification and bashing of Catholics, it's only this uncultured, uncouth "pope" who's getting some blowback."
I suggest you read some of the comments just on conservative sites that have commented on this issue. The vitriol against Catholics is pervasive.
"The Argentine is a thorougly mediocre, shallow, animus-driven simpleton."
This, from a simpleton that can't seem to spell correctly 5th grade words.
"There is no broad vilification and bashing of Catholics, it's only this uncultured, uncouth "pope" who's getting some blowback.
DeleteThe Argentine is a thorougly mediocre, shallow, animus-driven simpleton."
But extremely dangerous all the same. I sometimes wonder if it is worse to have a deluded, simpleton running the show or a narcissistic control freak (Joe Stalin or Barry Soetoro for example) in charge.
I’m an Irish Catholic and am not in the least offended by the blowback this moron has brought upon himself just as I don’t judge America or Americans by the abhorrent “leadership” behaviour of Manchurian Candidate Barry Soetoro.
America remains the greatest nation in history and will rebound in time. To err is human and America erred greatly in not vetting Barry before allowing him on the ballot. Smart humans and by extension smart nations learn from their errors. I was taught as a child to vote “The Man” not the party but then I believe in Nationalism and despise multiculturism; particularly the islamic flavoured variety.
This Pope does not represent my Catholic values as neither does Barry Soetoro represent America’s founding values.
The Irishman.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSpeaking of Napoleon and Generals; What was his biggest criticism of his Generals?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: They all married when they were Corporals.
Well I guess this election cycle has it all: a Clown Candidate and a Clown Pope. What next?
ReplyDeleteWell, the anon clown commentator above does provide additional comic relief to the 'south of the border' circus! A big belly laugh of an apologist for PaPa and his afflicted flock! As for "Blather and Bloviating Bullies", you sir take the Blue Ribbon! ~~~On Watch~~~
ReplyDelete"Let's Roll"
He does so in violation of American law, but, what else is new?
ReplyDeleteSpeaking as a Protestant with Jewish ancestors and Chinese connections--
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I cannot help but chuckle at the responses to the Pope's comments which note the massive walls behind which the Pope lives. Why, they rival the walls of the Forbidden City itself, and probably for the same reasons: protection of accumulated treasure, mystique of power, dazzling the outsider, protection of extremely high privilege...
Both the Donald and the Jorge are entitled to their opinions. Frankly, my own take is that rather than build a wall, we need to police the border and enforce immigration law. I know enough Chinese history to know that a single Yue Fei without the benefit of the Great Wall was worth a thousand of the biggest and best Great Walls standing when there was no political will or integrity to defend it.
On the other hand, our host's criticism of the current Pope seems spot on. I'm not the student of Latin American history and culture that the Dip is, but I knew a number of "Mainline" Protestant and radical Roman Catholic missionaries while I was living in Taiwan (as a teacher, not an FSO) during the late 1970's and the 1980's, all of whom exhibited not only the unctuous sanctimony which Mr. Dip criticizes, but also a disgusting and uncritical worship of the Communist Moloch.
This being said, my own take on MVH (Male Vanity Hairdo) and his faith is that I wince when he says he's never asked God for forgiveness. Don't the Mainliners use the Lord's Prayer, or numerous of the Pslams, anymore? Trump's attitude seems to reflect a guy who read too much Hemingway when young--you know, that great American writer of monosyllables who was a willing Communist dupe several times over and ended up spraying his brains all over his study with his shotgun.
I'm guessing that's not followed up with: "... because I know I've been forgiven and to ask for it again is to question the atoning sacrifice."? :)
DeleteBut indeed no, Big Donald doesn't *seem* to me any more xian than Obama.
Maybe Mr. Trump spouts a few less lies or mistruths, but that's not the heart of the matter.
- reader #1482
I beg to differ. Francis, as Pope, does not have the luxury of shooting off his mouth at will. Not only is it unseemly, that isn’t his role. If he doesn’t like that constraint he should never have accepted the “calling” and instead been content to be just Jose Q Cardinal. Every reservation and concern I had in the first minute after hearing his name announced as the new Pope (Jesuit, South American) has come to fruition. Francis cherry picks his outrage du jour. Late term abortions in the US, no biggie. Christians murdered in the Middle East, no biggie. Christian monasteries destroyed by ISIS, no biggie. His buddy Castro’s political adversaries imprisoned, no biggie. Refugees in Europe herded into tents and camps because there is no earthly way to house all these people, no biggie. Mexico holding hard and fast to THEIR borders, no biggie. Corrupt South American governments, no biggie. But wait, stop the presses and let’s focus on the evil United States and a presidential candidate who wants to maintain borders and national sovereignty, A BIG DEAL.
ReplyDeleteLet’s face it; Francis is no intellectual as his two predecessors were. It’s a disappointment loop with him installed at St. Peter’s. Hearing him speak is like listening to your great-uncle yammer on about his buddies down at the tavern. He is completely uninspiring on matters of faith (not that there is much talk of faith) and forgot the remit on this job is to save souls not lecture us on the wonderfulness of socialism. Little surprise he and Skeeter (Obama) are such fast friends. Small minds beget small thoughts.
I was caught in another eye roll cringe that once again there was egg on Francis’ face in his latest poorly worded spew that had to be explained away by Vatican toadies. I’m Catholic so I am resigned that this episode won’t be the last disappointment with this lightweight. Someone should school this mush mind on how to pivot from questions he needs to avoid. It’s really just an average skill. Wait, on second thought, that skill would be a stretch for him.
Speaking of pivot, can someone lay out the timeline when wanting one’s country to have borders became a radical concept relegated to the fringe element? I missed the memo.
"I beg to differ. Francis, as Pope, does not have the luxury of shooting off his mouth at will. Not only is it unseemly, that isn’t his role."
DeleteExcuse me if I don't share you "Know your place, boy!" attitude.
"I’m Catholic so I am resigned that this episode won’t be the last disappointment with this lightweight."
Yet, you seem to relish presenting us with your laundry list of what you imagine to be your grievances against this Pope.
Do I wish that Pope Francis would stick to the religious and not the political? Certainly. Do I honor his right to say what he wishes? Certainly. Clearly you seem to think that his right of free speech should be curtailed in a manner approved by you. Perhaps you should re-read our Constitution. The right of free speech is not granted by the Constitution, only guaranteed by it.
The Church has known other Popes that were less than desirable, just as our nation has known Presidents that were less than desirable. When Obama makes a stupid statement (with regularity) do you then make a laundry list of the things you think are wrong with the nation?
Zane
Which of you that want to bash the temporary head of the Catholic Church, has not been touched by the Church itself? Ever been treated at a Catholic hospital? Ever had a senior relative that was cared for by a Catholic charity?
I'm not going to pile on this Pope. He is in fact doing what every parish priest endeavors to do: to encourage his flock to be kind to their fellow man, to help those less fortunate, and in general to try to emulate Christ in their daily lives.
ReplyDeleteIn fact I'm pleased that this Pope is not a theological heavyweight, prone to pondering esoteric points of theology as his predecessor was.
He has made real progress at clearing out some of the deadwood in the Vatican bureaucracy, moderating the hubris of the Curia, and trying to bring some semblance of modernity into the financial affairs of the church. It is a slow process.
I agree that he overstepped his bounds in this case, by commenting on political events in a country which he understands so poorly. On this matter he is in conflict with his own church: Catechism 2241 discusses the role of governments and immigration, and it is closer to Trump than to Francis. (can be downloaded from Vatican website).
This is beyond his mandate as Pope, and we Catholics can in good faith criticize him for it.
Graham
For those who are more interested in truth than sound bites:
ReplyDeletehttp://video.foxnews.com/v/4763232704001/bill-donahue-on-unfortunate-exchange-between-pope-trump/?
since the American Head of State routinely interferes in the domestic politics of foreign lands.
ReplyDeleteDefine 'interferes'
Trump apparently started this by claiming that the Pope was working for the Mexican government. This is absurd, as I doubt the Mexican government can afford Francis, and if they could, it probably wouldn't be worth the cost.
ReplyDeleteThen that journalist asked the Pope for a response, and he made the statement. Part of which is responding to the claims about Trump's statements made by the journalist.
Our media always misinterprets the current Pope's statements in the most incompetent and risible manner possible.
A denomination usually isn't considered responsible for the crimes of its lay members, so long as it isn't encouraging, endorsing or organizing such crimes. Some of the Catholic clergy is involved in immigration crimes, hence also enabling slavery and rape. However, the Catholic Church is a large organization, and doesn't necessarily exercise complete control over the priesthood. When the head of the organization makes statements in favor of those crimes, it creates the appearance of conspiracy. It is unwise for the Pope to make careless statements on this matter, as they open a can of worms that everyone who isn't a secularist or a Muslim wants kept shut. Especially as he is also a foreign head of state.
Trump is a blowhard and an ass. Him being that doesn't hurt his prospects. Rubio is a Catholic. When Trump trolls the Pope, the Pope responding potentially puts Rubio in a bind.
Anti-Democrat
"I'm not being disingenuous. The Pope has just as much right to his opinion re: Donald Trump as you do. "
ReplyDeleteYes and he should also have enough judgement to know when to keep his peace. My impression of this Pope is that he would be comfortable joining his Jesuit colleagues in the Sandinista Regime in Nicaragua.
Trump is crude but the Pope did himself nor the Church no good with his ill-considered broad side. The Catholic Church has been far too concerned with illegal aliens the past 50 years, at least in California where I stopped contributing money.
"Yes and he should also have enough judgement to know when to keep his peace. My impression of this Pope is that he would be comfortable joining his Jesuit colleagues in the Sandinista Regime in Nicaragua."
DeleteYour impression? So now your impression is gospel? You think the Pope has no right to defend himself against the accusations lobbed by a man who admits he has few morals (like sleeping with married women while he himself was married?)
Yes, Trump is crude. Too crude to be president of the most powerful nation on the face of the earth. Yet, I notice you don't bash on Trump, only the Catholic Church. Nor did you comment on the video I produced so that you could get not only the question asked of Pope Francis but his entire response, not just the 30 second sound bite you are hanging your "impression" on.
You seem to be just as ill informed as the rest of the Trump supporters are.
Zane
"Trump is a blowhard and an ass."
ReplyDeleteNah, that's just the default public personality of most New Yawkers! Underneath that crusty patina often resides the heart of Crusader if not a Christian Soldier. . . It comes with the territory and a big dose of Free Will!
"Him being that doesn't hurt his prospects." Concur with that, moreover, some of his Congressional Testimony on U-tube might provide his empty-barrel critics with a more in depth comprehension of his powers of persuasion, and some of his other talents!
"Rubio is a Catholic." Maybe he really is? But, unfortunately, he too, like the Pope often speaks with forked tongue. . .
"When Trump trolls the Pope," Who's Trolling who?
"the Pope responding potentially puts Rubio in a bind."
From here in Florida it looks more like Marco short-sheeted himself -- and then invited a cadre of illegal alien supporters foreign and domestic to crawl into bed with him! For that I no longer "Stand with Marco" even when he wears his high heals! :)
Personally, I still can't decide between Ted and the Donald, I'm hoping they choose to bury the hatchet, and Pres. Trump deals with Peeps and the Younger VP Cruz steers the 'ship of state' through the legal minefield that the Progressives have scattered across America's track! If they play it right they could accomplish great things in sixteen years! Perhaps then I can stop worrying about my kids future?
~~~On Watch~~~
"Let's Roll"
I've long suspected that Trump was a Democrat.
DeleteThink back to '92. Remember Ross Perot? In hindsight, it would have been in character for the Clintons to have incited him. They would have had the connections to do so, as they were the Arkie Democrat mafia, and could have contacted him via the Texan Democrat mafia.
The Clintons also had connections with Donald Trump.
Trump's comment in the SC GOP debate have me fairly confident that he is a 911 Truther, which would again would place him with the Democrats.
I will not vote for a Democrat.
Anti-Democrat
"The Clintons also had connections with Donald Trump."
ReplyDeleteSlather him with what you will Anon, Trump's beginning to look like a cinch to take the GOP nomination, and when compared to Uncle Bernie or Comrade Shrillary he becomes the obvious 'Peoples Choice' for CinC, "Anti-Democrats" notwithstanding. "Happy Days are Here Again" :)
My biggest concern tho, is that Cruz may be mortally wounded by this dual citizenship chimera, and Rubio will thus become the token Hispanic half of the 2016 team. . .
http://www.conservativehq.com/sites/default/files/160121TrumpandClintons.jpg
~~~On Watch~~~
"Let's Roll"
HOLD THE PHONE
ReplyDeleteTHIS JUST IN!!
"BECK FASTING FOR CRUZ"
My "concern" obviously was premature ;)
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/21/glenn-beck-responds-to-sc-primary-results-join-me-in-a-fast-for-ted-cruz/
"Let's Roll"
A little late to the thread, but there was a surreal aspect to the discussion, with Trump supporters claiming that the wall was a symbol of the pope’s hypocrisy, and Pope supporters and supporters of illegal immigration insisting that the wall simply doesn’t exist.
ReplyDeletePonder that for a moment: The wall around 70% of the Vatican DOES NOT EXIST because it would weaken their argument to recognize that it has been there for nearly 1,000 years.
That's the internet opinion hive for ya!
(PS, I was there decades ago. The wall is long enough we took a cab to get around to the open, St Peter's Square side.)