Donald Trump loves to say that his business experience qualifies him to be President. But his business experience has mostly been failures and bankruptcies, and he inherited money from his father, which gave him an unfair advantage, compared to 99 percent of Americans, and he set out to take advantage of every legal trick and method of manipulation to enrich himself at the expense of others, including often not paying his bills.
We have had only one businessman, Herbert Hoover, as President, and he became a total disaster after he was elected in 1928. But he was not born to wealth, was orphaned before age 10,and accomplished his great business career with his own efforts and intellect, and became a multimillionaire in the mining industry by age 40, and then devoted himself to public service.
But the difference between Trump and Hoover is that Hoover served many years in government, working for Democrat Woodrow Wilson, and Republicans Warren G. Harding and Herbert Hoover, before he ran for President.
He had never been elected to anything, but he had been an extremely successful and outstanding figure in the First World War effort, and served eight significant years as Secretary of Commerce. Hoover stands out as one of the small group of really exceptional cabinet officers, which usually includes other agencies, such as the State Department, the Treasury Department, the Justice Department, and the Defense Department as the major areas where notable cabinet members serve a President.
Unfortunately, he had no ability to overcome the Great Depression that began in October 1929, as he was tied to a laissez faire political philosophy, and did not know how to gain backing in Congress. He was also a poor communicator, who was unable to inspire the American people with his public speeches and radio addresses. Hoover’s personality was very introverted, and he did not inspire confidence. So his business background failed him when it mattered, as President of the United States.
One can be sure that if Hoover was alive today, he would be shocked and stunned at a con artist, Donald Trump, who has had four bankruptcies, and has no understanding of government or world affairs, would have the gall to think he was qualified to lead America in the 21st century.
The last time we had a businessman with protectionist and interventionist policies the results were disastrous. Trump aspires to be a 21st-century Hoover, with a modernized platform of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff, which collapsed the banking system and helped send the U.S. and the world economy into a decade-long depression.
With the mass shooting in Florida being terrorism, I recommend seeing the CNN special, “Why They Hate Us”, the next time it’s aired. Fareed Zakaria, host of CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS”, gives an in depth examination into Middle Eastern terrorism.
Here is an excerpt of what is mentioned in the special, which explains that it’s about politics, not theology.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/08/opinions/why-they-hate-us-zakaria/
Thanks for that, Pragmatic. I’ll be sure to check it out next time it comes on.
I also thank you for letting us know about that, Pragmatic.
On economics, we’ll always disagree with our dumb troll. Capitalism requires government. http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=13
Capitalism requires the rule of law and a rule of law requires limited government not unlimited government. The problem with the left is not that they believe in government and we don’t (that’s nonsense, without government there would be no rule of law, there would be anarchy), it’s that they believe in unlimited government when it comes to economical issues. Thus the problem we have with the left is not on the existence of government but that on economic issue the left truly believes government power is unlimited. There are no limits the left is willing to accept because there will always be an “unfair” situation which according to the left will always require government intervention. And since life is inherently unfair, government must not be limited in its efforts to correct this “cosmic” injustice.
Mercy, not everyone is fortunate in life like you are, so it is easy to pontificate when you have a “good life” and do not care about those less fortunate or less lucky than you are!
There we go again. You do not know anything about my life so why do you judge? This is a typical tactic of the left, attack those who don’t share their solutions to problems by attacking their character. Like for example not caring for the less fortunate. That way issues are never debates because of course one doesn’t debate with a selfish SOB.
The link Leia posted is absolutely correct. Mercy’s ranting is absolutely incorrect.
And here (http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=13 ) thanks to Princess Leia we have another misrepresentation by the left. Let’s just look at the opening paragraph.
“One of the most common and misleading economic myths in the United States is the idea that the free market is “natural†– that it exists in some natural world, separate from government. In this view, government rules and regulations only “interfere†with the natural beneficial workings of the market. Even the term “free market†implies that it can exist free from government and that it prospers best when government leaves it alone.”
I believe I wrote this : “The problem with the left is not that they believe in government and we don’t (that’s nonsense, without government there would be no rule of law, there would be anarchy)” In other words, without government there would be no Courts to protect private property rights, (a natural right that pre-existed government). So it is a fallacy of the left to say or believe that conservatives are for anarchy, that the market can exist without government. That is ridiculous. One of the fundamentals of a free markets is the ability to freely contract with others, if there were no government where would people go to enforce their contractual rights if the contract was breach? So you see the existence of government is not the issue. Simply put we believe in traffic laws and rules, otherwise traffic would be chaotic. But the left believes traffic laws are not enough, government must control how and where we drive. They must control every turn break and stop, They distrust of drivers deciding freely, but respecting the rules, where to go. The left nirvana would be automated cars where a central authority or programmers not only regulate traffic with rules but specifically manages every car in the street. That’s the difference. We believe in traffic rules and laws, but we also believe people should be able to drive to their destination as they wish as long as the obey the rules. If the break the rules, then we have the cops and courts to enforce them. So this entire link is based on a false premise. They should be arguing with anarchist, if they find any,
Nope. Our dumb troll is incorrect again. The link is NOT misinterpreting anything.
I’ve heard from Rational Lefty. She has informed me that she will no longer be participating here. She’s sick and tired of putting up with our dumb troll.
How sad and intolerant of her. It is truly unbelievable. This person seems so blinded by hate towards conservatives that I realize she hardly ever reads carefully what I post, she just assumes my positions and actually seems to hate me for them without even knowing who I am. It is such a shame. I truly extend my hand out in virtual cyber tolerance. Hope she accepts.
Absolutely right, Former Republican! The website is based on factual research and also experiences that many of us have encountered. Just like the author of the website, I also have seen the damage done in my own community when taxes have been slashed and programs cut back.
She’s not the intolerant one here.
I just wish to say that I never called anyone her dumb. Yet I have been repeatedly called dumb by various members of this forum. I have not insulted anyone, I have just expressed my opinions freely. That’s just seems to be too much for some to bear. And this is the state in which we find our nation. So sad.
Princess Leia: I read the entire link and it starts with the assumption that conservatives are against LLC’s ,Corporate, Commercial and Business laws! As if we are against Law and Order and property laws!!?? It’s completely ridiculous! No one in there sane mind is against property laws! Commercial laws! Good grief!
Go up a few posts and you call the Professor and SOB.
Others are right. The link is telling truth. Right wingers brains aren’t hard wired to believe truth.
Former Republican: I was saying that he , the Professor, considers ME and SOB because he assumes that I don’t care for the less fortunate. That way, since I am an heartless SOB, he doesn’t debate the issues, after all you don’t debate an SOB. Get it? I would never call him an SOB, yet he seems to consider me a heartless soul you doesn’t give a damn about the less fortunate, without even knowing me.
It’s because you are a troll is why he gets aggravated when he debates you.
Quite right. You don’t come here to debate. You come here to argue and get regulars here mad at you. Hence, why you are a troll.
Anything I write will get you angry. Even if I slam Trump as being a Hoover as I did here will get you angry. If there isn’t 100% compliance with your worldview you will get angry. You just cannot tolerate non-compliance.
Wrong again. It’s not about being 100% compliant with worldviews, nor about tolerating non-compliance.
Because of trolls like Mercy, many websites are getting rid of comments sections.
If the Professor ever decides to do that, I fully support him.
Princess Leia: Well it sure seems that way. This is the pattern. I make comment. Someone referring to me post a link that supposedly refutes what I posted and while they are at it call me dumb. I read the link, think about it, then post a response, even copy and posting parts of the link, in reference to the issue and without any name calling. Then the reply I get: “Dumb right wing trollâ€. End of story. So much for a back and forth exchange of ideas.
Apparently ISIS claimed responsibility for today’s terrorist attack.
Me too, Leia.
It sounds like ISIS was a mask for his real issue which was his hatred of LGTB people.
This is OMAR MIR SEDDIQUE MATEEN Florida’s voter registration record. Party Affiliation and voting record. The records speak for themselves. http://voters.findthedata.com/l/28019600/Omar-Mir-Seddique-Mateen
Troll spreading Glenn Beck type propaganda alert!!!!! ^^^
That post shows precisely why we label him as dumb.
Your implication that there’s some sort of connection between the murder of gay people and the Democratic Party is absurd!
Again, why the insult? Is the information somehow false? I don’t understand why the anger? The terrorist was an american, Muslim faith, was an active citizen who participated in the electoral process. Voted various times. He was not oppressed in any way shape or form. Yet he still committed and act of terror and was in contact with Isis apparently. What is wrong with you people?
It’s loony stuff like that is why the Professor gets aggravated with you.
Mercy, just for the record, I did not call you an SOB and do not use that language.
I do consider you as someone who wishes to antagonize and interrupt civility, and do not understand why you remain on a site that you disagree with 90 percent of the time.
In other words, why not go where you will find more friendly viewpoints and interaction, since time is valuable?
I choose to remain out of the fray most of the time, as I have better things to do with my time, including writing new articles for History News Network, teaching, and having a life!
This is where he will find more friendly viewpoints and interaction ——> http://www.redstate.com
What implication? There is no implication. But now that you mention it I have to say that is just logical that an american Islamic radicalized terrorist would not vote conservative/Republican, after according to you guys on the left we are anti-Muslim, we hate Muslims, so why would they vote for us? We stand by Israel, by it’s government led by Bibi Netanyahu and we constantly denounce the pubic executions of gays and women in Muslim countries. And every time we point that out to the left they knee jerk with Israel, as if there was a moral equivalency between the only democracy in the middle east defending itself against these Islamist terrorist and the Islamist terrorist themselves! So now that you brought up the subject there actually is no reason for an American radical Islamist to vote conservative/Republican. Seriously if he had to choose, who would he vote for? The Party that calls Radical Islamic Terrorism by its name, or the Party that refuses to use the word Radical Islamic Terrorism and prefers to lets say use the words “workplace violence” like in the Fort Hood Islamist terrorist attack? The party that calls out Muslim countries for the execution of gays or the party that looks the other way? Even Bill Maher criticizes the left on this hypocrisy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyYZulIxNCE
Agreed, Rustbelt. It’s the perfect place for him. 😉
Pragmatic – I just saw the very same nonsense being spewed by trolls on the comments section of Think Progress. It’s the meme they’ve obviously been programmed to spread.
Of course, that’s false, you fool! Your voting record is private and not scattered around on the internet for all the world to see. That’s a fake site and I’m not going to dare click on it because I’ll probably wind up with a computer virus.
The Professor is right. You’re wasting your time coming here. You’ll never, ever find anyone here who will be friendly to you and wear tin foil hats like you do.
CNN explains that the reason Obama and Hillary don’t use the term “Radical Islam” is because associating terrorists with Islam helps to legitimize their interpretation of the religion and does a disservice to the majority of Muslims who don’t believe there’s anything Islamic about barbaric groups like ISIS.
Most terrorism experts agree with that line of thinking. Labeling terror attacks as radical Islamic terrorism is either detrimental to efforts to combat them or simply not strategically important to defeating terrorist groups like ISIS and their ideology.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/13/politics/islamic-terrorism-trump-obama-clinton/index.html
How to beat extremism. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/12/opinions/orlando-shooting-moghul/index.html
Even former President George W. Bush noted many times during his presidency that using ‘radical Islam’ to define terrorism is counterproductive.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/06/12/right-wing-media-echo-trump-s-criticism-obama-not-calling-orlando-shooting-radical-islamic-terrorism/210878
Hillary’s response to Trump’s attacks about using the phrase “radical Islam”. http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/13/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-orlando-attacks-reaction/index.html
What do we do with Islamist? And I am not referring to those Islamist that commit terrorist act. But to those as defined by the AP style book: “An advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Do not use as a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals, who may or may not be Islamists” Do we confront them? Do we look the other way? Or are we also not allowed to use the term Islamist because it might offend those who “advocate or are a supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam.”? Just asking. I want to know what I am allowed to say nowadays in our country.
Remember the story a few years back in which an endangered bird was eating an endangered fish? Liberals are now faced with a similar conundrum in regard to the event in Orlando. Here we have a member of one liberal protected group, Muslims, who just killed members of another liberal protected group, gays. And it wasn’t just one or two. Fifty killed and 53 wounded as of last count. Given the number of Islamic radicals known to exist in this world, gays have good reason to be worried.
This isn’t supposed to happen. Both groups are misunderstood and oppressed minorities, deserving of rights and protections beyond those allowed to other Americans. What’s a liberal to do?
It’s obvious. There’s only one possible answer: change the subject. Gun control. Get rid of all the guns, and the problem will go away. Ignore the fact that the guns were legally owned by a man who had previously worked as a security guard. Ignore the fact that Islamic radicals want to kill not just gays, but anyone who disagrees with them, including other Muslims who don’t toe their radical line. The most important thing is to use the crisis to advance another liberal cause. “Never let a crisis go to waste”-R. Emmanuel
BS for Monday. LOL! ^^^^^
Southern Liberal: So you say its a fake site? Good grief! It’s the government of Florida’s Division of Elections webpage? And it’s not the voting record that is public but the party registration! And he REGISTERED AS A DEMOCRAT! How can you be so blind? Check for yourself. http://registration.elections.myflorida.com/CheckVoterStatus?
Once you do the search you will find his public record.
Ho-hum…
Nothing will happen.
The NRA OWNS too many politicians who are afraid to cross them.
You can’t fool me. You purposefully just switched from the original link in your previous post.
The shooter was a plain and simple nutjob. Same as every other shooter. Nothing more.
And Love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and pride, will overcome the pathetic fearmongering and bigoted ignorance that the Right seems to resort to every time their logic against common sense policy and human decency fail.
How did the Greatest Generation defeat Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Imperial Japan? With “Love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and love, and pride” ….
Idiotic phrase of the day (I would say the year but hey liberals always surprise me): Democratic senator Richard Blumenthal, who was once Connecticut’s attorney general, issued this statement: “The Senate’s inaction on commonsense gun violence prevention makes it complicit in this public health crisis.â€
Public health crisis?????
My angry face in response to our troll ——-> (>_<)
Gun violence, uncontrolled, Mercy, IS a public health crisis!
People are dying in numbers unseen since the Civil War, as the recent NY TIMES article of a day ago demonstrated.
And I bet Mercy is “pro life” for fetuses, but apparently NOT for people who are born, many killed in this incident because they are gay and lesbian!
Heck, it does not matter, right, as only straight people have a right to life, apparently, heh, Mercy?
I suggest we copy the restrictive gun laws of France, that would have surely avoided yesterday’s Islamist terrorist attack…
Ronald: Will you denounce Islam for its treatment of gays and women? And I am not talking about ISIS, just regular run of the day Islam. Like the one practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt etc. Will you condemn Islam for publicly hanging gays in public like we conservatives, Christopher Hitchens and Bill Maher do? Will you condemn Islam for publicly stoning women who are raped? Do you agree that some cultures are BETTER than others? Do you agree that a culture that let women drive, work and where women have the same rights is better than one where women aren’t allowed to work, drive or marry who they wish? That a culture that doesn’t publicly execute people for being gay is better than one that does? If you do then we are in agreement of who the real enemy is, if not, then we just disagree.
Yes, Mercy, of course we agree, but that is no excuse for discrimination in this nation against all Muslims, gays, and women.
Of course we are “better” than these other nations, but we have a lot of work to do to make our treatment of these various groups far better than it is!
Are you implying that I am discriminating against Muslims in this country?? And by the way when you write ” I bet Mercy is “pro life†for fetuses, but apparently NOT for people who are born, many killed in this incident because they are gay and lesbian!
Heck, it does not matter, right, as only straight people have a right to life, apparently, heh, Mercy?” Are you implying that I hate gay people? If so, just say it straight up front. As I wrote in another entry -” When someone calls his opponents racist, sexist bigots, he has no arguments – he is showing his weakness.”
I cannot know what is in your heart and brain, Mercy, but you certainly come across as all centered around only yourself– a little like Donald Trump.
No wonder you have a hostile reaction by others on this blog.
I am too busy to debate this BS with you and will not comment any further, and I suggest you get back to work and to your life and stop being a troll, wasting our time and yours!
Just weeks ago, an Islamic Center just outside of Orlando, Florida, hosted a Muslim scholar who proclaimed gay people should be exterminated out of “compassion.†Farrokh Sekaleshfar, a British-born doctor, was invited to speak at the Husseini Islamic Center on March 29. The Muslim scholar gave a controversial sermon at the University of Michigan in 2013 claiming that “death is the sentence†for homosexuality.
“There’s nothing to be embarrassed about this. Death is the sentence,†he said during the sermon.
He then added an even more disturbing line: “We have to have that compassion for people. With homosexuals, it’s the same. Out of compassion, let’s get rid of them now.†https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBlwxqqAprQ
I can very easily find some old white preacher on YouTube preaching the same hate against gays.
In depth article about mass shootings. http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/06/13/can-we-prevent-mass-shootings/