Glenn Beck calls Trump a 'son of a bitch'

[rangerrebew]

"Give em hell Harry" Truman was nearly canonized for his bluntness and no holds barred brashness.  Trump, on the other hand, has been consigned to hell.  Go figure.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Give em hell Harry" Truman was nearly canonized for his bluntness and no holds barred brashness.  Trump, on the other hand, has been consigned to hell.  Go figure.

Truman and Trump have a lot in common.

They're both blunt and crass Democrats.
 

[bkepley]

"Give em hell Harry" Truman was nearly canonized for his bluntness and no holds barred brashness.  Trump, on the other hand, has been consigned to hell.  Go figure.

Trump is no Truman.

[libertybele]

Graham crackers - that's pretty good!   

I second that "emotion".  Graham crackers -- that there is just plain funny!   

[aligncare]

Truman and Trump have a lot in common.

They're both blunt and crass Democrats.

Your post got me thinking (Will wonders never cease).

Could be, the way to change the direction America's headed – toward european-style socialism, is from within.

And by that I mean we could use another conservative like John F. Kennedy at the helm. Could be it's gonna take a stealth candidate – a democrat, like Obama, who campaigned as a moderate but then took the country hard left.

Maybe somewhere out there is a democrat who could campaign as a moderate, but once elected, govern hard right?

Hey, a conservative/libertarian can dream, can't he?

[alicewonders]

Your post got me thinking (Will wonders never cease).

Could be, the way to change the direction America's headed – toward european-style socialism, is from within.

And by that I mean we could use another conservative like John F. Kennedy at the helm. Could be it's gonna take a stealth candidate – a democrat, like Obama, who campaigned as a moderate but then took the country hard left.

Maybe somewhere out there is a democrat who could campaign as a moderate, but once elected, govern hard right?

Hey, a conservative/libertarian can dream, can't he?

I want some of what you're smoking ac!

 

[Fishrrman]

Luis wrote above:
[[ Truman and Trump have a lot in common.
They're both blunt and crass Democrats. ]]

Nothing wrong with your statement above.
However....

I proffer that if ALL democrats over the last 30 years or so had been in the mold of Harry Truman, this country wouldn't be in the pickle that it's in.

I didn't watch the debate, and I dobut that I'll watch ANY of the upcoming debates (and that includes those in 2016 between the chosen nominees). Reason: the moderators NEVER ask the right questions, and the candidates seldom give the right responses.

I'll vote in the Republican primary here, but may not even bother in the general election. I'm in Connecticut -- the "bluest of the blue" states -- and unless there is some kind of earth-moving occurence here, no Republican can win here (except for local offices).

Sounds like Trump went out of his way to belittle that newsgal Kelly.
My take is that this will cost him votes with women, but might actually GAIN him votes from men (many of whom might be secretly amused and supporting of Mr. Trump).

I'm quite enjoying the brashness of Mr. Trump, and his damning of "political correctness" may actually turn out to be a plus for him.
I don't quite understand why he needs to "dis" everyone, however. When you rise to a position of wealth and power that he's attained, can't one then afford to be a bit gracious?

One last thought about your characterizing politicians as "blunt and crass":
The problem with Republican politicians is that they are not "blunt and crass" ENOUGH when confronting the democrats.

I WANT politicians like that representing me.
I WANT politicians who are not above yelling and screaming at each other.

Wasn't there at least one confrontation in the House or the Senate (don't remember which) in the time either before or just after the War Between The States, when several Congressmen got into a physical tussle, with one swinging a cane at the other right on the floor?

THIS is what I want to see (go ahead and laugh at me).
I WANT politicians who believe in what they believe strongly enough to shout about it, and fervently enough so that they will (literally) FIGHT with other politicians to get!

[EC]

I don't quite understand why he needs to "dis" everyone, however. When you rise to a position of wealth and power that he's attained, can't one then afford to be a bit gracious?

It's the only thing that gets him hard, belittling others.

[Paladin]

Trump is no Truman.

Which is a point in his favor given that Truman was one of our worst Presidents and his years solidified the collectivization begun by FDR, to say nothing of his failure to address the Communist penetration of our government. As to the latter, just the reverse in fact.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I doubt there are many supporters of Trump's candidacy here. But I'm sure, like me, there are those who love to see him poking his finger in the eye of the political media, the GOP political establishment, Hillary Clinton, Rosy O'Donnell, illegal immigrants, etc.

I'm just enjoying the show.

Oh, and if you're worried that the Donald is sullying the GOP brand, don't. GOP leadership has already seen to that.

Truth in a nutshell.   :thumbsup2:

[bkepley]

Which is a point in his favor given that Truman was one of our worst Presidents and his years solidified the collectivization begun by FDR, to say nothing of his failure to address the Communist penetration of our government. As to the latter, just the reverse in fact.

I knew that would result in a knee-jerk response from some wingnut who knows nothing about Truman or FDR for that matter.

[PzLdr]

I knew that would result in a knee-jerk response from some wingnut who knows nothing about Truman or FDR for that matter.

The wingnut is you. Truman was told early on after he took office about Alger Hiss by Adolf Berle, who had interviewed Whitacker Chambers. At the time Hiss was within the statute of limitations for espionage and possibly treason. Truman, for POLITICAL reasons, refused to move on Hiss, instead opting to ease him out of State. That's why Hiss was only ever charged with perjury.

Truman, and his Sec/Def, Louis Johnson, gutted the military budget, especially the Army's, after WW II. One of the principal reasons the Army was so ill-prepared for Korea were those budget cuts. No 3.5" bazookas to face T-34/85s. No available upgrades [initially] to the M4A38. Prop driven aircraft, except for the "Panther" jet. Very limited training. Very limited numbers. And don't forget, Harry's Sec/State, Dean Acheson placed South Korea OUTSIDE what he described as the U.S defense perimeter in a public speech, without a whisper of demurral from 'Give 'Em Hell' Harry. So, yeah, Truman's no biggie. Try T.R Fehrenbach's "This Kind of War", if you want to see why Korea started as it did.

[bkepley]

The wingnut is you. Truman was told early on after he took office about Alger Hiss by Adolf Berle, who had interviewed Whitacker Chambers. At the time Hiss was within the statute of limitations for espionage and possibly treason. Truman, for POLITICAL reasons, refused to move on Hiss, instead opting to ease him out of State. That's why Hiss was only ever charged with perjury.

Truman, and his Sec/Def, Louis Johnson, gutted the military budget, especially the Army's, after WW II. One of the principal reasons the Army was so ill-prepared for Korea were those budget cuts. No 3.5" bazookas to face T-34/85s. No available upgrades [initially] to the M4A38. Prop driven aircraft, except for the "Panther" jet. Very limited training. Very limited numbers. And don't forget, Harry's Sec/State, Dean Acheson placed South Korea OUTSIDE what he described as the U.S defense perimeter in a public speech, without a whisper of demurral from 'Give 'Em Hell' Harry. So, yeah, Truman's no biggie. Try T.R Fehrenbach's "This Kind of War", if you want to see why Korea started as it did.

Yes I have a few books by and about Chambers and Truman did not shine in all cases but he was an underrated man, one of the best read 20th century presidents and certainly no communist.  I wonder if Trump has ever read a book other than his own

[Carling]

In a CNN interview tonight, Trump called in and said "Kelly has blood coming out her ears, or out of somewhere else."

WTF? He's talking about Megyn Kelly menstruating now?

This bastard is delusional.

That's a false quote.  No wonder people are so worked up over nothing. 

Please try to stay factual.

[Carling]

Trump's called a whole lot of people a whole lot of names, and people support him for being candid and not bound by political correctness.

But if we in here do what he does out there, we're doing something wrong?

Doesn't that smell of hypocrisy?

You called people who do not support Trump "haters"... again.

Either set the tone or don't whine about the tone.

So that means you're going to follow Trump's example and insult people by calling them names?

That makes no sense.

[Paladin]

I knew that would result in a knee-jerk response from some wingnut who knows nothing about Truman or FDR for that matter.

Ain't nothing like a good ad hominem attack when you have nothing of substance to offer.

Speaking of substance this is his response to PzLdr's rather excellent riposte to the aforementioned attack.

Yes I have a few books by and about Chambers and Truman did not shine in all cases but he was an underrated man, one of the best read 20th century presidents and certainly no communist.  I wonder if Trump has ever read a book other than his own

Nope, no substance there either as it doesn't address even one point raised by PzLdr.

[bkepley]

Ain't nothing like a good ad hominem attack when you have nothing of substance to offer.

Speaking of substance this is his response to PzLdr's rather excellent riposte to the aforementioned attack.
 
Nope, no substance there either as it doesn't address even one point raised by PzLdr.

Arguing with a wingnut about something like this is like arguing with a JFK conspiracy lunatic.  Everything they say is factual (to them) but none of it is true.  Truman on his worst day was a better man than Trump.

[Luis Gonzalez]

So that means you're going to follow Trump's example and insult people by calling them names?

That makes no sense.

No.

I haven't called anyone any names because they follow or agree with Trump. I think they're incredibly wrong.

I object to that when Trump does it and I object when others do it in the context if the debate.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That's a false quote.  No wonder people are so worked up over nothing. 

Please try to stay factual.

It is an accurate and factual quote.

http://youtu.be/up8hbWjYI34

[Carling]

Trumpeters, don’t think CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS wont ask worse questions? Kelly asked "gotcha"questons of each candidate, why is it Trump is the only one bellyaching the next morning?   If he can’t take it from Fox he will completely implode with the others. Sign of a Looser, if you ask me.

Is there anyone on this board who is pro-Trump as a candidate? 

[Carling]

It is an accurate and factual quote.

http://youtu.be/up8hbWjYI34

You're blatantly lying.  What sinkspur quoted is not what Trump said.

In a CNN interview tonight, Trump called in and said "Kelly has blood coming out her ears, or out of somewhere else."

That's not what Trump said, unless you have a different definition of "factual" than I do.

[EdinVA]

Is there anyone on this board who is pro-Trump as a candidate?

I am pro American Electoral process without media interference and from that perspective, Trump has as much right to participate as anyone else.
The RNC nor the Red who ever they are, have no right to deny the voting public access to our candidates, no matter how much they may or may not agree with that person.
I hold the same view for Hillary, and the communist guy (forgot his name).

I like Trumps fire, his determination, his willingness to fight, something woefully lacking in any of the other candidates.

[bkepley]

I am pro American Electoral process without media interference and from that perspective, Trump has as much right to participate as anyone else.
The RNC nor the Red who ever they are, have no right to deny the voting public access to our candidates, no matter how much they may or may not agree with that person.
I hold the same view for Hillary, and the communist guy (forgot his name).

I like Trumps fire, his determination, his willingness to fight, something woefully lacking in any of the other candidates.

Whatever..fire..willingness to fight..I guess can be found on any street corner. 

[PzLdr]

Arguing with a wingnut about something like this is like arguing with a JFK conspiracy lunatic.  Everything they say is factual (to them) but none of it is true.  Truman on his worst day was a better man than Trump.

Really? Giving Alger Hiss a pass from prosecution for political reasons when he had evidence the man was a Soviet agent [GRU] makes him a better man than Trump? And as for being a lout, remember his comments about the guy who criticized his daughter's piano playing? While he WAS POTUS?

[EC]

Agree with everything but:

... Red who ever they are, have no right to deny the voting public access to our candidates, no matter how much they may or may not agree with that person.

Red State put on an event. They have every right to invite who they wish to speak at the event, for whatever reason. Not all the candidates were invited to begin with, only the ones most closely in line with their politics.