Welcome to Imperial City.
Posted on 03/26/2016 5:28:52 AM PDT by C19fan
One has to go back to the Roman Empire to find adequate parallels. The Romans dealt hard in their Caesar politics, with assassinations playing a large part in their “elections” of emperors.
Today the assassinations are a little less bloody, but no less devastating to the targets of those attacks. Once declared to be no longer “fit” to be a contender, the vanquished fall to the earth, never to rise above a level of obscurity again. But for those who play the game and rise to the top, almost always that person is a seriously flawed human being, and aptly summed up in Mark Anthony’s speech on the death of Caesar:
“Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears;
I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interrèd with their bones.”
Welcome to Imperial City.
The article advocates losing the election to Hillary Clinton as a way to stop Donald Trump.
I think I have figured out why the National Review is so strongly against Trump.
It has nothing to do with intellectual positions on conservatism. The National Review is in bad financial shape. The only thing that makes sense is that they are dependent on Clinton people for their very survival. In short they are owned by the Clintons.
They have also been infiltrated by David Brooks type careerists who pretend to be conservative but really aspire to a TV, NYT or Washington Post type position.
The idea of me caring what Avy Snyder has to say about anything is so facially absurd....He didn’t really want anyone to read it. These people - just stop, just friggin’ stop.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN was a backwoods logsplitter, not a quiche
eating dandy. The GOPe would label someone like that not
“worthy”.
“President Trump is not absurd. What’s absurd is a spit-
flinging socialist who’s older than granite. What’s absurd
is a harridan with no qualifications and a rap sheet longer
than John Gotti’s. Or an incompetent half-black preener
with an inverse Midas touch who can turn everything he
touches to feces.” - IronJack wrote.
If they pull this off, I will write in Trump and vote for the Dems downticket just to clean house....unless a viable third party arises.
The “National Review is Pure B.S.
Extremely picturesque Speech and right on the spot.
“This year we see candidates with no chance of winning on the first ballot staying in, expressly to deny the front runner from winning on the first ballot. The plan then is obviously to steal the delegates the front runner won fairly at the ballot box.”
I disagree with the use of the word “steal”. Suppose no candidate receives the necessary 1237 for nomination. At that point, there has to be some movement of delegates from candidate to candidate otherwise no one would ever get a majority. That isn’t “stealing”. It is common sense. The rules don’t give the nomination to the candidate with the MOST delegates. It requires a MAJORITY.
More Cheap Labor Express propaganda designed to convince people to give up their country without a fight.
In all fairness, Lincoln was also a lawyer, albeit largely self-taught. And he was not immensely popular, achieving his second term only because of a few fortuitous victories by the Union army.
But your point is well taken. Whatever he was, he could not be accused of being an elitist.
Some people say that The National Review has become out of touch and unreadable.
They’re right.
All of the above are absurd. Trump is at least an American patriot, albeit in a crude, ugly American kind of way. He is also a businessman and therefore at least not philosophically hostile to free markets, although he has made his career as a favor-trading, politician-buying crony capitalist, and although he is the epitome of the kind of classless wealth that fuels every leftist stereotype of vulgar wealth. Is Trump preferable to Hillary, Bernie, or Obama? Yes. But we are in bottom feeding territory with any of them.
And yet Avy Snyder probably never made a peep about the danger represented by Obama and his trampling on the Constitution and will of the governed.
“This year we see candidates with no chance of winning on the first ballot staying in, expressly to deny the front runner from winning on the first ballot. The plan then is obviously to steal the delegates the front runner won fairly at the ballot box.”
I disagree with the use of the word “steal”. ///
As I said, Cruz and Kasich CANNOT win on the first ballot. In the past, candidates who have reached this point have WITHDRAWN, so the party could heal.
If Kasich and Cruz in particular had any INTEGRITY, they would withdraw and let the front runner get his majority, IAW the rules, and heal the party.
Instead Cruz wants to drag out the primaries and the rancor to the last vote so he can STEAL delegates he did not win at the ballot box. Cleveland will be even more toxic than the primaries.
I guess Thad Cochran “won” by the rules didn’t he?
New definition of mugging: The movement of cash from the owner to the thief.
The Republican Party is infected with people who think they own the party and who appear to be oblivious to the facts that they have destroyed what the party stands for.
What simple minded garbage this author is.
“If Kasich and Cruz in particular had any INTEGRITY, they would withdraw and let the front runner get his majority, IAW the rules, and heal the party.”
The rules do not stipulate that some should withdraw for the good of the party. Applying your logic, all the candidates should withdraw and we can start this over again.
We need to “tank” the soul of the bastard GOPe to save the country, but for me that means Cruz.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.