Connect with us

Opinions

What we can learn from Trump’s idiotic blather

Published

on

It would be absolutely ridiculous to relitigate the entire NFL controversy regarding the National Anthem and standing versus kneeling, as l think it has been discussed to death. However, there is something to be learned from Donald Trump’s idiotic blather.

They call it the First Amendment, Mr. Trump

People in America protest things on a daily basis. Some of the protests are quite worthwhile, while others are utterly absurd. However, Americans have a Constitutional right to peacefully protest anything they want, even if their approach leaves much to be desired. Didn’t we see liberals walking down the street dressed as vagina’s this year? In other words, a person has the right to act like a disrespectful idiot if he or she so chooses. That comes with being a free American citizen. This is something Donald Trump clearly does not understand.

Observations

It is interesting that someone who has consistently allowed anything and everything to come out of his mouth, regardless of how vulgar or offensive it was, should now be criticizing and condemning others for behavior he deems unacceptable.

Apparently what we have here is an ideal example of the classic double standard. We have seen this for several years now: anything that comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth is justified and therefore perfectly acceptable, and any uncouth, base, classless behavior he chooses to exhibit is also above reproach since he is, after all, him. However, anything he chooses to dub inappropriate is automatically inappropriate and should be outlawed.

Here we have a classic characteristic of a dictator. Trump seemingly fancies himself a King, but I have a hunch that if we could pry into the minds of people throughout the world, he is probably the biggest laughingstock on earth.

How much does Trump really care?

Everyone who has intelligence, and I realize that demographic is dwindling as we speak, sees this for what it is and nothing more. Donald Trump is creating a diversionary fuss over something that in reality he probably cares very little about, to attempt to boost his poll numbers by a noisy show of patriotism.

It is my humble opinion that if Donald Trump cared about this country, he never would have taken a job for which he has zero qualifications just because he decided it would be cool to be president. Lectures coming from Donald Trump on proper behavior are about as incongruous as lessons from a scorpion on how to make one feel loved and cherished. Many people are of the opinion that Trump is the most divisive person ever to sit in the Oval Office, and let’s face it, he had some stiff competition on that front.

Few have upset, angered and offended so many different people on so many different levels, yet somehow this man thinks he has moral high ground to lecture others. Amazing.

The nonsense needs to stop, and U.S. citizens need to understand that part of being a free American is having the right to act like an idiot. I do not agree with not standing for the national anthem. I think there are hundreds of better ways to protest something . I also don’t agree with presidential candidates calling women fat pigs or trading their wives in for younger models when they get too old. However, we don’t legislate manners or morality in this country, which Trump would know if he were familiar with the Constitution.

I think Mr. Trump should worry more about his collapsing presidency, the state of the country, and the consequences of his attempt to goad a maniac on the other side of the world into war, and worry less about criticizing the actions of others. Trump has absolutely no moral high ground to critique anyone’s behavior, anywhere, anytime, EVER. Therefore, he just needs to stop.

Jesse Broadt has been a full-time writer in the travel industry since 2007 and regularly contributes to news and political websites.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report
8 Comments

8 Comments

  1. Russell Alexander

    September 28, 2017 at 8:48 am

    The freedom of speech which the First Amendment protects against Congressional intrusion serves an important social function. It is not a guarantee that fools can blow off steam by acting foolishly. It is a means by which bad ideas can be confronted and bad actors can be identified.

    If there is idiocy in the matter, then it is the failure to distinguish between saying something is wrong and should not be done and making it illegal. The totalitarian or statist reflex that jumps to the apparent conclusion that a President condemning something as politically imprudent or blatantly immoral is proposing that it be made illegal.

    Free speech fosters discussion. Discussion involves saying — what you are saying is wrong because it is foolish or illogical.

    Failing to recognize the role and wholesomeness of such political discourse is evidence of the “dwindling” of intellect. But consider, if good people cannot talk bad people into being good, then legislation and the threat of force is all that is left — and free society is doomed.

  2. Russell Alexander

    September 28, 2017 at 8:51 am

    Please let me know if there are any replies to my former comment. Thanks.

  3. Dan Lamar

    September 28, 2017 at 9:12 am

    YES, YES, YES, you are absolutely on target with everything you said here and said it perfectly! How stupid can one be to goad back and forth with a lunatic communist who wants to blow everyone up who stands for freedom! How about use every diplomatic means possible!? The president is majoring in the minors and minoring in the majors!

    Thank you Jesse for again being right on! KEEP IT COMING!

  4. Raz Schultz

    September 28, 2017 at 10:39 am

    Excellent article and exactly right, Jesse! Even if the kneelers were being disrespectful instead of making a point, Trump is the last one to talk. He has been nothing but disrespectful to individuals, the country and the law since he came on the scene. Most of those men are good guys with good reputations, very patriotic and know how to be team players and support a cause greater than themselves, all of which Trump will never learn.
    But if the worst among us wants to be disrespectful toward the country, burn the flag, etc., etc., they have that right.
    This is just his latest diversion to make us focus on something other than his incompetency. He didn’t know how to run a football team, either, as we know from his failed National football team disaster, LOL

    • Sharon

      September 28, 2017 at 10:53 am

      Well said, Schultz, well said.

  5. Sharon

    September 28, 2017 at 10:51 am

    Outstanding article. I do believe Broadt has captured the essence of Trump’s disastrous Presidency, his absurd behavior and his true agenda: Trump. It is all about him and what might make his poll numbers rise, and Broadt clearly reminds everyone that this is not what a good President does. The NFL protest left a particularly bad taste in my mouth; however, good men and women fought and died for the right to free speech and peaceful assemblage. And yes, that means we can walk down the street dressed as vaginas (that one made me laugh) or for instance, have a “run for squids day” by jamming rubber gloves over our heads while chanting, “I’m a squid! I’m a squid!”. It is legal. It is our right. Whether it is moral, reasonable, adult behavior is another matter, but as Broadt pointed out, we do not legislate morality in this country. We do not legislate silly behavior. When Trump fixates on such matters, rather than running the country (or attempting to), he is displaying the same self-absorbed behavior he claims to be against. This was an exquisite expose on the true motives of our alleged POTUS. Thank you for the contribution.

  6. Gail

    September 28, 2017 at 12:07 pm

    Jesse….you are 110% correct! BRAVO!

  7. Violet

    September 28, 2017 at 12:09 pm

    SPOT ON!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinions

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Published

on

Conservative Picks for the Minnesota Primary

Minnesota has a lot of action and potential relative to other states. Minnesota has three blue districts Donald Trump won in 2016. This means the right candidate can come along and upset the “blue wave” or at least mitigate potential losses. Minnesota is hopeful because in almost every race, there’s at least one candidate that doesn’t suck. It would be nice to see a little more enthusiasm in the Senate races(courtesy of Al Franken.) The GOP can look to make progress in what has been a staunchly blue state for decades. Minnesota has become redder with each of the last three presidential elections, so the Democrats reign is in trouble.

Best Picks: Jim Newberger, Tom Emmer, Jen Zielinski
Worst Picks: Carla Nelson
Best Race: District 7
Worst Race: Senate Special Election

US Senate Special Election

Karin Housely is the GOP favorite in this race. However she comes off as a RINO who would expand the debt. Her stint in the State Senate shows she really isn’t all that Conservative despite having a more Conservative 2017 session, which every other Republican did as well, so it seems. She doesn’t impress up front. Her main opponent is Bob Anderson. Anderson fancies himself as an outsider. He comes off as a populist rather than a Conservative, but that is preferable to the shining RINO that Housely would likely be. Anderson is anti-establishment so he is more likely to shake things up.

Conservative Pick: Bob Anderson

US Senate

The most serious candidate here seems to be Jim Newberger. As a rep in the Minnesota House, Newberger has an outstanding record. For that reason, it’s a good thing for Conservatism that he may walk into a easy victory here in an underwhelming race. Merrill Anderson is a populist and perhaps a conspiracy nut. He doesn’t reasonably stand a chance. Roque De La Fuente is literally running for Senator in every state that has loose enough residency requirements. He isn’t Conservative. He is not the pick here, but he understands taking chances.

Conservative Pick: Jim Newberger

District 1

Jim Hagedorn looks to reclaim he seat he barely lost in 2016. This is district went red for Trump, yet he lost by less than 1%. His main opponent is Carla Nelson, a state rep. She is ACU’s lowest ranking Republican in 2016 and was tied for a repeat in 2017. She is no Conservative.

Conservative Pick: Jim Hagedorn

District 2

Jason Lewis is the highest rated Congressman in the state. He’s not a perfect Conservative, but deserves another term. He is unopposed.

District 3

Erik Paulsen is an unchallenged RINO.

District 4

Greg Ryan is an unchallenged RINO.

District 5

Jen Zielinski seems to be the GOP favorite in this race. She seems to have the potential to shrink the government. She also wants to make the Republican Party the “Party of Choice.” This is good branding for incorporating issues such as school choice. The other candidates don’t appear to be as serious.

Conservative Pick: Jen Zielinski

District 6

Tom Emmer hasn’t done a terrible job in Congress. His Liberty score of 69 shows a more fiscally responsible Republican than a typical RINO. He faces the same two challenges as he did last time around. Neither of these candidates are particularly inspiring enough to warrant a course change.

Conservative Pick: Tom Emmer

District 7

David Hughes looks for a rematch after losing by 5% in 2016. Hughes is a solid Conservative by looks. His platform is right of Trump on immigration and healthcare. His opponent Matt Protch is campaigning as an outsider. Rather than a populist, he actually seems Conservative. This race is winnable for the GOP so Hughes is perhaps the best bet here. But he lost a race where Trump won. This indicates weak campaigning. So perhaps its time to invest in someone new? However Collin Peterson has been in since 1990, too long. He’s also way more vulnerable in an increasingly red district. Perhaps Hughes can win with a second chance, now that he potentially has more name recognition. Or perhaps Protch is the choice.

Conservative Pick: David Hughes?

District 8

The most serious candidate here is Pete Strauber who seems like a regular Republican, and that comes with a bad connotation. This is another flippable seat in Minnesota.

Conservative Pick: Pete Strauber

Continue Reading

Opinions

Liberal Republicans and House Freedom Caucus on same Trumpservative team

Published

on

Liberal Republicans and House Freedom Caucus on same Trumpservative team

After vowing to “fight the meritless charges” brought against him following an indictment for insider trading, Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY) experienced a political come-to-Jesus moment about the reality of his situation.

In a statement released over the weekend, Collins officially “suspended” his re-election campaign, which is just the Washington Doublespeak way of saying he’s ending his re-election bid because he’s still free to raise campaign money for his selfish political purposes.

While Rep. Collins is innocent until proven guilty, the repercussions following his indictment were swift, especially with the uphill climb the GOP faces in November. Democrats were ecstatic over the sudden opportunity to take a seat Republicans were expected to win. And right on cue, the GOP faithful lined up to support Collins, proving once again that conservatism has died within the GOP and has been replaced by the Trumpservatives.

In a statement of support for Collins who was an early support of Trump who served on his transition team, state chairman of the NY Conservative Party Mike Long said that Collins is “an excellent legislator and the most conservative member of Congress in NY.” An absurd claim considering Collins’ Liberty Score of 39% (F).

For the record, every NY Republican in Congress carries a failing Liberty Score with the most “conservative” being Rep. Lee Zeldin at 54% (F).

Sacrificing conservative values in the name of party loyalty comes as no surprise when NY Republicans are involved. After all, New York is the home of the liberal currently occupying the White House, and the longest-serving Republican in Congress from the Empire State is 25-year veteran Peter King, who carries a Liberty Score of 30% (F).

But the sad reality is that even so-called conservatives such as House Freedom Caucus members Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Mark Meadows (R-NC) have made Trump and his agenda the new measuring stick of what constitutes a conservative.

In a Facebook post last Friday, I shared an excerpt from an email I received from the House Freedom Fund—the Political Action Committee of the House Freedom Caucus—asking for a donation in support of Jordan and Meadows, not because of their successes conservative track records, but because they have become identified as “Trump’s pit-bulls on Capitol Hill” working to push his agenda.

In the Age of Trump, it’s sad but not much of a surprise to hear that people like NY liberal Chris Collins and others who have worked for Trump are unethical Trumpservatives. However, when so-called conservative groups like the House Freedom Caucus begin acting the same way, it’s clear that conservatives no longer have a home within the GOP.

 

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Media

Who is afraid now?

Published

on

By

Who is afraid now

It could be the grudge match of the century, Ben Shapiro championing Economic Liberty while Comrade Cortez vainly tries to defend Socialistic Slavery.

In this corner, weighing in at 171 Pounds in Blue shorts with 62 wins, 23 by knockout, Kid Shapiro representing Economic Liberty.

And in this corner weighing in at [don’t you dare ask that question].. in Red shorts and Red lipstick with one primary win, Comrade Cortez representing Socialistic Slavery.

Ben Shapiro recently offered to debate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but so far it looks like she doesn’t want to take up the challenge. The most eagerly anticipated question for her being: How in Hades’ are you going to pay for all of your vote buying schemes with the country having over 100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities  and 21 Trillion in debt?

In many ways, it’s too bad that Democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is longer on intersectional ‘street cred’ than intellectual gravitas. A fair match-up would still see her losing given that she is trying to defend the indefensible. This is why we salivated over her overnight ascendancy in the ranks of the Socialist-Left. The abject inferiority of her ancient ideas would have seen a lopsided victory of epic proportions even if she were evenly matched with Mr. Shapiro. The proposed debate could be a virtual bloodbath, unseen since the Roman coliseum.

Two prime examples of why the Left cannot openly debate the issues.

Socialism doesn’t work in the real world, so one of the left’s favourite tactics is the illogical comparison between the theoretical promises of every supposedly positive aspect of socialism with the negative connotations of Economic Liberty [or the pejorative term used by the Left ‘Capitalism’]. This is because they cannot compare the practical results of Economic Liberty with the practical results of ‘Democratic’ Socialism. Most rational people would easily choose to live under Economic Liberty than Socialistic Slavery, hence the reason most socialist nations are akin to open air prisons.

The myth of Scandinavian Socialism.

Let’s start the Prime Minister of Denmark Lars Løkke Rasmussen during the last presidential cycle, stating flat-out stating: Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist

“I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy,” Rasmussen said.

“The Nordic model is an expanded welfare state which provides a high level of security for its citizens, but it is also a successful market economy with much freedom to pursue your dreams and live your life as you wish,” he added.

This myth has been eviscerated a number of times, Here, and Here. But the National Socialist-Left is heavily invested in this lie, since it is about the only defense they have for base ideology. In actuality, these are small, culturally homogenous nations that can spend money on an expansive welfare state because the US taxpayers foot the bill for their defense. That is hardly amenable to the US, especially the part about the Constitutional funding for defense. We can’t exactly take money from ourselves to give it back, although the odds are there are some that might believe that could be done.

The Socialist-Left can’t afford to debate the Pro-Liberty Right because they will lose.

These examples are why that much-anticipated debate might not take place. Much like guerrilla fighters hiding in the jungle, the Left cannot come out in the open and engage in direct confrontation with the Right. They can only survive ‘debating’ in their echo chamber where their theories are somehow still viable after all the empirical evidence to the contrary. But sooner or later eventually everyone will get a chance to compare their ancient failed ideas to what actually works in reality, and they will lose the argument.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.