ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted September 4, 2015 Posted September 4, 2015 http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/mexican-app-developers-creating-trumpealo-video-game-n419752 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has sparked outrage in Mexico over comments he has made about the country sending its rapists and criminals over the border. But he has also inspired the makers of piñatas and now even a new video game. "Trumpéalo," created by Mexican developers KaraOculta, is a new parody game in which players follows a cartoon Trump around and throw shoes, soccer balls, and an assortment of items at him to prevent him from exiting the stage.
Who is Yuri? Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 Is the Trump candidacy for President just an excuse for major media outlets to pass off tabloid trash as real news? Isn't there a choice regarding what is newsworthy? CNN looks like the worst offender to me. They've been covering the insults, not the issues. Government should be serious business, but I am getting a Hollywood Insider Edition vibe from recent coverage, especially from CNN. I will be looking to other sources for principled journalism.
meazza Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 So Trump is complaining about gotcha questions because a radio interviewer asked him a simple foreign policy question? This is who is leading in the polls?
Who is Yuri? Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 (edited) It really bugs me, as a bit of an Eisenhower fan, how Trump says that he'll discover the next General Douglass MacArthur to advise him. He sometimes says, "or Patton." Both of those men are admirable fighters, but without Marshall and Eisenhower making the important decisions and compromises, I don't believe we'd have been able to work nicely enough with others to win World War II. With nobody holding the bridle reigns, those two generals would go out in a tremendous blaze, but lose the war ingloriously. I do not put Trump on the level of Marshall or Eisenhower. He's not even a Patton or MacArthur. Therefore, I don't think that Trump is qualified to be Commander in Chief. Edited September 5, 2015 by Franz Kafka
DC Tom Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 It really bugs me, as a bit of an Eisenhower fan, how Trump says that he'll discover the next General Douglass MacArthur to advise him. He sometimes says, "or Patton." Both of those men are admirable fighters, but without Marshall and Eisenhower making the important decisions and compromises, I don't believe we'd have been able to work nicely enough with others to win World War II. With nobody holding the bridle reigns, those two generals would go out in a tremendous blaze, but lose the war ingloriously. I do not put Trump on the level of Marshall or Eisenhower. He's not even a Patton or MacArthur. Therefore, I don't think that Trump is qualified to be Commander in Chief. If Trump found the next MacArthur, he'd end up being deposed by him. And Dugout Doug wasn't all his legend says.
Who is Yuri? Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 If Trump found the next MacArthur, he'd end up being deposed by him. And Dugout Doug wasn't all his legend says. I agree. It's a small-time glory-hunter riding the coat-tails of big-time glory hunter. Trump'd been fired after the first campaign if he made it that far.
Ozymandius Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 Trump beating Hillary and all other Dems head-to-head Remember, Trump is also beating all GOP contenders (except Carson) head-to-head I wonder if we've reached peak Trump and it's all downhill from here
Adam Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 It really bugs me, as a bit of an Eisenhower fan, how Trump says that he'll discover the next General Douglass MacArthur to advise him. He sometimes says, "or Patton." Both of those men are admirable fighters, but without Marshall and Eisenhower making the important decisions and compromises, I don't believe we'd have been able to work nicely enough with others to win World War II. With nobody holding the bridle reigns, those two generals would go out in a tremendous blaze, but lose the war ingloriously. I do not put Trump on the level of Marshall or Eisenhower. He's not even a Patton or MacArthur. Therefore, I don't think that Trump is qualified to be Commander in Chief. I originally read that as you put him on their level
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 I originally read that as you put him on their level I'm really not sure how a self described socialist (Franz) fancies himself an Ike fan, given that Ike was the last truely conservative president we've had, unless he's conflating the "military industrial complex" speech with his entire presidency.
DC Tom Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 I'm really not sure how a self described socialist (Franz) fancies himself an Ike fan, given that Ike was the last truely conservative president we've had, unless he's conflating the "military industrial complex" speech with his entire presidency. Because Ike was the Great Compromiser. His generalship wasn't so much military as it was political (even before the war - he never commanded anything larger than a battalion before Torch, but he was the consummate staff officer.) He basically says that Ike was a better general than Patton, because while Patton was a better general, Ike was a better politician. Typical liberal-think. Rewrite the language to fit the preconceived notion. (And by the way, Franz...Dugout Doug ran a coalition, and did it better than Ike.)
Who is Yuri? Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 I'm really not sure how a self described socialist (Franz) fancies himself an Ike fan, given that Ike was the last truely conservative president we've had, unless he's conflating the "military industrial complex" speech with his entire presidency. I've read a couple biographies on Eisenhower and his war memoirs. Alot of what Thomas Ricks has written about Eisenhower resonated with me. I am impressed by Ike's political savvy. For his time, I think Ike would be considered a moderate. I'm not sure he would be considered conservative by todays standards, but "conservative-" I'm not even sure what that stands for, with libertarians and social conservatives at odds sometimes.
....lybob Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 I've read a couple biographies on Eisenhower and his war memoirs. Alot of what Thomas Ricks has written about Eisenhower resonated with me. I am impressed by Ike's political savvy. For his time, I think Ike would be considered a moderate. I'm not sure he would be considered conservative by todays standards, but "conservative-" I'm not even sure what that stands for, with libertarians and social conservatives at odds sometimes.
DC Tom Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Of course, that's taken out of context and altered to make him look like a populist and socialist, and not the moderate he actually was. Not that you'd know that.
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Of course, that's taken out of context and altered to make him look like a populist and socialist, and not the moderate he actually was. Not that you'd know that. Though he wasn't a moderate. He was a purist of his position, and as a sum of his parts, he was a conservative. The last of them.
Who is Yuri? Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Though he wasn't a moderate. He was a purist of his position, and as a sum of his parts, he was a conservative. The last of them. If you like Ike, I won't quibble with your reasons. I like him too. You call him conservatve, I call him socialist, you call him traditional, I call him disestablishmentarian, potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 If you like Ike, I won't quibble with your reasons. I like him too. You call him conservatve, I call him socialist, you call him traditional, I call him disestablishmentarian, potato, potahto, tomato, tomahto...Tell me more about that "socialist" Eisenhower, who ushered in a decade of austerity, actually had the US under a balanced budget without accounting gimmicks, and demanded non-Keynesian monetary policy.
Who is Yuri? Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 "Today in America, unions have a secure place in our industrial life. Only a handful of reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions and depriving working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice. I have no use for those -- regardless of their political party -- who hold some vain and foolish dream of spinning the clock back to days when organized labor was huddled, almost as a hapless mass. Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice." Dwight D. Eisenhower
Who is Yuri? Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 Tell me more about that "socialist" Eisenhower, who ushered in a decade of austerity, actually had the US under a balanced budget without accounting gimmicks, and demanded non-Keynesian monetary policy. "Every dollar spent by the government must be paid for either by taxes or by more borrowing with greater debt. The only way to make more tax cuts now is to have bigger and bigger deficits and to borrow more and more money. Either we or our children will have to bear the burden of this debt. This is one kind of chicken that always comes home to roost. An unwise tax cutter, my fellow citizens, is no real friend of the taxpayer." - Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower 1952 on his refusal to lower the top marginal tax rate on the rich from 91%.
DC Tom Posted September 6, 2015 Posted September 6, 2015 "Some people wanted champagne and caviar when they should have had beer and hot dogs." -Eisenhower, about socialism.
Recommended Posts