The dumbass express is leaving the station: this month in stupid.

So shocking to no one (or at least not me), now that the election is drawing closer, the stupid is coming fast and furious, and it turns out that even a 4 part blog about it wasnt enough to catch it all as it just keeps growing.

Case and point Rick Perry, who I think believes he is still running for President in 2012. Otherwise I really cant explain this

Perry claims Obama has a"“lack of engagement to stop ISIS.” [and the president] “has a hard time connecting the dots from time to time, of understanding, [because of a] lack of executive experience”

2 problems, the less well known one first: the US is actually leading an international coalition and has already killed more than 10,000 ISIS members  Or as Rick Perry puts it "nothing".

Problem number 2 should be obvious to everyone. The leader of the free-world, about to leave office due to term limits, and the highest level executive in his country, has no executive experience.....

Right because logic.

Also, even if somehow magically we could get our heads far enough up our asses to not have 2 terms count.....why would you blast a guy NOT running in the next election as unqualified to be elected again? HES ALREADY NOT RUNNING.

Although I suppose much like that 3 agency of government, Rick Perry may have just forgotten which year he's running in.

Speaking of being in the wrong year, we come to a man who already failed his life's goal of being nominated as George Wallace's running mate, Mike Huckabee.

Recently the Huckster was asked about the shooting in South Carolina, specifically as it tied into the Confederate Flag still being displayed at the State Capitol. His response:

“I still think it’s not an issue for a person running for president, Everyone’s being baited with this question as if somehow that has anything to do whatsoever with running for president.

I don’t think [the American people] want us to weigh in on every little issue in all 50 states that might be an important issue to the people of that state but not on the desk of the president,”

To be fair, the man DOES have a point. There is no way a Flag, especially this one could ever be a big enough deal to make it to the presidents desk.

Right guys?.

The Huckster continued:

“The question underlying all of this is, that we’re asking, is South Carolina a racist state because of the flag that flies on their capitol grounds? I don’t think you could say that the presence of one lunatic racist, who everybody in this country feels contempt for, and no one is defending, is somehow evidence of the people of South Carolina,””

And actually you know what, again he's got a point, South Carolina is not a racist state because of that flag or one person.

They are a racist state cause of the whole secession thing (which they started), followed by the whole firing on Ft. Sumter thing, which turned into the civil war, followed by the whole Jim Crow thing, followed by being the stronghold of the First Klan, to being the site of one of the most recent race based lynchings (in 2006).....to finally failing to lower or remove the Confederate Flag to half staff EVEN when the American Flag WAS lowered after the shooting

But you know, other that American History disagreeing Huckabee has a good point (good in the sense of he pronounced all his words correctly)

Next up we actually cross the aisle to the Democratic Side, where one of their presidential candidates finds himself waging his own war on Stupidity. Enter Bernie Sanders.

Sanders was being interviewed by NPR's Diane Rehm when the following exchange occurred:

Rehm: Senator, you have dual citizenship with Israel
Sanders: "Well, no I do not have dual citizenship with Israel, I'm an American. I don't know where that question came from. I am an American citizen, and I have visited Israel on a couple of occasions. I'm an American citizen, period.""

Rehm: I understand from a list we have gotten that you were on that list.

Sanders: No.

Rehm: Forgive me if that is—

Sanders: That's some of the nonsense that goes on in the internet. But that is absolutely not true.

Rehm: Interesting. Are there members of Congress who do have dual citizenship or is that part of the fable?

So is Bernie Sanders yet another foreign national illegally trying to become president (you know, like the current guy)? Or is he, as he claims, as american as Barack Obama or anyone else?

Believe it or not......He's AMERICAN!

So what the fuck was Diane Rehm talking about? well as she herself put it the next day when she was forced to apologize:

"On yesterday’s show, I raised the issue of dual citizenship with Senator and Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders. This is an issue that has come up over the years in American politics. One of our listeners suggested via our Facebook page that I ask Senator Sanders about Internet speculation that he has dual citizenship with Israel.

But instead of asking it as a question I stated it as fact. That was wrong. He does NOT have dual citizenship and Senator Sanders immediately corrected me. I should have explained to him and to you why I felt this was a relevant question and something he might like to address. I apologize to Senator Sanders and to you for having made an erroneous statement. However, I am glad to play a role in putting this rumor to rest."
So lets see her excuse is "hey a listener asked me about it being possible on Facebook....and everyone on Facebook is clearly an expert on journalism (unlike me) so I not only assumed the rumors existed but that they were in fact FACTS...because you know....why actually do my job?"

By the way, I actually WOULD like to hear her explanation as to why she considers any sort of  facebook rumor, especially one that is easily disprovable, relevant to anything ever.

So yea, we're waiting.....

But as it turns out Mrs. Rehm's is NOT the only person to get tripped up by social media this month.

Enter Republican Senator John Thune, who ealier this month made a tweet about the then still undecided Obamacare case

"Six million people risk losing their health care subsidies, yet @POTUS continues to deny that Obamacare is bad for the American people."

Translation: "You see how bad Obamacare is? its so bad that tons of people will be negatively impacted if MY party succeeds in taking it away from them.

But should that happen, you should totally blame the president for not admitting for fucked you would be when MY party took this great thing away from you.....

How dare the Democratic President do something to make it easier for Republicans to fuck you over.....which is why next time you should cut out the middle man and vote Republican"

Good luck with that one.......

By the way speaking of Obamacare, it also provides this months winner for Dumb fuck of the month, in the form of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (also Thomas and Alito who joined in the dissent, but Scalia gets the nod here because he wrote it)

I already ripped Scalia for his dissent in the Gay Marriage case a couple of blogs ago, but I actually missed the significantly more stupid argument he used in the Obamacare case namely:

"The Court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says 'Exchange established by the State' it means 'Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.' That is of course quite absurd, and the Court's 21 pages of explanation make it no less so."


He also has a more pithy version thats flying around the right wing right now:


"Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is 'established by the State.'"

So clearly Justice Scalia's point here is that words have meanings and those meanings should be followed.

By the way, you know what the meaning of the word "State" is? Well according to the dictionary its got several, specifically:

"made, maintained, or chartered by or under the authority of one of the commonwealths that make up a federal union"
This is the defintion Scalia seems to be familiar with.....this would suggest a state is something like the State of Virginia, or the State of New York ect.

BUT theres a problem here as state can also mean

"a politically unified people occupying a definite territory; nation."

Thats right, state can also mean NATION or NATIONAL. hence why the "State sponsor of terror list" happens to include North Korea and Iran, even though neither is actually part of the United States."

Which means when considering the meaning of the word "established by the state" either definition could be considered valid (which is in a nutshell the supreme courts ruling)

Of course I doubt this is new information to any one, as I assume all of my readers successfully passed 5th grade civics.

Of course if by some odd happenstance you didnt pass 5th grade civics...CONGRATULATIONS even you can grow up to be a Supreme Court Justice.

And Congratulations to you as well Justice Scalia, not only are you dumber than a 5th grader, you are actually the dumbest person in the world this month.  

Once again the GOP is caught with their pants down....and this time its kinda gay.

So one of the recent reoccurring themes of my blog has focused on how, time and time and time and time again the Republican party keeps getting blindsided by reality.....and has no mechanism to cope.

For example. In 2014 the GOP ran on the idea that if they got the senate they could impeach Obama. Small problem, the math was NEVER going to work, and they had to try to weasel their way out of that promise.

Or Keystone XL....which the republicans needed the president to veto to kill (so I suppose the end of my blog here was wrong, but otherwise CALLED IT) to get out of that promise

Or Obamacare. Specifically the recent lawsuit to overturn it. A lawsuit that was SO bad for Republicans they were desperately trying to preemptively reverse a decision in their favor. Luckly for the GOP and the rest of us, it wasnt needed......but only because republicans are evil despicable people according to themselves.   (and this doesnt even get into the fact that its been about 6 years since Obamacare was first passed....and the GOP actually still hasnt come up with the alternative they have been saying should be the countries plan B)

And for the record, the GOP is currently already set to make this same mistake again later next year....as they are already blowing through all their money creating attack ads based on the assumption Hilary is going to win. And if she doesnt win (as I expect she wont)...well OOPS.

So I guess it should be no surprise that after the Supreme Court upheld its own unanimous precedents that the federal government can redefine marriage however they like, the GOP has no real plan for this either.

Now thats not stopping them from trying to suggest plans....especially the ones pretending to run for president in 2016.

For example: Bobby Jindal (who just officially announced) has an idea that would "fix" two problems at once:

“The Supreme Court is completely out of control, making laws on their own, and has become a public opinion poll instead of a judicial body. If we want to save some money, let’s just get rid of the court"

So Bobby Jindals solution to the SCOTUS giving an opinion he disagrees with is to destroy the american Constitutional system.....

on the upside, destroying the government WOULD mean we didnt have to pay back that governments debt. So I guess he gets partial credit.

Ted Cruz meanwhile has not 1 but two different solutions.

The first is a Constitutional Amendment requiring Supreme Court justices to stand for reelection every 8 years, coinciding with presidential elections. Of course in normal american style, these would not be outright popular vote elections. In order to remove the Justice you would need not only 50.1% of the national popular vote,  but also 50.1% of the popular vote in 50% of the states.

A benchmark that could be a problem for Cruz and his ilk, as they have only hit it ONCE in 30 years (based on presidential elections).

Meaning, if we do this it is much more likely Alito, Thomas, and Scalia get tossed out on their asses then anyone else.

Not exactly the best strategy if you want to move the Court to the right...... (then again, as I've long said, Ted Cruz is one of the best at moving policy the Left has ever had....so maybe hes a double agent and this is a stoke of genius)

By the way, as I said, Cruz has a second idea too: pass a LAW saying the supreme court can no longer rule on issues related to marriage.

Now there are 2 major problems here.

The first is the word I capitalized, LAW, not amendment. and as a law, it would likely go up in front of the supreme court......and what do you think the chances that the court wouldnt uphold it?  It would likely be the fastest unanimous decision in Court history to overturn it.

Second problem is this: As it stands, Gay Marriage is legal in all 50 states. Cruz's law would make it illegal for the court to EVER change that.

Which makes things really difficult for the "traditional marriage" side that Cruz is supposed to be helping........

But all of that brings me to the greatest (read worst) of the ideas the GOP has had to "protect" traditional marriage.....stop letting people get married.

Thats right, this is the idea being floated by Mississippi, Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma (and probably a few others before its all said and done). The state will totally and utterly destroy states ability to recognize a marriage.

Meaning that, in the eyes of the state NO ONE is married. Every single one of us is living in sin.  Doesnt matter if your two dudes, two girls, 1 dude and 1 girl, 2 dudes and a girl, or 3 dudes and 5 girls YOU'RE ALL EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE STATE

Congratulations Mississippi, you just legalized Polyamory.....I'm going to assume an OOPS is called for here.

You also just removed the preference for married couples to adopt. Since no one would be married EVERY adult is unrelated to any other.

So you just legalized gay adoption...or single parent only adopting, depending on how you want to play it.

OOPS again.

Furthermore your going to tell all your citizens that what ever their churches say is irrlevant. Since you are unrelated you get jack when your partner dies. No death benefits, no pensions, no social security no inheritance, you cant go to the hospital and see them when they are dying cause your not family.

Also that kid you had? well turns out your partner had sole custody, so they will be adopted soon by a loving (and possibly gay) individual....

By the way, hope your name is on the deed to your house......

And that your not using your partner for insurance, cause yea you aint related no more, so thats gonna go bye bye

oh and did we mention your taxes are going to go up?

OOPS OOPS OOPS OOPS and fucking OOPS.!

But hey on the bright side, gay marriage will not destroy traditional marriage.....

      

The Supreme Court's Gay marriage decision and the 4 Horsemen of heteronormativity.

So unless you live under a rock AND are totally blind and deaf, you likely heard that today the United States Supreme Court voted 5-4 to legalize gay marriage nation wide.

What you probably didn't hear though is just how bad [from the basis of any kind of framework] the dissent is.

Which was actually easily predictable, given that any defense of banning gay marriage was likley going to rest primarily on the idea that the Federal Government can't change the state definition of marriage.

Which happens to not be true.

In 1878 in  case called Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court overrode state marriage laws and banned polygamy. Or in a 1967 in a case called Loving v. Virginia, the SCOTUS again overrode marriage laws and said states could be forced to marry any 2 hetrosexual people who wanted to get married.

Now this by no means ensured a victory for the pro gay marriage side (given that of the two cases mentioned, 1 would be considered a conservative/"traditional" victory today, the other a liberal/"equality" victory). All it means is that the US actually has a very long history of having the federal government define marriage any god damn way it wants, fuck the states.

By the way, both of those cases were fucking unanimous, so there is literally not a Justice in history, until today, who heard a case about redefining marriage by national fiat and said "no actually we cant do that".

So that is the incredibly weak, functionally non existent position the minority is trying to work from here.

We start with the Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts:

"The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this Court’s precedent. The majority expressly disclaims judicial “caution” and omits even a pretense of humility, openly relying on its desire to remake society according to its own “new insight” into the “nature of injustice.”

Thats right, no basis in precedent.....except for the 2 UNANIMOUS decisions over the course of about 90 years. But other than that......

Apparently oblivious to the history of his own job, Roberts continues:

"The premises supporting this concept of marriage are so fundamental that they rarely require articulation. The human race must procreate to survive. Procreation occurs through sexual relations between a man and a woman. When sexual relations result in the conception of a child, that child’s prospects are generally better if the mother and father stay together rather than going their separate ways. Therefore, for the good of children and society, sexual relations that can lead to procreation should occur only between a man and a woman committed to a lasting bond.

Society has recognized that bond as marriage. And by bestowing a respected status and material benefits on married couples, society encourages men and women to conduct sexual relations within marriage rather than without. As one prominent scholar put it, “Marriage is a socially arranged solution for the problem of getting people to stay together and care for children that the mere desire for children, and the sex that makes children possible, does not solve.”"

And he's got a point, except for the whole divorce thing which allows you to leave a marriage and your kids. Oh and people like this

Bristol Palin

Call me crazy, but I have a hunch she's not just having "sexual relations that can lead to procreation" only with men "committed to a lasting bond". And its not like shes anywhere NEAR the only one (just as it happens the most famous one at the moment) So I guess we can call that a "marriage fail"?

But lastly and perhaps most importantly is Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 Supreme Court Case, which actually made it illegal to stop a married person from using contraception, because in part marriage wasnt only about children.

Man John Roberts might want to look into these "Supreme Court" guys....they seem to think he's a moron....

Luckily for Roberts, he has a found a higher power to drawn from (and shockingly not God):

"In his first American dictionary, Noah Webster defined marriage as “the legal union of a man and woman for life,” which served the purposes of “preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes, . . . promoting domestic felicity, and . . . securing the maintenance and education of children.”"

Now Noah Webster's first dictionary was published in 1806. I dont have it in front of me, but I'm going to go out on a limb and guess defines the word "African American" as follows: "not possible, property cant be an american" or the word "Woman" as "property of her husband"

I'd also guess it doesnt have definitions for words like "car" "radio" "baseball" "jeans" or "internet"

What I'm getting at is, it might not be the most reliable up to date source to pull from.

But its not like Roberts had a choice here. I looked up "marriage" in the current version of Webster's dictionary came up with this:

" (1) the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage"

So the dictionary cited by the Chief Justice of the United States in his defense against allowing gays to get married, actually defines marriage as being possibly same sex.

Well thats awkward.......

Granted its not the oddest thing Roberts said

"Perhaps the most discouraging aspect of today’s decision is the extent to which the majority feels compelled to sully those on the other side of the debate. The majority offers a cursory assurance that it does not intend to disparage people who, as a matter of conscience, cannot accept same- sex marriage.

By the majority’s account, Americans who did nothing more than follow the understanding of marriage that has existed for our entire history — in particular, the tens of millions of people who voted to reaffirm their States’ enduring definition of marriage — have acted to “lock . . . out,” “disparage,” “disrespect and subordinate,” and inflict “[d]ignitary wounds” upon their gay and lesbian neighbors. These apparent assaults on the character of fairminded people will have an effect, in society and in court."

Translation: I'm against gays getting married because allowing them to do so would suggest that those of us with our heads up our asses about our own legal history, might in fact be morons, and while true, forcing us to admit that is just mean......

Luckily for Roberts, and sadly for the rest of us, he was hardly alone in his self inflicted cranial penetration of the anal cavity. Take his fellow Bush appointee Sam Alito who also thinks its mean to point out he's an idiot.

"It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy. In the course of its opinion, the majority compares traditional marriage laws to laws that denied equal treatment for African-Americans and women. The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent.

I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public, they will risk being labeled as bigots and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools.

By imposing its own views on the entire country, the majority facilitates the marginalization of the many Americans who have traditional ideas. Recalling the harsh treatment of
gays and lesbians in the past, some may think that turnabout is fair play. But if that sentiment prevails, the Nation will experience bitter and lasting wounds."

No, actually I take that back. Justice Alito thinks it mean to point out he is both a moron AND a bigot in a way almost identically comparable to those on the losing of Loving v Virginia 50 years ago.

Alito also called this an "upside down black heart on a stick" and stated other names for it were too negative.

Moving on to Horseman Number 3. Justice Clarence Thomas, who makes two points mostly proving he's not paying attention.

"Petitioners cannot claim, under the most plausible definition of “liberty,” that they have been imprisoned or physically restrained by the States for participating in same-sex relationships. To the contrary, they have been able to cohabitate and raise their children in peace. They have been able to hold civil marriage ceremonies in States that recognize same-sex marriages and private religious ceremonies in all States. They have been able to travel freely around the country, making their homes where they please. Far from being incarcerated or physically restrained, petitioners have been left alone to order their lives as they see fit."
Except, even that is a relatively recent development. Up until EXACTLY 12 years ago (June 26th 2003) gays could in fact be arrested and imprisoned (so physically restrained)  by the state for engaging in homosexual activities with consenting adults in their own homes.

And by the way, that change is actually no thanks to you. It was due to a SCOTUS case called Lawrence v. Texas, that was decided 6-3. One of the 3 in favor of locking up gays for consensual sex was one Justice Clarence Thomas.  In fact, he authored his own damn dissent.

Apparently it seems Justice Thomas can no longer remember things that have happened to Justice Thomas, as according to Justice Thomas, no living gay person has ever been imprisoned just for being gay.....

"The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity)
because the government allowed them to be enslaved. Those held in internment camps did not lose their dignity because the government confined them. And those denied
governmental benefits certainly do not lose their dignity because the government denies them those benefits. The government cannot bestow dignity, and it cannot take it away."

So according to Thomas,  it doesnt really matter if you cant marry the person you love, get locked up by your government for how you look, or are in fact legally classified as non-human. As long as you have your dignity, whats the problem? go fuck off.

Which is an especially shocking opinion in light of the fact that, had Thomas' predecessors agreed with him, he would not be a Supreme Court Justice, he would in fact be legally classified as a "courtroom decoration"....assuming of course they let him into the Courtroom at all/hadnt lynched him for fucking a white woman (his wife).And fucking is all he'd have been able to do since without Loving v Virginia its not like he could have married her......

And with that, we come to the 4th and final Horseman......Justice Antonin Scalia.

He starts by proving that he is in fact as dumb as Roberts and Alito with this

"These Justices know that limiting marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago, cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry. And they are willing to say that any citizen who does not agree with that, who adheres to what was, until 15 years ago, the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, stands against the Constitution."

Yep thats right, traditional marriage was accepted by everyone everywhere always until 15 years ago.

Well except for the Romans... and the Mormons...and the Spanish....and the Irish...and the Arabs...and the Indians...and the Celts...and Tibetans....and Native American's....and Italians...and parts of Africa...and Indonesia...and Biblical Christianity.

But with those few "minor" exceptions, its been everyone always.....

And it seems Scalia has inherited Thomas' memory loss:

"But what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch. The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003."

This being totally different than the 5 justices (including all 4 mentioned here0 who were completely comfortable concluding that every State violated the 1st amendment in the 218 years between its ratification and Citizens United.....cause that was totally ok. After all when Justice Scalia does it that means that it is not astounding. (to paraphrase a former president)


finally Scalia moves on to the irony section:

"They [the majority] have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds — minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis, William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly — could not."
You know whats awkward....well other than being wrong, given that at least 18 other supreme court justices found the same right (in the two cases I mentioned in the beginning)?

How about fucking up Supreme Court history... Of Scalia's list of names, 3 of them were never actually on the supreme court (Friendly, Hand and Cooley)

Or prehaps, that is maybe the WORST possible list of people you could point to for support.

To start with Oliver Wendall Homes wrote the court decision in Buck v Bell that said the government could legally sterilize you against your will.

So yea not a person you would find much popular support for.....even from those (like Chief Justice Roberts) who agree with you, that gay marriage is bad because children.....

There are actually 2 John Marshall Harlan's and neither is really a great example.

Harlan I. was one of 9 justices to unanimously rule in Pace v. Alabama, that we should be able to legally restrict black people from marrying white people.

So yea, racist bigot....great pick

Harlan II is actually worse for Scalia though. He was famous for his very broad interpretation of the 14th amendment...and actually one of the 9 justices that ruled unanimous in favor of allowing interracial marriage and forcing to states to comply in the Loving case (which overturned Pace)

So yea, that would be one of the 18 justices whos actually considered this issue....and agreed with the majority in this case.

By the way, another name on the list, Hugo Black....also one of those 9 justices from the Loving case.

So yea, thats now 1 or 2 names from your own list who'd think your a moron.....good going Scalia.

Brandis it turns out is actually the person who basically created the idea of the Right to Privacy, and the idea you can do whatever the fuck you want in your own "home"  Scalia is opposing with this decent.

Taft meanwhile wrote the opinion in Wisconsin v. Illinois that said the Court does have the power to force a state to comply with an action in another state (like say forcing marriage recognition?)

Now in fairness to Scalia, the final 3 names (Cardozo, Jackson and especially Frankfurter) are actually pretty good supports for his position.

Still when your ratio of self picked supporters turns out to be 3 historically not relevant, 4 (or 5 depending on harlan) actual supporters (1 or 2 of whom drafted opinions relevant here saclia would never support), and 3 (or 4 cause harlan) who would openly disagree with you, including 1 or 2 of whom actually DID rule against your position, thats not exactly a well thought out position.

Especially considering Scalia isnt writing his dissent for the common man.....he's writing it for future justices and future cases to use for support. So proving yourself a moron to the extent of being basically 66% openly and clearly wrong with your examples is just this side of being mentally retarded.

Scalia (and to lesser extents the other 3) is literally outright trying to lie about court history and precedent to a group of future readers who are likely to be experts on those very issues.

But I guess that's what happens when you find yourself trying to support a position for political reasons that has no legal justification beyond "because we said so", and the people who agree with you [incorrectly] believe that actually not the legal justification and you dont feel like educating them.

So yea there you have it, the total weaksauce, asinine, attempts at defending their position of the only 4 out of 27 justices to ever rule marriage isnt definable by the federal government.

Conspiracy Watch: Following Obamacare ruling GOP says GOP is inherently evil.

So a few months back I posted a blog pointing out the GOP was desperately trying to SAVE Obamacare from the GOP, because the GOP was about to destroy itself.

If you dont want to click the link, heres the short version: The GOP filed a lawsuit, that if successful would strip healthcare.....but only from Republicans. And would force those same Republicans to continue to pay for healthcare that would only go to Democrats.

So yea, you can see why this might be a major problem for Republicans to explain.

Well it turns out that thanks to the US Supreme Court, that problem has been avoided for Republicans, they dont actually have to explain anything, since the Court ruled against them.

Now you'd think this would actually be Good news for republicans. But that suggests you dont know republicans.

See it turns out that Republican's avoiding self destruction is a massive conspiracy by Democrats, for motivations yet unknown.

In otherwords, prepare to find out how deep the rabbit hole goes.  At least according to author, tea partier, potential Republican Senate Nominee from Nevada, and former Libertarian Vice Presidential candidate,  Wayne Root who wrote this:

"It’s time to start asking the question. It’s time to be cynical. It’s time to assume the worst of this government.

Has Supreme Court Justice John Roberts been blackmailed or intimidated?


I would put nothing by the Obama administration that lives and rules by the Chicago thug playbook.

Doubt me? On the same day that Justice Roberts and the Supremes upheld Obamacare – again – the key IRS watchdog reported to Congress that the IRS purposely destroyed evidence of a crime."

So I actually left the links intact here for a reason.....I really really want you to click the second one. Mostly so that you'll believe me when I tell you what it says: its the FOX news 404 error page.

Which means 1) even FOX news has no idea what the fuck he's taking about

2) Mr. Root assumes his readers wont catch him, because he assumes his readership is too fucking stupid to click the link.

3) note both of these (the obamacare ruling and the 404 error link) allegedly occured on the same day...so Root cant even claim the story was taken down after the fact....its only been about 7 1/2 hours (as of my writing this)....we havnt had time for "after the fact"

Anyways, after making shit up completely, and trusting in your mental stupidity and brainwashing, Root continues:

"Is the idea implausible that this same Obama administration that orders IRS attacks, then orders destruction of key evidence, would stop at nothing to save Obama’s signature achievement? Is it impossible to believe that Obama and his socialist cabal that learned from Saul Alinsky that “the ends justify the means” would hold something over a Supreme Court justice’s head?

It’s time to ask the question loudly and boldly because something is clearly wrong in Washington, D.C.

Is that the purpose of government agencies like the IRS and the NSA that are abusing our rights – to listen to us, to watch us, to find something we’ve done wrong, and then use it to intimidate, harass, threaten or extort key political figures so that Obama can “fundamentally change America”?

Well lets see, given that, it appears based on your links, your premise never happened...uh yea I am going to have to say your idea is implausible.

Also who the fuck is Saul Alinsky?

My college degree is in American History, I used to work for congress, and I write a political blog, and outside of deranged right wing rants mentioning his name i've never actually heard of this dude. Just saying, if anyone would have heard of him if he was actually even slightly important to anything, its me.

"Because something clearly smells rotten in Washington, D.C. Like “the mafia delivering a dead fish to your door” rotten. Conservatives just won national elections in a massive wave, a historic landslide. We control both houses of Congress; we control the Supreme Court, yet we continue to lose every key vote in Congress and every key Supreme Court ruling.

Suddenly when Republicans win elections, elections have no consequences. Doesn’t this seem odd? Doesn’t something smell rotten, like the fix is in?"

Well lets see, given that we are dealing with the Supreme Court.....the branch of government that by design is totally unelected and supposed to be as far removed from the results of any election as possible......no it doesnt seem in the slight bit odd.

Then again, I'm not sure Root's SCOTUS exists in the same reality as ours....his elections sure dont.

See according to him, Republicans coming up 2.6 million votes below what the dem's got is a historic landslide (yes the GOP got 9 seats, they just got fewer votes nationally). And winning ONLY 13 seats is a MASSIVE wave (as opposed to say winning 63 seats in 2010).

So either Root isnt seeing the same elections as the rest of us (possibly due to his sphincter cutting off the bloodflow to his brain and causing hallucinations) or he's just really really really bad with numbers (or both)

Anyways....moving on

Justice Roberts voting for Obamacare twice is as likely as me voting to save Obamacare.

Like me, Justice Roberts is a lifelong dedicated conservative warrior. He was appointed by President George W. Bush to become the key conservative vote in important decisions that effect “the fundamental transformation of America.” Justice Roberts was born, raised and groomed for one job in this life – to join that Supreme Court, strike down Obamacare, protect the Constitution and end big government overreach.

Yet he is the man responsible for saving Obamacare – twice.
So apparently Justice Roberts is a time-traveler....having been groomed since his birth in 1955 to strike down something that wouldnt exist for 55 years.  He even managed to get himself preemptively appointed to the Supreme Court 7 years early.....you know just in case.

"Justice Roberts legacy as a “conservative warrior” will be that he protected big government, supported government overreach and helped to hasten the fundamental transformation of America.

This doesn’t seem odd to you? This doesn’t smell rotten?"

Um nope. See for those of us with working brains and an ability to read (so, not readers of Wayne Root) we might be able to find out that Roberts first major case was US vs Microsoft....in which he represented to US take down Microsoft for being too close to a monopoly.  Or that he was part of the unanimous decision at the appeals court level in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld to allow the federal government to undertake extralegal military tribunals of non combatants. (a decision overturned by the Supreme Court).

What it does sound like though, is that you Mr. Root have no idea what your taking about. You just assume that because a man is a republican or appointed by one he must have his head inserted as far into his own rectum as you do.

 By the way, a key point to get to before we move on. You would be forgiven if you think the recent SCOTUS Ruling was 5-4, with the blame for the "liberals winning" resting solely with Roberts.

Except its not. The ruling was actually 6-3, meaning Roberts vote didnt particularly matter.

So yea this entire theory boils down to how a the Obama administration must have done something evil to win a vote it didnt actually need, presumably because they were bored.

Oh and by the way, its not JUST the supreme court the Obama's have sunk their teeth into.

"I have felt the same way about Speaker of the House John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for years now. Something is wrong. All it takes to destroy America and pass Obama’s agenda is to control a few key powerful positions in Washington, D.C.

Just blackmail one or two key conservative leaders to stop the GOP from blocking Obama’s agenda. Just find out the weak link of a key opposition leader or government official and hold it over their heads. It’s that simple. Suddenly sworn lifelong conservatives are giving Obama whatever he wants – Obamacare, Trans Pacific Partnership, massive tax increases, amnesty for illegals. The list is long."

See that evil Obama got to Boehner and McConnell as well....they were totally in on it. In fact all republicans were. Dont believe me? lets continue:

"Am I being too cynical? Really? Did anyone suspect former House Speaker Dennis Hastert was a child molester who commited crimes with underage boys?

Because he sure had everyone fooled. He looked like a choir boy. But he clearly did something terrible that forced him to agree to pay millions of dollars in blackmail.

And it’s odd that the government knew about it. How did they know to question Hastert about taking his own money out of his own bank account? Maybe they knew for the same reason they knew former CIA chief and retired Gen. David Petraeus was having an affair. Maybe they know everything."
He's right, Hastert was a child molester and no one saw it.  BUT Hastert wasnt in government at any point during the Obama Administration. He actually resigned in 2007. And from 1999 until 2007 had been Speaker of the House.

Now for the rest of us, this is (mostly) known as the George W. Bush Administration.

So clearly Bush was in on the conspiracy to force us all to have Obamacare too. Cause he'd have been the one blackmailing Hastert.

BUT the conspiracy goes FAR deeper than that, see the beginning of Hasterts speakership was in 1999 under Bill Clinton. And Hastert was the replacement for David Livingston....who without warning refused to accept the speakership after it came to light he was having an affair....and Livingston was the replace Newt Gingich, who had been forced out after it came to light HE was having an affair after having tried (and failed) to convict President Clinton for the same thing.

So presumably, Clinton was in on this too as he blackmailed a speaker and a presumptive speaker to ensure the new speaker would be a pedophile that Bush could blackmail so that he could be set up for Obama to blackmail him

And actually, as it turns out, even this isnt the end. You see, as I said the vote was 6-3, and the Supreme Court is made up of 4 Justices appointed by Democrats and 5 by Republicans. So who's the other Justice who jumped ship? that would be Anthony Kennedy.....who was appointed by Ronald Reagan....who clearly had to be in on this too.

anyways, now that we have uncovered all of the players lets keep moving:

"What makes anyone think the government and it’s three-letter agencies (IRS, NSA, DOJ, FBI, SEC) don’t know everything bad about everyone in key positions in Washington, D.C.? What makes you think that blackmail isn’t happening every day to conservative politicians – except it’s the government doing the blackmailing?

You know, this is the same government that asked the IRS to target key critics of this president (like me) and then ordered the IRS to destroy the evidence. The same government that told you “if you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” The same government that says there is no problem with $18 trillion in debt that threatens your children’s entire future. The same government that indicted both rating agencies immediately after they dared to downgrade the credit rating of the United States for the first time in history"

What? you thought I was kidding about all these Republican Presidents like Bush being in on this.

But the entire point here is that this has been going on for a long time and that the government has been doing this for a long time....long enough that we have had multiple administrations of both parties.......but only conservatives have been targeted.


"Just a guess, but here’s how I think it goes:

I think the Obama Crime Family meets with a key politician like Boehner or Justice Roberts and they offer both a carrot and stick. They threaten to expose something terrible like an affair, or corruption, or malfeasance, or immorality that would shock the nation, ruin their career, destroy their legacy, cost their marriage, destroy their relationship with their children and leave them unemployable by any respectable law firm or lobbyist. That’s what’s behind door number one.

Or if you see the light and vote Obama’s way, they get to continue playing national leader and hero, their legacy is untouched, their family loves them, and they retire someday to a $5 million per year lobbying job (like Dennis Hastert). That’s what’s behind door number two.

Which would you choose?

Trust me – those options are being offered every day by the Obama Crime Family to key political figures in Washington, D.C. Republicans are being blackmailed, intimidated, extorted and bribed. That explains Justice Roberts and the Supremes ruling against the American People again. That explains why conservatives keep winning elections, yet we keep gaining nothing and losing everything. It’s all been fixed."

There it is, in basic English. Bush covered up Hastert's pedophilia in exchange for his cooperation, and Obama exposed it to send a message to the 3 top republicans in the country; the Speaker of the House, the Senate Majority Leader and The Chief Justice of the United States.....ALL of whom have done things at least as bad as pedophilia.

And by implication, all 3 of those men's deputies are also guilty of pedophile level crimes they are covering up in exchange for helping Obama.

And again, note, at least according to these examples this is something exclusively done to Conservative politicians (by both republicans and democrats)

Which means, as I understand it, Obamacare is LAW and will remain so because Republicans are vile, evil, disgusting human beings ripe for blackmail and exploitation.....at least according to other Republicans.   

So I think the bigger question here is, if you read Mr. Root's article, and believed it, why in hell would you EVER vote republican again.....even for a republican like Wayne Root (who by the logic of his own article is probably a pedophile by virtue of being a Republican)

You're Hired: The Donald 2016, the most epic announcement speech of all times. Part 2, the Post Screed.

Picking up DIRECTLY (as in this is actually the next line of his speech despite the lack of a transition in the speech) from where I left off in part 1. Its STORY TIME:

"So, here’s a couple of stories happened recently. A friend of mine is a great manufacturer. And, you know, China comes over and they dump all their stuff, and I buy it. I buy it, because, frankly, I have an obligation to buy it, because they devalue their currency so brilliantly, they just did it recently, and nobody thought they could do it again.

But with all our problems with Russia, with all our problems with everything— everything, they got away with it again. And it’s impossible for our people here to compete."

So the problem with the US according to Trump is China....or Russia....or China, who sell their shit here to people like Donald Trump, who buys it while fucking over his friends in the process.

Point is, Donald Trump is a shitty friend.

"So I want to tell you this story. A friend of mine who’s a great manufacturer, calls me up a few weeks ago. He’s very upset. I said, “What’s your problem?”"

Wait didnt we just DO this story? Or is this a do over because you got side tracked by random russia last time.....

"He said, “You know, I make great product.”

And I said, “I know. I know that because I buy the product.”

No you dont. You just told everyone you fucked him over for China. So apparently your a shitty friend AND a liar.

"He said, “I can’t get it into China. They won’t accept it. I sent a boat over and they actually sent it back. They talked about environmental, they talked about all sorts of crap that had nothing to do with it.”

I said, “Oh, wait a minute, that’s terrible. Does anyone know this?”

He said, “Yeah, they do it all the time with other people.”

I said, “They send it back?”

“Yeah. So I finally got it over there and they charged me a big tariff. They’re not supposed to be doing that. I told them.”

Now, they do charge you tariff on trucks, when we send trucks and other things over there."

So the moral of this story, Take 2 version, is that your friends are also dumbasses?

"Ask Boeing. They wanted Boeing’s secrets. They wanted their patents and all their secrets before they agreed to buy planes from Boeing."

And the problem with this IS? its basically like asking for $20 an hour on a job you expect to make $14, you aint gonna get $20 but you might make $16. Just saying that Negotiations 101....allegedly Trumps strong suit.

"Hey, I’m not saying they’re stupid. I like China. I sell apartments for— I just sold an apartment for $15 million to somebody from China. Am I supposed to dislike them? I own a big chunk of the Bank of America Building at 1290 Avenue of the Americas, that I got from China in a war. Very valuable."

Translation: I'm not anti chinese people or anything....I once sold something to one of them. I have a great relationship with "the china's" kinda like my great relationship with "the blacks"

"I love China. The biggest bank in the world is from China. You know where their United States headquarters is located? In this building, in Trump Tower. I love China. People say, “Oh, you don’t like China?”

Remember the self promotion ADD? IT'S BAAAACCCKKKK!

"No, I love them. But their leaders are much smarter than our leaders, and we can’t sustain ourself with that. There’s too much— it’s like— it’s like take the New England Patriots and Tom Brady and have them play your high school football team. That’s the difference between China’s leaders and our leaders."

So basically your saying the Chinese are smarter but their balls are deflated?  nothing racist to see here folks........

They are ripping us. We are rebuilding China. We’re rebuilding many countries. China, you go there now, roads, bridges, schools, you never saw anything like it. They have bridges that make the George Washington Bridge look like small potatoes. And they’re all over the place.

So lets just send them Governor Christie.....we all saw what he did to the George Washington Bridge.....

Also the GWB is the busiest bridge in the world bar none. So yea, who wants to explain to Trump that size doesnt matter?

"We have all the cards, but we don’t know how to use them. We don’t even know that we have the cards, because our leaders don’t understand the game. We could turn off that spigot by charging them tax until they behave properly.

Now they’re going militarily. They’re building a military island in the middle of the South China sea. A military island. Now, our country could never do that because we’d have to get environmental clearance, and the environmentalist wouldn’t let our country— we would never build in an ocean. They built it in about one year, this massive military port."

Trump makes a good point, our country could NEVER build a military island.

Midway Island. A fictional american military Island that surely wasnt a major battle of  WW2.

"They’re building up their military to a point that is very scary. You have a problem with ISIS. You have a bigger problem with China."

Wait what? you just spend the last few minutes talking about how youd like to orally pleasure China if possible because you love them so much.....and now they are worse than terrorists?

Dafuq?

"And, in my opinion, the new China, believe it or not, in terms of trade, is Mexico.

So this man tells me about the manufacturing. I say, “That’s a terrible story. I hate to hear it.”

Mr. Trump I have to ask do you have tourettes? Cause somehow we went from talking to your friend on the phone to Boeing, to loving China, who are worse that terrorists but also the future of Mexico....and that was all actually supposed to be connected as a story?

"But I have another one, Ford.

So Mexico takes a company, a car company that was going to build in Tennessee, rips it out. Everybody thought the deal was dead. Reported it in the Wall Street Journal recently. Everybody thought it was a done deal. It’s going in and that’s going to be it, going into Tennessee. Great state, great people.

All of a sudden, at the last moment, this big car manufacturer, foreign, announces they’re not going to Tennessee. They’re gonna spend their $1 billion in Mexico instead. Not good.

Now, Ford announces a few weeks ago that Ford is going to build a $2.5 billion car and truck and parts manufacturing plant in Mexico. $2.5 billion, it’s going to be one of the largest in the world. Ford. Good company.

So I announced that I’m running for president. I would…

… one of the early things I would do, probably before I even got in— and I wouldn’t even use— you know, I have— I know the smartest negotiators in the world. I know the good ones. I know the bad ones. I know the overrated ones."
Ok seriously What the fuck is going on? Are you and that thing on your head locked in a battle over who actually gets to control your brain at the moment?

Cause like seriously dude, even Sarah Palin thinks that was unintelligible.

"You get a lot of them that are overrated. They’re not good. They think they are. They get good stories, because the newspapers get buffaloed. But they’re not good.

But I know the negotiators in the world, and I put them one for each country. Believe me, folks. We will do very, very well, very, very well."We will do very very well in WHAT? like I actually have no god damn clue what your even taking about except it may or may not involve Ford

"But I wouldn’t even waste my time with this one. I would call up the head of Ford, who I know. If I was president, I’d say, “Congratulations. I understand that you’re building a nice $2.5 billion car factory in Mexico and that you’re going to take your cars and sell them to the United States zero tax, just flow them across the border.”

And you say to yourself, “How does that help us,” right? “How does that help us? Where is that good”? It’s not.

So I would say, “Congratulations. That’s the good news. Let me give you the bad news. Every car and every truck and every part manufactured in this plant that comes across the border, we’re going to charge you a 35-percent tax, and that tax is going to be paid simultaneously with the transaction, and that’s it."

So the good news is your letter Ford bring cars in tax free, but the bad news is your not letting Ford bring in cars tax free? I'm pretty sure both of those statements cant be true.

Also do I even want to know what transaction your talking about here? cause are we talking sale of the car? cause if so your basically telling Ford to mark up all their prices 35% so the car buyer (AKA all of *us*) actually pays that when we buy the car.  So I'm not sure how thats sticking it to Ford.

"Now, here’s what is going to happen. If it’s not me in the position, it’s one of these politicians that we’re running against, you know, the 400 people that we’re (inaudible). And here’s what’s going to happen. They’re not so stupid. They know it’s not a good thing, and they may even be upset by it. But then they’re going to get a call from the donors or probably from the lobbyist for Ford and say, “You can’t do that to Ford, because Ford takes care of me and I take care of you, and you can’t do that to Ford.”

And guess what? No problem. They’re going to build in Mexico. They’re going to take away thousands of jobs. It’s very bad for us.

So under President Trump, here’s what would happen:

The head of Ford will call me back, I would say within an hour after I told them the bad news. But it could be he’d want to be cool, and he’ll wait until the next day. You know, they want to be a little cool.

And he’ll say, “Please, please, please.” He’ll beg for a little while, and I’ll say, “No interest.” Then he’ll call all sorts of political people, and I’ll say, “Sorry, fellas. No interest,” because I don’t need anybody’s money. It’s nice. I don’t need anybody’s money.

I’m using my own money. I’m not using the lobbyists. I’m not using donors. I don’t care. I’m really rich. I (inaudible).

And by the way, I’m not even saying that’s the kind of mindset, that’s the kind of thinking you need for this country."

So *if* I understand you, and thats a BIG stretch, your saying this would only work because your rich.....but your also saying that isnt the thing you need for this country.

So your undermining your own point? Ok..............

"So— because we got to make the country rich.

It sounds crass. Somebody said, “Oh, that’s crass.” It’s not crass.

We got $18 trillion in debt. We got nothing but problems.

We got a military that needs equipment all over the place. We got nuclear weapons that are obsolete.

We’ve got nothing. We’ve got Social Security that’s going to be destroyed if somebody like me doesn’t bring money into the country. All these other people want to cut the hell out of it. I’m not going to cut it at all; I’m going to bring money in, and we’re going to save it.

But here’s what’s going to happen:

After I’m called by 30 friends of mine who contributed to different campaigns, after I’m called by all of the special interests and by the— the donors and by the lobbyists— and they have zero chance at convincing me, zero— I’ll get a call the next day from the head of Ford. He’ll say. “Please reconsider,” I’ll say no.

He’ll say, “Mr. President, we’ve decided to move the plant back to the United States, and we’re not going to build it in Mexico.” That’s it. They have no choice. They have no choice."

Wait, are you SURE you dont want to pick this up when you and that thing on your head arnt fighting for control.

Cause somehow we jumped from Ford to 18 Trillion in debt to Nukes, to Social Security, to all your friends who are apparently (and thankfully) smart enough NOT to support you for president, back to Ford.

Because Ford is responsible for everything?  or something.....

"There are hundreds of things like that. I’ll give you another example.

Saudi Arabia, they make $1 billion a day. $1 billion a day. I love the Saudis. Many are in this building. They make a billion dollars a day. Whenever they have problems, we send over the ships. We say “we’re gonna protect.” What are we doing? They’ve got nothing but money.

If the right person asked them, they’d pay a fortune. They wouldn’t be there except for us.

And believe me, you look at the border with Yemen. You remember Obama a year ago, Yemen was a great victory. Two weeks later, the place was blown up. Everybody got out— and they kept our equipment.

They always keep our equipment. We ought to send used equipment, right? They always keep our equipment. We ought to send some real junk, because, frankly, it would be— we ought to send our surplus. We’re always losing this gorgeous brand-new stuff.

But look at that border with Saudi Arabia. Do you really think that these people are interested in Yemen? Saudi Arabia without us is gone. They’re gone."

Actually I'm pretty sure the Saudi's have something other than Money....but for the life of me I cant remember what it is

"And I’m the one that made all of the right predictions about Iraq. You know, all of these politicians that I’m running against now— it’s so nice to say I’m running as opposed to if I run, if I run. I’m running.

But all of these politicians that I’m running against now, they’re trying to disassociate. I mean, you looked at Bush, it took him five days to answer the question on Iraq. He couldn’t answer the question. He didn’t know. I said, “Is he intelligent?”

Ironically we are now ALL thinking the same thing about you........

"Then I looked at Rubio. He was unable to answer the question, is Iraq a good thing or bad thing? He didn’t know. He couldn’t answer the question.

How are these people gonna lead us? How are we gonna— how are we gonna go back and make it great again? We can’t. They don’t have a clue. They can’t lead us. They can’t. They can’t even answer simple questions. It was terrible.

But Saudi Arabia is in big, big trouble. Now, thanks to fracking and other things, the oil is all over the place. And I used to say it, there are ships at sea, and this was during the worst crisis, that were loaded up with oil, and the cartel kept the price up, because, again, they were smarter than our leaders. They were smarter than our leaders.

There is so much wealth out there that can make our country so rich again, and therefore make it great again. Because we need money. We’re dying. We’re dying. We need money. We have to do it. And we need the right people.

So Ford will come back. They’ll all come back. And I will say this, this is going to be an election, in my opinion, that’s based on competence."

Wait FORD? where the FUCK did Ford come from, dude you stopped talking about them like 10 minutes ago, unless somehow Saudi Arabia is actually part of Ford and we all missed that memo.

"Somebody said — thank you, darlin’.

Somebody said to me the other day, a reporter, a very nice reporter, “But, Mr. Trump, you’re not a nice person.”

That’s true. But actually I am. I think I am a nice person. People that know me, like me. Does my family like me? I think so, right. Look at my family. I’m proud of my family."

So its true, your not a nice person......except its not true because you are.....MAKE UP YOUR FUCKING MIND!

"By the way, speaking of my family, Melania, Barron, Kai, Donnie, Don, Vanessa, Tiffany, Ivanka did a great job. Did she do a great job?

Great. Jared, Laura and Eric, I’m very proud of my family. They’re a great family."

Now if you dont know anything about Trumps family, this might look like giving credit to his wife for how great his kids are, which is cool and all, except for one small problem.

Ivanka is his daughter, not his wife.

So I'm not entirely sure what she did that was such a great job.....maybe its possible he's referencing her giving him 2 of his 7 grandchildren.....except that he kinda forgot to mention THOSE grandkids in the speech (mentioned some of the others though)

That's kinda awkward.......

'So the reporter said to me the other day, “But, Mr. Trump, you’re not a nice person. How can you get people to vote for you?”

I said, “I don’t know.” I said, “I think that number one, I am a nice person. I give a lot of money away to charities and other things. I think I’m actually a very nice person.”

But, I said, “This is going to be an election that’s based on competence, because people are tired of these nice people. And they’re tired of being ripped off by everybody in the world. And they’re tired of spending more money on education than any nation in the world per capita, than any nation in the world, and we are 26th in the world, 25 countries are better than us in education. And some of them are like third world countries. But we’re becoming a third word country, because of our infrastructure, our airports, our roads, everything. So one of the things I did, and I said, you know what I’ll do. I’ll do it. Because a lot of people said, “He’ll never run. Number one, he won’t want to give up his lifestyle.”

They’re right about that, but I’m doing it"

So people will vote for you because they are nice, but people are tired of voting for nice people?

*singing* Take me down to the contradiction city, where the grass is green [and blue] and the girls are pretty [and ugly] take me home [and somewhere else].

"Number two, I’m a private company, so nobody knows what I’m worth. And the one thing is that when you run, you have to announce and certify to all sorts of governmental authorities your net worth.

So I said, “That’s OK.” I’m proud of my net worth. I’ve done an amazing job.

I started off— thank you— I started off in a small office with my father in Brooklyn and Queens, and my father said — and I love my father. I learned so much. He was a great negotiator. I learned so much just sitting at his feet playing with blocks listening to him negotiate with subcontractors. But I learned a lot.

But he used to say, “Donald, don’t go into Manhattan. That’s the big leagues. We don’t know anything about that. Don’t do it.”

I said, “I gotta go into Manhattan. I gotta build those big buildings. I gotta do it, Dad. I’ve gotta do it.”

And after four or five years in Brooklyn, I ventured into Manhattan and did a lot of great deals— the Grand Hyatt Hotel. I was responsible for the convention center on the west side. I did a lot of great deals, and I did them early and young. And now I’m building all over the world, and I love what I’m doing.

But they all said, a lot of the pundits on television, “Well, Donald will never run, and one of the main reasons is he’s private and he’s probably not as successful as everybody thinks.”

So I said to myself, you know, nobody’s ever going to know unless I run, because I’m really proud of my success. I really am.

I’ve employed— I’ve employed tens of thousands of people over my lifetime. That means medical. That means education. That means everything."

So your running because it will require you to release the documents that prove you're a success?

You know I'm not a lawyer or anything but it seems to me, you could *just* release the documents because you WANT to. Pretty sure that's legal....and easier than running for president.

:"So a large accounting firm and my accountants have been working for months, because it’s big and complex, and they’ve put together a statement, a financial statement, just a summary. But everything will be filed eventually with the government, and we don’t [use] extensions or anything. We’ll be filing it right on time. We don’t need anything."

So you dont need anything to finish it, but its not finished yet because you need more time......these contradictions make my head hurt.

"And it was even reported incorrectly yesterday, because they said, “He had assets of $9 billion.” So I said, “No, that’s the wrong number. That’s the wrong number. Not assets.”

So they put together this. And before I say it, I have to say this. I made it the old-fashioned way. It’s real estate. You know, it’s real estate.

It’s labor, and it’s unions good and some bad and lots of people that aren’t in unions, and it’s all over the place and building all over the world.

And I have assets— big accounting firm, one of the most highly respected— 9 billion 240 million dollars.

And I have liabilities of about $500 million. That’s long-term debt, very low interest rates.

In fact, one of the big banks came to me and said, “Donald, you don’t have enough borrowings. Could we loan you $4 billion”? I said, “I don’t need it. I don’t want it. And I’ve been there. I don’t want it.”

But in two seconds, they give me whatever I wanted. So I have a total net worth, and now with the increase, it’ll be well-over $10 billion. But here, a total net worth of—net worth, not assets, not— a net worth, after all debt, after all expenses, the greatest assets— Trump Tower, 1290 Avenue of the Americas, Bank of America building in San Francisco, 40 Wall Street, sometimes referred to as the Trump building right opposite the New York— many other places all over the world.

So the total is $8,737,540,000."

Translation: they said 9 billion which was wrong I will explain to you in GREAT detail of how rounded up by a exactly 26,246,0000 million and not a penny less......but yea point is ROUNDING IS UNACCEPTABLE

"Now I’m not doing that…

I’m not doing that to brag, because you know what? I don’t have to brag. I don’t have to, believe it or not."

Actually I have no problem believing you dont HAVE to......you just clearly enjoy bragging.

"I’m doing that to say that that’s the kind of thinking our country needs. We need that thinking. We have the opposite thinking."

Actually I'm pretty sure that like 20 paragraphs ago you said we DIDNT need that thinking....
*scrolls up the page* "And by the way, I’m not even saying that’s the kind of mindset, that’s the kind of thinking you need for this country."

Yep...I was right.

"We have losers. We have losers. We have people that don’t have it. We have people that are morally corrupt. We have people that are selling this country down the drain.

So I put together this statement, and the only reason I’m telling you about it today is because we really do have to get going, because if we have another three or four years— you know, we’re at $8 trillion now. We’re soon going to be at $20 trillion."

You know I was going to try to say something snarky here but you switched topics mid sentence and.....so I says bangor? I hardly know her.

"According to the economists— who I’m not big believers in, but, nevertheless, this is what they’re saying— that $24 trillion— we’re very close— that’s the point of no return. $24 trillion. We will be there soon. That’s when we become Greece. That’s when we become a country that’s unsalvageable. And we’re gonna be there very soon. We’re gonna be there very soon."

Honestly, kinda noticed you werent a big believer in economists....or numbers really, back in part 1.

"So, just to sum up, I would do various things very quickly. I would repeal and replace the big lie, Obamacare.

I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me, and I’ll build them very inexpensively, I will build a great, great wall on our southern border. And I will have Mexico pay for that wall.

Mark my words."

Again with the size comparsion thingy. it has to be a *GREAT GREAT* wall.

Although given what you said about mexico in part 1 I'm not shocked you think they would pay for it since according to you their economy is booming and employment is soaring compared to us.....in Trumpland they want the wall to keep *us* out.....

"Nobody would be tougher on ISIS than Donald Trump. Nobody.
I will find — within our military, I will find the General Patton or I will find General MacArthur, I will find the right guy. I will find the guy that’s going to take that military and make it really work. Nobody, nobody will be pushing us around."

Ah yes, two generals both removed from command (albeit temporarily in one case) for being bad at their jobs.

Also, if your looking for a world war II figure who really made the military work.....you probably want their boss:

General George C. Marshall. Army Chief of Staff, America's highest ranked General of World War 2.

"I will stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And we won’t be using a man like Secretary Kerry that has absolutely no concept of negotiation, who’s making a horrible and laughable deal, who’s just being tapped along as they make weapons right now, and then goes into a bicycle race at 72 years old, and falls and breaks his leg. I won’t be doing that. And I promise I will never be in a bicycle race. That I can tell you."

Cause everyone knows the most important factor in diplomacy is bike riding skills.

But hey, at least The Donald knows enough to never do anything embarrassing......

   (and yes I was tempted to just show a picture of his comb-over)

"I will immediately terminate President Obama’s illegal executive order on immigration, immediately.

Fully support and back up the Second Amendment.

Now, it’s very interesting. Today I heard it. Through stupidity, in a very, very hard core prison, interestingly named Clinton, two vicious murderers, two vicious people escaped, and nobody knows where they are. And a woman was on television this morning, and she said, “You know, Mr. Trump,” and she was telling other people, and I actually called her, and she said, “You know, Mr. Trump, I always was against guns. I didn’t want guns. And now since this happened”— it’s up in the prison area— “my husband and I are finally in agreement, because he wanted the guns. We now have a gun on every table. We’re ready to start shooting.”

I said, “Very interesting.”

So protect the Second Amendment."

I really hope this woman only owns two tables.....cause thats about the number of guns most pairs can fire at once. Any more than that, and shes basically leaving guns out for the people who break into her house to shoot her/shoot back with.....

But that said, I do agree with Trump, this woman's crazy is "Very interesting"

"End— end Common Core. Common Core should— it is a disaster. Bush is totally in favor of Common Core. I don’t see how he can possibly get the nomination. He’s weak on immigration. He’s in favor of Common Core. How the hell can you vote for this guy? You just can’t do it. We have to end education has to be local.

Rebuild the country’s infrastructure.

Nobody can do that like me. Believe me. It will be done on time, on budget, way below cost, way below what anyone ever thought.

I look at the roads being built all over the country, and I say I can build those things for one-third. What they do is unbelievable, how bad.

You know, we’re building on Pennsylvania Avenue, the Old Post Office, we’re converting it into one of the world’s great hotels. It’s gonna be the best hotel in Washington, D.C. We got it from the General Services Administration in Washington. The Obama administration. We got it. It was the most highly sought after— or one of them, but I think the most highly sought after project in the history of General Services. We got it. People were shocked, Trump got it.

Well, I got it for two reasons. Number one, we’re really good. Number two, we had a really good plan. And I’ll add in the third, we had a great financial statement. Because the General Services, who are terrific people, by the way, and talented people, they wanted to do a great job. And they wanted to make sure it got built.

So we have to rebuild our infrastructure, our bridges, our roadways, our airports. You come into La Guardia Airport, it’s like we’re in a third world country. You look at the patches and the 40-year-old floor. They throw down asphalt, and they throw."

Remember the very first thing Trump said? that the A/C was broken in his own building? So while he might be able to do it fast and cheap.....well clearly as he himself has proven....you'll get what you pay for

"You look at these airports, we are like a third world country. And I come in from China and I come in from Qatar and I come in from different places, and they have the most incredible airports in the world. You come to back to this country and you have LAX, disaster. You have all of these disastrous airports. We have to rebuild our infrastructure.".

You know, its kinda weird how much time Trump is spending in the Middle East and in China given how much he keeps suggesting those who do buiness with those people are destroying this country.....

'Save Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security without cuts. Have to do it.

Get rid of the fraud. Get rid of the waste and abuse, but save it. People have been paying it for years. And now many of these candidates want to cut it. You save it by making the United States, by making us rich again, by taking back all of the money that’s being lost.

Renegotiate our foreign trade deals.

Reduce our $18 trillion in debt, because, believe me, we’re in a bubble. We have artificially low interest rates. We have a stock market that, frankly, has been good to me, but I still hate to see what’s happening. We have a stock market that is so bloated.

Be careful of a bubble because what you’ve seen in the past might be small potatoes compared to what happens. So be very, very careful.

And strengthen our military and take care of our vets. So, so important.

Sadly, the American dream is dead.

But if I get elected president I will bring it back bigger and better and stronger than ever before, and we will make America great again.

Thank you. Thank you very much."You know you can almost see the mental talking points checklist going through Donalds head here. "Shit did I mention saving medicare? Check, the Debt? Check, the Military....I dont remember so fuck it, lets say it again....Check.

But as my final thought I just want to say. No, Mr. Trump THANK YOU, thank you for all the material you will be giving me and everyone else in the world who thinks your a joke (but then I repeat myself) over the upcoming year.

My only regret is that NOTHING I or anyone else ever comes up with will trump (pun not intended) this:

(just you know, in case you forgot why trump changed his mind about running last time)

You're Hired: The Donald 2016, the most epic announcement speech of all times. Part 1, the Pre Ramble

So its now offical. The republican presidential field is a joke.....because Donald Trump is running for president.

To celebrate this momentous mockery of a major political party, and The Donald's epic speech making skills, I hereby present, the ENTIRE announcement speech as made by The Donald. With, as usual my running commentary and critique and of course my never ending quest to shine the light on STUPID.

To be honest, given how long this damn thing is I considered only doing a condensed version.....but I realized that there was so much stupid spread throughout this thing that by condensing it I would only improve it.

Therefore we have the original, long form, unaltered speech, although due to its length I'm publishing it across two different blog posts to make it slightly more bearable to read/allow you to take a break and not forget where the hell you were.

(this is per time.com for the transcript:)

"Wow. Whoa. That is some group of people. Thousands.

So nice, thank you very much. That’s really nice. Thank you. It’s great to be at Trump Tower. It’s great to be in a wonderful city, New York. And it’s an honor to have everybody here. This is beyond anybody’s expectations. There’s been no crowd like this.

And, I can tell, some of the candidates, they went in. They didn’t know the air-conditioner didn’t work. They sweated like dogs.

They didn’t know the room was too big, because they didn’t have anybody there. How are they going to beat ISIS? I don’t think it’s gonna happen." 

Dafuq? The only way I can make sense of this is that Trump is saying Trump Tower are such pieces of shit the A/C doesnt work, and the other candidates are stupid for actually expecting Trump Tower be anything other than a rat's nest.

But hey credit where it's due, bashing yourself/your brand IS a new way to start a speech.

"Our country is in serious trouble. We don’t have victories anymore. We used to have victories, but we don’t have them. When was the last time anybody saw us beating, let’s say, China in a trade deal? They kill us. I beat China all the time. All the time.

When did we beat Japan at anything? They send their cars over by the millions, and what do we do? When was the last time you saw a Chevrolet in Tokyo? It doesn’t exist, folks. They beat us all the time."

Alright, fair point here, I actually can't think of a time we beat Japan.

Oh wait....nevermind

"When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they’re killing us economically."

You know when your whole justification for running is about money and how good you are with it its kinda awkward to not know how to read an exchange rate.

See at the moment The Donald said this the exchange rate for dollars to Peso is 1 to 15.25.

In otherwords what you can buy for 1 american dollar costs 15 peso's and change.

I guess the Donald doesnt know this is like golf, you actually want the LOWER number.....


"The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.
Thank you. It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people."

Drugies, Criminals, Rapists and Good People...........you know undesirables.

"It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast."

Translation: South America, Middle East....its all the same place right? I mean the people are both brown.....

"Islamic terrorism is eating up large portions of the Middle East. They’ve become rich. I’m in competition with them.

They just built a hotel in Syria. Can you believe this? They built a hotel. When I have to build a hotel, I pay interest. They don’t have to pay interest, because they took the oil that, when we left Iraq, I said we should’ve taken."

wait ISIS has HOTELS? Dafuq? and is it just me or does it seem like even if that was true The Donald's biggest issue is that he needs to take out a loan (hence the interest) and ISIS doesnt?

So his problem is that there, you know, bigger in the pants pocket area? (by which I mean the Wallet, get your mind out of the gutters)

"So now ISIS has the oil, and what they don’t have, Iran has. And in 19— and I will tell you this, and I said it very strongly, years ago, I said— and I love the military, and I want to have the strongest military that we’ve ever had, and we need it more now than ever. But I said, “Don’t hit Iraq,” because you’re going to totally destabilize the Middle East. Iran is going to take over the Middle East, Iran and somebody else will get the oil, and it turned out that Iran is now taking over Iraq. Think of it. Iran is taking over Iraq, and they’re taking it over big league."

Now its a bit hard to see at first read cause he changes thoughts mid sentence, but the key take away here is that this is stuff Trump said 19 years ago. Which means he said it in 1996. You know at a time where FUCKING NO ONE was taking about a war in Iraq.  So I actually have to assume he was just REALLY late to the party in giving his opinion on the first gulf war.

"We spent $2 trillion in Iraq, $2 trillion. We lost thousands of lives, thousands in Iraq. We have wounded soldiers, who I love, I love — they’re great — all over the place, thousands and thousands of wounded soldiers.

And we have nothing. We can’t even go there. We have nothing. And every time we give Iraq equipment, the first time a bullet goes off in the air, they leave it. "Last week, I read 2,300 Humvees— these are big vehicles— were left behind for the enemy. 2,000? You would say maybe two, maybe four? 2,300 sophisticated vehicles, they ran, and the enemy took them."

Wait, you cant get to Iraq?....dont tell that to Priceline, as they currently have a flight listed from BWI (Baltimore-Washington International) to Baghdad for a bit over 1600 round trip. And actually the Donald could save some money and fly from home, NYC to Baghdad comes in a bit over 1400 round trip.

"Last quarter, it was just announced our gross domestic product— a sign of strength, right? But not for us. It was below zero. Whoever heard of this? It’s never below zero."

You know, I'm starting to get the impression numbers and finances REALLY arnt The Donalds strong suit, cause he's just a little off here. And by a little off I mean off by a mere Seventeen and a half TRILLION.

You know, chump change.......

"Our labor participation rate was the worst since 1978. But think of it, GDP below zero, horrible labor participation rate."

On the one hand, he actually got this one right.

On the other hand, the Labor Participation Rate is a measure of the number of people older than 16 who are working OR want to work (even if they arnt). So yea, a low labor participation rate, means we have a lot of people who dont want to work.....  So yea, you slacking high school juniors and seniors are dragging us down with your whole staying in school bullshit. Also ever heard of the Baby Boomers? you fuckers are dragging us down with that whole "retirement thing".

If only we had some kind of government run "death panel" that could be used to kill old people and bring up our Labor Participation Rate numbers.......

"And our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don’t believe the 5.6. Don’t believe it.

That’s right. A lot of people up there can’t get jobs. They can’t get jobs, because there are no jobs, because China has our jobs and Mexico has our jobs. They all have jobs.

But the real number, the real number is anywhere from 18 to 19 and maybe even 21 percent, and nobody talks about it, because it’s a statistic that’s full of nonsense."
And you should totally believe The Donald over anyone else because he's been GREAT with numbers so far in this speech.........in fact he's so great he changed numbers pulled out of his ass between sentences and didnt even notice.

 Also, pretty sure if Mexicans all had jobs, we wouldnt have that whole "illegal immigration" problem.....

"Our enemies are getting stronger and stronger by the way, and we as a country are getting weaker. 

Even our nuclear arsenal doesn’t work. It came out recently they have equipment that is 30 years old. They don’t know if it worked. And I thought it was horrible when it was broadcast on television, because boy, does that send signals to Putin and all of the other people that look at us and they say,

“That is a group of people, and that is a nation that truly has no clue. They don’t know what they’re doing. They don’t know what they’re doing.”

So our nuclear arsenal is 30 years old....man that creates a real opening for Putin and his top of the line shiny brand new Soviet nuclear missiles..........oh wait.

"We have a disaster called the big lie: Obamacare. Obamacare.Yesterday, it came out that costs are going for people up 29, 39, 49, and even 55 percent, and deductibles are through the roof. You have to be hit by a tractor, literally, a tractor, to use it, because the deductibles are so high, it’s virtually useless. It’s virtually useless. It is a disaster."

Translation: This study that said it was this number, or maybe this number, or possibly this number, or maybe even this number...who knows I didnt read it I just figure the more numbers I pull out of my ass the closer I have to being right.

"And remember the $5 billion website? $5 billion we spent on a website, and to this day it doesn’t work. A $5 billion website.

I have so many websites, I have them all over the place. I hire people, they do a website. It costs me $3. $5 billion website."

You know, maybe its just me, but I have a hunch if your finding people who are making you a website for $3, you might be employing those illegal immigrants you keep bitching about......

"Well, you need somebody, because politicians are all talk, no action. Nothing’s gonna get done. They will not bring us— believe me— to the promised land. They will not.

As an example, I’ve been on the circuit making speeches, and I hear my fellow Republicans. And they’re wonderful people. I like them. They all want me to support them. They don’t know how to bring it about. They come up to my office. I’m meeting with three of them in the next week. And they don’t know— “Are you running? Are you not running? Could we have your support? What do we do? How do we do it?”

You know, call me crazy but I have a hunch your probably NOT having meeting with 3 republicans seeking your endorsements next week, not with you just announcing your competing against them and all.

Unless your considering not endorsing yourself, which would actually be the sanest idea you've had thus far in this speech......

"I like them. And I hear their speeches. And they don’t talk jobs and they don’t talk China. When was the last time you heard China is killing us? They’re devaluing their currency to a level that you wouldn’t believe. It makes it impossible for our companies to compete, impossible. They’re killing us.

But you don’t hear that from anybody else. You don’t hear it from anybody else. And I watch the speeches."

Actually I did hear it from this one guy, name of Jon Huntsman, ran for president as a republican last time around.....course he got his ass handed to him....but still since you asked and all.

"I watch the speeches of these people, and they say the sun will rise, the moon will set, all sorts of wonderful things will happen. And people are saying, “What’s going on? I just want a job. Just get me a job. I don’t need the rhetoric. I want a job.”

Wait, republicans are THAT devoid of ideas that the best they got is "day and night will keep occurring?"  I mean i actually get the point trump was making...but damn does that analogy suck ass.

"And that’s what’s happening. And it’s going to get worse, because remember, Obamacare really kicks in in ’16, 2016. Obama is going to be out playing golf. He might be on one of my courses. I would invite him, I actually would say. I have the best courses in the world, so I’d say, you what, if he wants to— I have one right next to the White House, right on the Potomac. If he’d like to play, that’s fine. In fact, I’d love him to leave early and play, that would be a very good thing."

Donald Trump seems to have this really odd form of ADD, where instead of being distracted by shiny things he can be taken totally off tangent by a chance to talk about himself....

"But Obamacare kicks in in 2016. Really big league. It is going to be amazingly destructive. Doctors are quitting. I have a friend who’s a doctor, and he said to me the other day, “Donald, I never saw anything like it. I have more accountants than I have nurses. It’s a disaster. My patients are beside themselves. They had a plan that was good. They have no plan now.”

We have to repeal Obamacare, and it can be— and— and it can be replaced with something much better for everybody. Let it be for everybody. But much better and much less expensive for people and for the government. And we can do it."

Alright, whats your plan, youve had 6 years....lets hear it...at least an outline......odd by the way that not a single republican in 6 years has been able to come up with one......

"So I’ve watched the politicians. I’ve dealt with them all my life. If you can’t make a good deal with a politician, then there’s something wrong with you. You’re certainly not very good. And that’s what we have representing us. They will never make America great again. They don’t even have a chance. They’re controlled fully— they’re controlled fully by the lobbyists, by the donors, and by the special interests, fully.

Yes, they control them. Hey, I have lobbyists. I have to tell you. I have lobbyists that can produce anything for me. They’re great. But you know what? it won’t happen. It won’t happen. Because we have to stop doing things for some people, but for this country, it’s destroying our country. We have to stop, and it has to stop now."

So hold on, if I follow this logic here: politicians are bad because they are controlled by lobbyists who dont have the best interests of the country at heart.

I control those evil lobbyists....so vote for me because I have the best interests of the country at heart more than the politicians I pay....

Yea......not the best pitch I've ever heard......

"Now, our country needs— our country needs a truly great leader, and we need a truly great leader now. We need a leader that wrote “The Art of the Deal.”

SELF PROMOTION ADD ENGAGED

"We need a leader that can bring back our jobs, can bring back our manufacturing, can bring back our military, can take care of our vets. Our vets have been abandoned.

And we also need a cheerleader."

Hmm, a cheerleader president.....wonder how that would work out?

"You know, when President Obama was elected, I said, “Well, the one thing, I think he’ll do well. I think he’ll be a great cheerleader for the country. I think he’d be a great spirit.”

He was vibrant. He was young. I really thought that he would be a great cheerleader.

He’s not a leader. That’s true. You’re right about that.

But he wasn’t a cheerleader. He’s actually a negative force. He’s been a negative force. He wasn’t a cheerleader; he was the opposite.

We need somebody that can take the brand of the United States and make it great again. It’s not great again.

We need— we need somebody— we need somebody that literally will take this country and make it great again. We can do that."

I actually have to give Trump credit on this one, he's already learned politics 101, the easiest thing you can claim to want to do is something that was already done.....but then again those stories pointing out US approval rating around the world are way up since the Cheerleader President was in office involve numbers....so its actually possible trump just doesnt understand them.

"And, I will tell you, I love my life. I have a wonderful family. They’re saying, “Dad, you’re going to do something that’s going to be so tough.”

You know, all of my life, I’ve heard that a truly successful person, a really, really successful person and even modestly successful cannot run for public office. Just can’t happen. And yet that’s the kind of mindset that you need to make this country great again." 

I dont know who told The Donald that, but it was probably a moron. Either that or by Trumps standards being a millionaire (as more than HALF of congress is,) doesnt count as "moderately successful".......

"So ladies and gentlemen…I am officially running… for president of the United States, and we are going to make our country great again."

And cue the reaction of Democrats around the country in 3....2.....1

oddly contrasted with the republican reaction (as they realize he just made their election into a clown show):

"It can happen. Our country has tremendous potential. We have tremendous people.

We have people that aren’t working. We have people that have no incentive to work. But they’re going to have incentive to work, because the greatest social program is a job. And they’ll be proud, and they’ll love it, and they’ll make much more than they would’ve ever made, and they’ll be— they’ll be doing so well, and we’re going to be thriving as a country, thriving. It can happen.

I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created. I tell you that."

Oh good, next I assume your going to tell me HOW your going to do that?

"I’ll bring back our jobs from China, from Mexico, from Japan, from so many places. I’ll bring back our jobs, and I’ll bring back our money.

Right now, think of this: We owe China $1.3 trillion. We owe Japan more than that. So they come in, they take our jobs, they take our money, and then they loan us back the money, and we pay them in interest, and then the dollar goes up so their deal’s even better.

How stupid are our leaders? How stupid are these politicians to allow this to happen? How stupid are they?

I’m going to tell you— thank you. I’m going to tell you a couple of stories about trade, because I’m totally against the trade bill for a number of reasons."

I guess your not actually going to tell me how your going to do that. But on the upside YAY Story time.

"Number one, the people negotiating don’t have a clue. Our president doesn’t have a clue. He’s a bad negotiator.

He’s the one that did Bergdahl. We get Bergdahl, they get five killer terrorists that everybody wanted over there.

We get Bergdahl. We get a traitor. We get a no-good traitor, and they get the five people that they wanted for years, and those people are now back on the battlefield trying to kill us. That’s the negotiator we have."

Wait Bergdahl? Iran? what the fuck happened to the stories about TRADE you just promised me?

Unless...oh my god is this possible, could it be that Donald Trump doesnt actually understand the definition of the term Trade when they use it in something called the "Trade Bill". That he actually doesnt realize that the term is implied to mean ECONOMIC exchange? Can he actually be that stupid?

"Take a look at the deal he’s making with Iran. He makes that deal, Israel maybe won’t exist very long. It’s a disaster, and we have to protect Israel. But…"

It appears he be can and is actually that stupid. And I didnt truncate that sentence, he actually just stopped talking and switched [or not?] subjects

So we need people— I’m a free trader. But the problem with free trade is you need really talented people to negotiate for you. If you don’t have talented people, if you don’t have great leadership, if you don’t have people that know business, not just a political hack that got the job because he made a contribution to a campaign, which is the way all jobs, just about, are gotten, free trade terrible.

Actually as it happens most bureaucrats are career professionals, have been since Chester Arthur was president around 120 years ago....

Free trade can be wonderful if you have smart people, but we have people that are stupid. We have people that aren’t smart. And we have people that are controlled by special interests. And it’s just not going to work.

So stupid people who arnt smart and are controlled by special interests? based on this speech alone, I'm pretty sure those people look like this:

Hell he admitted he was behind the lobbyists/special interests up at the top.

So for the sake of making things easier to read, that wraps part 1. Join us in part 2 for Story time with Trump and a descent into contradictory confusion.