Tuesday, April 18, 2017

National Review wants Trump to become Clinton

Unable to stop Donald Trump in the primary season, National Review openly opposed his election. The publication wanted Trump to lose so they could take over a devastated Republican Party.

National Review was willing to let Marxists run the Supreme Court for the next 40 years.

Now the Never Trump comrades dare give President Trump advice on how to govern?



The globalists at National Review ran a column by Fred Bauer:
Time for Trump to Triangulate
On infrastructure, legal immigration, and health care, the White House can support piecemeal policies that bring together populists, conservatives, and even a few Democrats.
Triangulation is part of the myth that Clinton was a moderate.

No, he was a Marxist who was smart enough to put his Marxist policies under his wife's name. Hillarycare was an attempt to take over the entire medical industry, turning it into a Soviet system where the central government controlled medical training, decided who became a specialist (most would be forced to be general practitioners), and decided where they would work.

Even Democrats gave pause to that.

Once Republicans took over, Clinton abandoned his Marxism in favor of training young Marxists for a future Marxist Cabinet.

He hoped it would be his wife.

Today mark Day 88 of the Trump administration. President Trump is doing just fine without kowtowing to the enemy.

Also known as National Review.



The original, "Trump the Press" chronicled and mocked how the media missed Trump's nomination.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.
Then came "Trump the Establishment," covering the election, which again the media missed.

It is available on Kindle, and in paperback.

Autographed copies of both books are available by writing me at DonSurber@GMail.com

Please follow me on Twitter.

Friend me on Facebook.

17 comments:

  1. NR and the NYT are the same now: hymnals that no one except the faithful sing from any more. If Trump can keep his people in line they will become just curios in national politics. It is in his hands for now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Clinton was a dangerous man in more ways than one.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rich Lowry, presiding over the fall of a once-great magazine. Shame on you, Rich. And double shame on writers like Goldberg, Cooke, Nordlinger, et al who blindly followed instead of saying Whoa whoa whoa, Trump is onto something here...a Jacksonian Republican. Smell ya later, NR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nordlinger is the one who I liked the best.

      Delete
    2. I would add Willaimson to the list of writers who are bringing NRO down. Their obsession makes going there just too tiring.

      Delete
  4. NR completely lost me when the first name on the "Against Trump" issue was the insane Klown Glenn Beck!
    BTW I was a Cruzer until he BeBecked himself ..
    They deserve what they get..
    TG McCoy

    ReplyDelete
  5. I used to think of NR as a nice intellectual interlude for conservatism. Since their bombast of Trump, I quit reading them. They are so predictable and NYT faux intellectual.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It is to my everlasting shame that I once had a full subscription to that magazine.

    So sad that they have fallen to the Dark Side.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Couldn't agree more about the fall of NRO. It is so hard to read and if it were not for Victor Hanson and a few others would not be worth going to the site. I was not a Trump supporter by i voted for hima nd realize that he like all of us have faults but i want him to have the same chance for success that all other presidents have been given. That is just too much for NRO though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I wish I could disagree with you, but I cannot, other than to note that the enemy is not just the National Review. The enemy includes Fox News and the Republican Party.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In reality there is but one party in Washington.If one were to make a distinction the GOPe are Dims and Dem are Commies.

      Delete
  9. I was a subscriber for many years - "was" being the operative word.

    ReplyDelete
  10. NRO used to be my goto mag. Was a Cruz guy in the primary and have not regretted my vote for Trump at all. In fact, I am a full throated supporter now as the Stupid's in Congress are showing their true establishment colors of self preservation. Grrr...

    ReplyDelete
  11. I wasn't a Trump Kool-Aid drinker, and I've I couldn't/can't stand their rabid anti-Trumpism. I canceled all the NR communications (and I used to be a huge fan of Jonah's...still love Dr. Hanson, but can get him through other avenues).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Awesome article, Great, & Informative..Wonderful article you wrote..
    بلغارستان و روسیه سالانه میزبان هزاران هزار گردشگر است که به این کشورها سفر می کنند
    تور ارمنستان
    تور دبی
    تور تایلند
    درباره تایلند
    درباره ارمنستان
    درباره دبی
    تور بلغارستان تابستان 96
    تور روسیه تابستان 96

    ReplyDelete
  13. NR chose sides and the side they chose was in opposition to the interests of the American people, our culture, and our future. Good to know, thanks for letting the mask fall away, finally.

    I use this filter now, after years of using other types of filters, to judge *all* news and opinion. It reveals that 95% or more of what we take in via the media is bullshit, which I then feel free to remove from my life.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Not exactly on topic, but, a burning question on my mind, if I may: today Bloomberg runs an article which mentions, in passing, that Jamie Gorelick is Ivanka Trump's personal counsel: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-19/ivanka-fights-to-protect-her-first-name

    My impression of Jamie Gorelick long has been that, in a town of evil women, she is arguably the most evil. Am I deluded, needless alarmed?

    ReplyDelete