Republicans kick National Review magazine out of February debate

An American conservative magazine found itself disinvited from co-sponsoring a presidential primary debate Thursday night after it published an entire issue devoted to tearing down Republican front-runner Donald Trump.

Speaking to during a press conference in Las Vegas, Trump dismissed the 60-year-old publication, National Review, as washed-up and irrelevant.

'Its circulation is way down. Not very many people read it anymore,' he said at the Venetian Hotel and Casino before making an appearance on stage at the Outdoor Sportsman Awards, where he accepted the endorsement of 'Duck Dynasty' star Willie Robertson.

'I mean, people don't even think about the National Review,' Trump said. 'So I guess they want to get a little publicity. But you know, it's a dying paper. It's pretty much – I've gotta tell you David, it's pretty much of a dead paper.'

Read more: 

Views: 792

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ray, again, is it legal to access a person's voting record? Is it accurate? Do you mean someone has MY voting record? Not encouraged that our country keeps voting records of all voters!!!!!!

Even if you have the Job Title, it is not ethical or American to keep a tally of a voting record!

I truly appreciate your Texas conservative status. You are my idea of a Texan!!!! And, if you used what was before you as an assessment, I know liberals did that also. Glad our side also did it!

Jo Anne and even Jo Gonzales, I supported Trump when he first announced his candidacy and even sent money to his site.  About two weeks ago I started looking closely at him and some of the things he was saying.  I could excuse his use of profanity, for it wasn't too bad.  When he started attacking Cruz over something that he had already said it was no questionable subject.  That really didn't sit well because about the same time he was coming out saying that he never went after anyone unless they attacked him.  I took that statement and can say that that was BS for he did the same to Carson.  He went after Fiorina before she ever mentioned Trump and what he said just didn't sit well.  When he then tried to play that New York sympathy statement on New York after the towers went down.  At that time everything was starting to come together for everything that has been said about Trump has been pretty much verified. You said that you have voted Republican since 18, having said that would you sit down and write down all of the principles that applied to you party and then check out video on what Trump has said.  When you have supported Obama and Clinton is just a starting point for you are going to find many others reasons to question.  Thank God that I stepped back and reevaluated my judgement and came to my current opinion that he is a flimflam snake oil salesman and I will not be a party to it.  I will not stay away from the polls if he is the nominee but it will not be with any joy. 

Jo Anne, I fairly positive that every state has Sect. of State that has voting records and 99% positive your county has your voting record.

We had a record on everyone, including the Democrats, that's how I targeted and also followed up on previous party voters.  If your county chairman didn't have it it would be impossible to determine who to solicit.  

You might call your county chairman and verify what I said, that would confirm some of my comments. 

@ Jo Anne, I like your whole article, the points you've brought forth, and think America is in your Pew.  I know I am.    I do not think we're going to get out of all of this,  without a very strong person at the wheel.     Trump would be my choice,  on the basis of his having lived longer, and having much more experience in the "Real World",  where you have to earn things, and struggle with all kinds of problems,  from employees to budgets, to providing Leadership and knowing how to delegate.  Thanks for a great Post.

You are a dear, Jo. Thank you for your acknowledgment.

We were talking about the voting records and I do need to clear up one thing, anybody can't obtain voting records.  To my best of knowledge only County Chairman, registered candidates for office and of course the State Party Offices. 

Ray Hause:  I may just jump over to the Cruz side of the fence. That Trump is sitting out the debate because of Megyn Kelly is less than presidential. It is exactly as you said - petty! I don't like it. We all should heed the warnings and not cover up the truth. Is Trump a narcissistic egomaniac who cannot take criticism without taking a "time out"?

Not the type of character reference or "deal making" we need for the next four years in an effort to Save America. Cruz just might be our vote.

Have to add a post note to my long post:  I could not get the Edit button to actually record my edited typos. In fact, the first time I pressed "Add Reply" - the entire post disappeared - and I had to think a minute or two if I wanted to write that long post again. Since I really, really HATE the "National Review", I re-wrote it, and saved it on Pages before I pressed "Add Reply", but then, I could not edit it. So, the mistakes are glaring.

Just voicing my frustrations with either my computer or a glitch in the site.

Seems the Natl Review and the Chamber of Commerce want their lil rubber stamps... Bush/Rubio. 




Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Angry Dem Impeachment ‘Witness’: Pam Karlan Donated Thousands To Hillary And Was On Clinton’s List For Potential SCOTUS Nomination

Image result for Pam Karlan

The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler, kicked off its first impeachment circus Wednesday morning.

The four ‘witnesses’ testifying have never actually witnessed any of Trump’s dealings with Ukraine firsthand — the four witnesses are law professors offering legal analysis.

One of the witnesses the Dems rolled out is an angry Hillary Clinton donor who was on Crooked’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination.

No wonder why this unhinged, dowdy woman is so pissed off!

“Professor Pam Karlan donated thousands of dollars to Democrats and was on Hillary Clinton’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination. So she certainly has no vendetta against President Trump,” GOP Rep. Mark Walker said.

Congressman Walker also pointed out that Noah Feldman, the Dems first partisan witness in Wednesday’s hearing tweeted about impeaching Trump right after he was sworn in.

Rep. Mark Walker   RepMarkWalker

Meet Noah Feldman, House Democrats first partisan witness.

Look at the date of this tweet. He has been trying to get @realDonaldTrump impeached since 46 days into his presidency.

His reason? Trump criticized President Obama.

This is a sham impeachment with sham witnesses. 

Noah Feldman @NoahRFeldman

Trump's wiretap tweets raise risk of impeachment  via @BV

Rep. Mark Walker   RepMarkWalker

The next witness, Karlan, has donated thousands to Democrats and was on Hillary Clinton’s list for a potential Supreme Court nomination.

So she certainly has no vendetta against @realDonaldTrump.

These witnesses are as serious as House Democrats impeachment case: not at all.

The entire sham show trial is stacked with partisan hacks who have wanted to impeach Trump from the moment he won in November of 2016.

Norm Eisen, the Democrats’ counsel who is blasting Trump and questioning witnesses in Wednesday’s show trial, tweeted about impeaching Trump before Donald Trump was even sworn into office!

Infantilization of Popular Culture

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service