Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field by 9%)

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Timely and topical:

http://gawker.com/#!5791915/did-sarah-palin-carry-out-the-biggest-hoax-in-american-political-history

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52841266/Prof-Brad-Scharlott-Palin-the-Press-and-the-Fake-Pregnancy-Rumor

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Flava Flav -Sec of Defense (he already has the Viking hat), Snoop Dogg-Agriculture, Pamela Anderson head of the CDC

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

STATES RIGHTS!! NULLIFICATION!!!

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Sen. Reid: Trump's not 'presidential caliber'
By: CNN Political Unit



Washington (CNN) - Add Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, to the list of those pushing for Trump 2012.

"Oh, do I wish he would get the nomination," Reid told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in an interview set to air Thursday. "Donald Trump running for president of the United States? I mean, I like the man just fine. But he's not presidential caliber."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/14/reid-trumps-not-presidential-caliber/

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Sadly, this isn't even close to the dumbest shit cooked up by the Arizona legislature this term.

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

and hysterical, to boot! Pat yourself on the back, you successfully made fun of a Down Syndrome child! Awesome!

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Actually, no one has done that.

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

The joke went way over Carlton's head on this one.

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Those folks make the Tennessee legislators that passed the road-kill bill look like a bunch of Dirksens. Did all the right-wing crazies retire to Arizona?

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Trump: "I Have a Great Relationship with the Blacks"
by Kathleen Foster | April 14, 2011
"I have a great relationship with the blacks," Donald Trump said on an Albany, N.Y. radio station Thursday morning. "I've always had a very great relationship with the blacks. But unfortunately, it seems the numbers that you cite are very, very frightening numbers."

The numbers Trump is referring to are part of a Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday. It shows 95 percent of black voters in New York State approve of how Barack Obama is handling his job as president. Only 4 percent do not. In sharp contrast, of white voters polled, 42 percent approve of the job the president is doing, while 53 percent do not.

Talk 1300 radio host Fred Dicker, who is also the stated editor for New York Post (owned by News Corp), brought up the poll and asked Trump if dramatic differences in American attitudes toward the president are race based.

"I think it's a pretty sad poll when you see that," Trump said, pointing to the 2008 election outcome. "When you look at Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton did so much for the black population, so much, and she got very few votes."

"One would always hope that votes are on the basis of merit," Dicker responded, "Not on race or anything."
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/04/14/trump-i-have-great-relationship-blacks

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

Let me make it easy for Carlton. There are rumors that Bristol Palin is really Trig's mother, but the Palins covered it up.

Substitute any other Palin kid and the joke doesn't work.

 

Re: Donald Trump: Should We Take Him Seriously? (Now leads 2012 GOP Field)

I think Jan Brewer will take this to court because she thinks this is what Arizonians want. This was on wiki:

"In 1939, the Court in Pacific Employers Insurance v. Industrial Accident wrote:

[T]here are some limitations upon the extent to which a state may be required by the full faith and credit clause to enforce even the judgment of another state in contravention of its own statutes or policy. See Wisconsin v. Pelican Insurance Co., 127 U.S. 265; Huntington v. Attrill, 146 U.S. 657; Finney v. Guy, 189 U.S. 335; see also Clarke v. Clarke, 178 U.S. 186; Olmsted v. Olmsted, 216 U.S. 386; Hood v. McGehee, 237 U.S. 611; cf. Gasquet v. Fenner, 247 U.S. 16. And in the case of statutes...the full faith and credit clause does not require one state to substitute for its own statute, applicable to persons and events within it, the conflicting statute of another state, even though that statute is of controlling force in the courts of the state of its enactment with respect to the same persons and events.[15]

If the legal pronouncements of one state conflict with the public policy of another state, federal courts in the past have been reluctant to force a state to enforce the pronouncements of another state in contravention of its own public policy. In cases of out-of-state judgments, the Court has stated that there may be exceptions to the enforcement and jurisdiction of out-of-state judgments, but maintains that there is no public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause for judgments."

I always thought the Full Faith and Credit Clause was in place, in large part, for things such as driver's licenses and birth certificates. I don't think Arizona has a prayer to have this new law hold up, but they will spend tons of money to try.