Democrat Congressman: “Trump is not normal.”

During a 01/27/17 interview on an Arizona radio station, Congressman Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) said about President Trump, “This man is not normal. He is not acting normal and there is nothing at this point that he has done for me that has proven that I should work with him and I don’t think that’s going to change.”

Here is a news flash for Congressman Gallego: President Trump wouldn’t have been elected if he were “normal”.

In Washington, D.C., being “normal” means being an Establishment politician.

President Trump’s appeal to those who voted for him partially comes from the fact that he isn’t an Establishment politician.

The reason that President Trump ran for POTUS in the first place is because – from his perspective – “normal” politicians were not getting done the things that the USA needed done.

In August 2016 and during the aforementioned radio interview, Congressman Gallego declared President Trump to be “mentally unstable” – as if the congressman were qualified to make any kind of psychiatric diagnosis.

Well, the congressman isn’t qualified. Someone who is qualified is psychiatrist Keith Ablow, and he says about President Trump, “Man, I am just so happy this guy went to work for us. I’m still pinching myself. It’s like a miracle.”

Obviously, President Trump is going to make mistakes, because every sitting President does. In President Trump’s case, if he is erring, then he is erring on the side of caution. After all, his first duty is to protect Americans.

Indeed, if anything should be normal in the USA, it should be the philosophy of America First, meaning that the safety of U.S. citizens takes priority over everything else.

If Congressman Gallego chooses not to work with President Trump, then that is the former’s loss, because the latter probably won’t notice. That is because President Trump is too busy being abnormal by taking action instead of just giving speeches.

After the last 8 years of “normal”, “abnormal” is refreshing.

By the way, notice that Congressman Gallego states, “There is nothing at this point that he [President Trump] has done for me that has proven that I should work with him.” So, a congressman who boycotted President Trump’s inauguration wants the new POTUS to do something for him. Now, that’s chutzpah.

It's Neil Gorsuch!
Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners January 27, 2017
  • Par4Course

    This is the first David Robinson column I’ve agreed with in weeks, maybe months. Good going.

    • Retired military

      Same. I expected more drivel but was somewhat pleasantly surprised.

    • jim_m

      months

  • Tom Higgens

    I Think Trump is quite mentally unstable.

    • And your qualifications to make such a diagnosis are what?

      • He heard it from his tinfoil hat.

      • Paul Hooson

        I agree with Tom Higgens, and my qualifications are as a psychologist. As a public figure he is way too prone to strike out with petty angry Tweets, taking everything as personal. Further, his fragile personality seems to crave praise, while he carries out lifelong vendettas against some bankers who once decided not to make him a business loan 20 years ago, etc. Trump’s own father had to take him out of the school system when he would threaten teachers or throw erasers at them and put him into a military school. His own wife and 20 women also have made strong allegations about his behavior. None of this is to say that many times he can behave in a very decent manner, such as his friendly talk with workers or charity giving. But, his conduct needs to be more even and more moderate as president.

        • jim_m

          Your qualifications are that you are already exhibiting symptoms of dementia.

          • Paul Hooson

            Your insult jokes don’t phase me one bit, and entertain me, unlike Mr. Trump who takes such humor personally and then engages in lifelong crusades.

          • jim_m

            Just to be clear – I’m not joking.

          • Paul Hooson

            Well, I suppose if push comes to shove, even Don Rickles might tell you to leave insult comedy to the professionals.

          • jim_m

            Which is why I do so. I think you have made it abundantly clear that you should no longer be handling your own affairs.

          • Paul Hooson

            You mean “own” not “on”?

          • jim_m

            Yes, I make typos. You misstate facts and make other obvious errors of cognition.

          • Paul Hooson

            We’re only human my friend. We all make mistakes and live by the good graces of God. You guys are decent men, but we sometimes disagree about some things.

          • Scalia

            I can assure you that the grace of God does not countenance your making accusations about people’s private lives based on your political disagreement with them. It also does not endorse being dishonest in order to make a political point.

          • Brucehenry

            Ha ha you mean like Paul thinks Trump is unbalanced, which God would hate, but you think Paul is senile, which God would love?

          • Scalia

            ??

            Go back to your warm milk and cookies. I was referring to another conversation Paul and I had some time back.

          • Brucehenry

            Sure, OK, if you say so. Chocolate chip.

          • Those aren’t chocolate chips…

          • Brucehenry

            Let me guess you’re snickering about something *fecal* aren’t you? Coprophile.

          • Your attributions and assumptions are yours and yours alone and reflect only on you.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes sure because you have no history of such behavior how unfair of me.

          • Scalia

            What part of I’m not joking don’t you understand? Jim might be rather crude, but you’re clearly not remembering previous discussions, and you repeatedly misstate facts. That can only mean that you are a liar or you’re incapable of properly processing information that is very easy to follow.

            You used to be a lot sharper, but you’ve lately been behaving in a truly head-shaking manner.

          • Paul Hooson

            That’s a rather cheap way to dismiss any disagreement with me. However, I always have great respect for everyone that will not ever be shaken by nonsense personal attacks like this.

          • jim_m

            Paul, we routinely refute your idiotic ramblings on this blog. While I may add insult and vituperation to my posts I also take the time to point out your myriad of errors. Scalia is kinder than I am about it.

          • Scalia

            And with those remarks you further validate my observation. I have engaged you in very detailed fashion, and you turn around and forget what we’ve talked about. You ask for information that we’ve previously provided and consistently misstate plain to read facts. That’s not dismissal; it’s what you’ve been doing.

          • Retired military

            Like yourself. I mean you have done everything else.

          • Who said we found your condition comical?

        • Vagabond661

          And he took offense to people talking about his big ears!….wait…..that was another president…..recent one…..recent big eared one….

          • Paul Hooson

            That president joked about himself being a “mutt” because he was biracial. He was never above a joke about himself unlike the new president who is overly sensitive about such things.

          • Vagabond661

            Look at his eyes and tell me he can take criticism:

            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=myQJE5TdbAs

          • Recent President…

        • Retired military

          “my qualifications are as a psychologist”

          Damn Paul. Is there absolutely nothing you cant do??

          If anyone is psycological here it would have to be you. I mean working 3 jobs, strip bar, supermarkets, working on political campaigns and the list goes on.

          • Paul Hooson

            I’m nearly 62. If I haven’t achieved a few things in life by now, then it would never happen in this lifetime. It wasn’t a supermarket, just a great smaller grocery store.

          • Retired military

            My apologies for messing up your numerous and apparantly endless life experiences. Seriously Paul. I admire the fact that you never seem to blow up and you try to stay civil. Really I do. But lately you have been so far off the mark that you arent even in the ballpark much less way way out in LEFT field.

          • jim_m

            True. Paul is very tolerant and unflappable. But his comments have noticeably declined in their acuity.

          • Paul Hooson

            I think some of the Trump probusiness policies such as building oil pipelines and reducing some regulations, cutting taxes, etc. will prove to be good policy. But, it’s some of the other weird stuff he does that dominates the news because it’s so strange.

            I have been involved in helping family businesses since I was five years old, helping to select toys at the wholesaler and helping to stock the shelves, so I’ve had many years experience with business.

          • jim_m

            Really? I would have been more generous with your IQ

          • jim_m

            He failed to get his degree

          • Paul Hooson

            True, I have seven years college, but no degree.

          • jim_m

          • Paul Hooson

            There you go!

          • Scalia

            You must have forgotten to look at the paragraph tutorial.

        • Scalia

          I agree with Tom Higgens, and my qualifications are as a psychologist.

          Are you saying that you have a degree in psychology?

        • Wild_Willie

          “We won get over it” snapped Obama.

          Paul, you have been everything. I bet you at one time you were queen of England for a weekend.

          I think you need to bet out of your mom’s basement and talk to mainstream people. I want to know now the MSM is getting told off. It is good. It is right. It needs to happen. ww

    • Sky__Captain

      Evidence, please.

      I submit the mental instability is much more evident in the reactions of the progressives and their media minions whenever Trump does something.

    • Retired military

      I cant wait to see what EOs Trump does tomorrow that will send the libs running around screaming with their hair on fire. I mean Trump has been in office like 10 days and this has happened about 10 times so far so why should tomorrow be any different.

      • Paul Hooson

        Roberts chief qualification was that he was a lawyer hired by Kodak to defend their dumping photographic waste chemicals in public waterways, so any qualification better than being a lawyer for a corporate polluter would be an improvement here.

        • Not every Supreme Court Justice has a clear fraud upon the court in their record…

          • Paul Hooson

            Despite his questionable qualifications to be a justice and then quickly appointed chief justice, Roberts has not really been bad. But, there were reasons to question his impartial views in some cases where corporations would be sued such as defective automobiles that caused deaths for example.

          • Scalia

            Despite his questionable qualifications to be a justice…

            Do you know what the qualifications are to be a justice on the Supreme Court? If so, what are they?

          • Paul Hooson

            For the Oregon Supreme Court you don’t even have to be a lawyer. One year the election was between a barroom drunk who got into drunken barfights who was a state senator and another senator who did not.

          • Scalia

            Would you like me to repeat the question, or do you prefer to read what I already asked?

          • Paul Hooson

            Like the Oregon Supreme Court, there are no real qualifications to be a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. – By questionable qualifications for Roberts I did not mean abilities, but his bias in cases dealing with gross violations by businesses.

          • Scalia

            By questionable qualifications for Roberts I did not mean abilities, but his bias in cases dealing with gross violations by businesses.

            How was he biased? Please provide a link. You asserted that Roberts was biased when acting as counsel for Kodak. A counsel is supposed to act as an advocate for his client. If that’s bias, then all attorneys are biased and therefore unqualified for the Supreme Court.

            Next, you write:

            By questionable qualifications for Roberts I did not mean abilities, but his bias in cases dealing with gross violations by businesses.

            Since you were asserting that he was unqualified to sit on the Supreme Court, you have to be referring to his work prior to his nomination. Again, if it’s his behavior as an attorney, you have no leg to stand on because that’s what attorneys are supposed to do. If you’re referring to his behavior as a judge, then provide me with a link to a case and show me where he departed from the law in order to reach a decision.

            The bottom line: You are again demeaning somebody because you politically disagree with him. Your interest isn’t the law; your interest is in the result. You don’t like the result, so that’s sufficient to slander a person. You’ve done that with Justices Thomas and Scalia. Now you’re doing it with Roberts.

            I’ll be writing a piece on advice and consent within the next few weeks (perhaps even within the week). The Senate was under no constitutional obligation to take up Garland’s nomination. If the People don’t like it, they can remedy the situation in what we call elections. The People retained the GOP as custodians of the Senate. More sour grapes from Paul.

          • Vagabond661

            The Biden Rule came into effect. The Dems don’t like it when we use their own rules against them.

          • Retired military

            Alinsky 101

          • jim_m

            Paul is completely ignorant and I doubt he can substantiate his slander about Roberts and Kodak. I can find nothing online to connect the two with regard to any pollution case.

          • Retired military

            Or his being blackmailed to make sure Obamacare wasn’t found to be unconstitutional.

        • jim_m

          Another ignorant, lying, dumbass comment from Paul.

          I am certain that Roberts’ graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School, clerking for Chief Justice Renquist, being a Judge in the DC circuit court of appeals all had nothing to do with Roberts’ qualifications.

          You should be embarrassed and ashamed for posting the lie you just did.

        • Retired military

          I watched part of Robert’s hearings. He was able to answer questions on any case they threw at him. Sorry Paul you failed yet again.

        • jim_m

          Paul, if you are going to slander the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, you owe us all a link to prove that Roberts was the lead counsel on any such case. Even in the rare event that you produce one, you have still ignored the man’s manifest qualifications for the job and in that case you owe us all an apology for your lies.

  • jim_m

    It’s understandable why the dems feel this way. They believe that normal is what Hillary stood for. She believed that you have to have one position that you tell the public and another position that you tell your cronies and actually intend to enact.

    What the dems find abnormal is someone who actually keeps his word. Frankly, I think most GOPe members find that abnormal too.

  • Retired military

    Meanwhile Yates who was acting DOJ and an Obama appointee who refused to defend the perfectly legal Trump EO in court regarding immigrants has been fired.

    Liberal heads explode in 3….2…1…

    • jim_m

      Won’t be Pryor because he has been too outspoken on abortion and can easily be argued to have prejudged the case.

      I think Gorsuch is the best choice. He has written enough to demonstrate a solid commitment to Scalia-like textualism. Hardiman hasn’t written much and I have serious concerns that like many “conservative” nominees he will swing violently to the left once install on the court.

  • jim_m

    GORSUCH!!!!!

    Great choice. Unanimously confirmed to the appellate bench the dems will have a hard time resisting him. Since the dems have already declared a filibuster the GOP will have an easier time dispensing with that artifact once and for all.

    • Scalia

      A wise and excellent choice by the president. I was very pleased by the announcement.

      Also, it was quite touching that the president invited Maureen Scalia to the ceremony.

      • jim_m

        Trump actually looked very presidential tonight

    • Scalia

      By the way, I hope Rick might in some measure now understand why voting for Trump was the only logical choice for conservatives.

      • jim_m

        HaHaHa! I doubt it. That would require that Rick be a conservative to begin with. He was Catholic and not a conservative. While there is some overlap on that venn diagram they are not by any means congruent.

      • Who?

      • Who?

    • Brian Brandt

      ” Unanimously confirmed to the appellate bench the dems will have a hard time resisting him.”

      In a rational world you are correct, Jim. But in my experience, the Dems have no problem switching sides of an argument as soon as it becomes inconvenient for them to hold it.

  • Retired military

    “We simply cannot allow people to come into the country undocumented and unchecked” – Barrack Obama 2005

    • Scalia

      Indeed. Here’s a fuller quote:

      The American people are a welcoming and generous people. But those who enter our country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security and better enforcement of the immigration laws.

      • Retired military

        Trump should put an Obama quote at the top of every executive order he signs.