Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Jake's Trump Thread -- Make America Great Again


JakeHolman

Recommended Posts

Is he setting, or is it the sun? :ph34r:

 

This reminds me of what Louis the 14th used to say about himself--

 

L'état, C'EST moi!

 

The state (of France) That's me. I am the state.

 

And why shouldn't Le Roi du Soleil, The Sun King say that?

 

Louis XIV ruled by divine right, that means he was the dictator of France by the gift of God.

 

This 17th century philosophy really fits in with the mindset of Donald Trump.

 

Donald Trump doesn't need the Republican party-- he is the Republican Party.

He would probably feel the same way about the US government and the United States.

 

But I've got to say the 17th century is a little more advanced than where Jake would put us with his Emperor in 49 BC with Julius Caesar.

 

However,if we do go back to the emperor dictatorship of the Roman Empire, I don't think we're going to need the US Constitution anyway.

 

The US Constitution was written with and from knowledge of the French Enlightenment--Le Siècle des Lumières, the 18th century.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of what Louis the 14th used to say about himself--

 

L'état, C'EST moi!

 

The state (of France) That's me. I am the state.

 

And why shouldn't Le Roi du Soleil, The Sun King say that?

 

Louis XIV ruled by divine right, that means he was the dictator of France by the gift of God.

 

This 17th century philosophy really fits in with the mindset of Donald Trump.

 

Donald Trump doesn't need the Republican party-- he is the Republican Party.

He would probably feel the same way about the US government and the United States.

 

But I've got to say the 17th century is a little more advanced than where Jake would put us with his Emperor in 49 BC with Julius Caesar.

 

However,if we do go back to the emperor dictatorship of the Roman Empire, I don't think we're going to need the US Constitution anyway.

 

The US Constitution was written with and from knowledge of the French Enlightenment--Le Siècle des Lumières, the 18th century.

then the 2nd amendment is timeless. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of what Louis the 14th used to say about himself--

 

L'état, C'EST moi!

 

The state (of France) That's me. I am the state.

 

And why shouldn't Le Roi du Soleil, The Sun King say that?

 

Louis XIV ruled by divine right, that means he was the dictator of France by the gift of God.

 

This 17th century philosophy really fits in with the mindset of Donald Trump.

 

Donald Trump doesn't need the Republican party-- he is the Republican Party.

He would probably feel the same way about the US government and the United States.

 

But I've got to say the 17th century is a little more advanced than where Jake would put us with his Emperor in 49 BC with Julius Caesar.

 

However,if we do go back to the emperor dictatorship of the Roman Empire, I don't think we're going to need the US Constitution anyway.

 

The US Constitution was written with and from knowledge of the French Enlightenment--Le Siècle des Lumières, the 18th century.

 

A gift, yes, but the reality implies something a bit more:

 

"The divine right of kings, divine right, or God's mandate is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm, including (in the view of some, especially in Protestant countries or during the reign of Henry VIII of England) the Catholic Church. It implies that only God can judge an unjust king and that any attempt to depose, dethrone or restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute a sacrilegious act. It is often expressed in the phrase "by the Grace of God," attached to the titles of a reigning monarch." ---Wikipedia

 

--

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do remember obama painting himself back in 2008 as a very different person then we have gotten.

 

early 2008, here he is with messianicness of forethought saying to a cheering crowd of worshippers...

 

"I know that the american people are tired of the same ol' politics as usual."

 

making the case that if we elected him...all that would change.

 

loretta lynch should not have met with bill clinton...anytime, any place or anywhere.

 

how could she not know that?

 

 

if obama and hillary's shortcomings doan bother alotta posters here...

 

then donald trump's flamboyance sure ain't gonna bother me. :D

 

see how it works? it's called reciprocating in kind.

 

have a nice day, everyone. donny's on the horizon. :D

 

Trumpus Maximus Americanus!

 

pronouncement of power

:)

Perfect freedom has no existence. A grown man knows the world he lives in, and for the present, the world is Rome.

 

Pontius Pilate -- Ben Hur

 

Trumpus Maximus Americanus!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A gift, yes, but the reality implies something a bit more:

 

"The divine right of kings, divine right, or God's mandate is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm, including (in the view of some, especially in Protestant countries or during the reign of Henry VIII of England) the Catholic Church. It implies that only God can judge an unjust king and that any attempt to depose, dethrone or restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute a sacrilegious act. It is often expressed in the phrase "by the Grace of God," attached to the titles of a reigning monarch." ---Wikipedia

 

--

LE DROIT DIVIN concerne La justification d'un pouvoir non-démocratique part le choix de Dieu. Ce choix est souvent exprimé part l'affirmation d'un généalogie d'une race choisie.

 

In the French Wikipedia they tend to emphasize the birthright of the Divine Right King in terms of his genealogy and then the non-Democratic nature of the process--choix de Dieu, c'est à dire-- God's choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LE DROIT DIVIN concerne La justification d'un pouvoir non-démocratique part le choix de Dieu. Ce choix est souvent exprimé part l'affirmation d'un généalogie d'une race choisie.

 

In the French Wikipedia they tend to emphasize the birthright of the Divine Right King in terms of his genealogy and then the non-Democratic nature of the process--choix de Dieu, c'est à dire-- God's choice.

 

The quote in French implies that the King rules as anointed by God and then affirms that Divine Right follows the family line of Kings.

 

My understanding from admittedly long ago studies says that Divine Right was that the King was virtually God. Nothing he says can be questioned by anyone in the Court or anyone else because to do so would be blasphemy against God. So what does that tell you?

 

God doesn't merely say, okay you can be King and I will do you the favor of genealogical preeminence and so your successors will have it also. This I make a gift to you.

 

God means by that, and you speak for me down there in the temporal world. Your Divine Right is exactly just that. You are Divine!

 

If you want to split hairs and say well he is only a King, a man ...fine.

 

But under the Divine Right of Kings, he would be virtually God.

 

What do you think the word "Divine" means in that phrase?

 

That's my take on the subject, right or wrong.

 

(too bad I don't have Divine Right, I would always be right)

 

:P

 

(btw, don't tell Trump any of this, he'd claim Divine Right in a New York minute)

 

:blink:

 

--

 

==

Link to post
Share on other sites

The quote in French implies that the King rules as anointed by God and then affirms that Divine Right follows the family line of Kings.

 

My understanding from admittedly long ago studies says that Divine Right was that the King was virtually God. Nothing he says can be questioned by anyone in the Court or anyone else because to do so would be blasphemy against God. So what does that tell you?

 

God doesn't merely say, okay you can be King and I will do you the favor of genealogical preeminence and so your successors will have it also. This I make a gift to you.

 

God means by that, and you speak for me down there in the temporal world. Your Divine Right is exactly just that. You are Divine!

 

If you want to split hairs and say well he is only a King, a man ...fine.

 

But under the Divine Right of Kings, he would be virtually God.

 

What do you think the word "Divine" means in that phrase?

 

That's my take on the subject, right or wrong.

 

(too bad I don't have Divine Right, I would always be right)

 

:P

 

(btw, don't tell Trump any of this, he'd claim Divine Right in a New York minute)

 

:blink:

 

--

 

==

Laffite-- I'm just repeating what my 17th- 18th c Sorbonne Professor told me.

 

In literature my specialty is Après-Guerre--Camus & 19th c Romantisme.

 

In history it's modern.

 

I'm not now nor have I ever been an authority on Louis XIV.

 

I simply had to read a great deal about him to get to modern times and I spent my time studying at Versailles when I was at the Sorbonne to get my credits for French culture.

 

So I'm not qualified to go into a PhD argument about divine right, but I can give you the name of my professor and maybe you can talk with her.

 

But as interesting as this may be to you, I think we've gotten off the subject of the thread and why this was brought up in the first place.

 

If anybody else is interested,I would suggest just looking at that MGM Norma Shearer movie Marie Antoinette-- it's as good as any if you want to know more about Versailles and Louis XIV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanting to know how Lynch could be so stupid to meet with Bill Clinton is reasonable,  but of course we will never know.

 

But Obama should have fired Lynch for being such a dummy.

He would never get her replacement confirmed by the Republicans in the Senate.  I'm not sure, but it would take a lot for any official to refuse to talk with a former POTUS.

Whatever happened to the old Christian virtue of forgiveness?

Link to post
Share on other sites

He would never get her replacement confirmed by the Republicans in the Senate.  I'm not sure, but it would take a lot for any official to refuse to talk with a former POTUS.

Whatever happened to the old Christian virtue of forgiveness?

 

The virtue of forgiveness is alive and well ... so long as within it there is some relish of gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Laffite-- I'm just repeating what my 17th- 18th c Sorbonne Professor told me.

 

D'accord. En effet, je repete aussi bien que m'ont dit mes professeurs il y a longtemps dans mes jours de l'universite. Que sais-je?

 

In literature my specialty is Après-Guerre--Camus & 19th c Romantisme.

 

Magnifique! Aimez-vous Baudelaire? Zola? Vos sujets sont tres bien choisies.

 

In history it's modern.

 

Tres bien.

 

I'm not now nor have I ever been an authority on Louis XIV.

 

Ni moi non plus.

 

I simply had to read a great deal about him to get to modern times and I spent my time studying at Versailles when I was at the Sorbonne to get my credits for French culture.

 

Excellent! Vous ete au courant de la chose plus que moi, j'en suis sur.

 

So I'm not qualified to go into a PhD argument about divine right, but I can give you the name of my professor and maybe you can talk with her.

 

Je m'ennuis de la Droit Divine a present, c'est bien qu'elle n'existe plus. Je serais enchante de causer avec votre professeur, de milles choses. Mais ca n'arrivera, je le sais. J'aime la litterature Francais.

 

But as interesting as this may be to you, I think we've gotten off the subject of the thread and why this was brought up in the first place.

 

D'accord. On n'en parlerait plus. C'est fini.

 

If anybody else is interested,I would suggest just looking at that MGM Norma Shearer movie Marie Antoinette-- it's as good as any if you want to know more about Versailles and Louis XIV.

 

La Sorbonne, Versailles, vous savez bien les lieux historiques.

 

Merci bien, Princess, je veux voir vous reussir a vos etudes.

 

:) 

adieux

 

je vous demand pardon si j'etais impoli avant, je ne suis pas normament comme ca

 

Monsieur Laffite

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Louis XV a dit cette phrase.

Après moi, le déluge.

 

Louis XVI found that out with a Little Help from his wife Marie Antoinette.

It's a great phrase, but like a lot of well known quotes, there

is disagreement about whether it was ever actually said,

either by Louis XV or Madame de Pompadour. I guess it's

one of those If nobody said it, someone should have quotes.

I wonder if it was ever known before the French Revolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Startin' to smell like cheap French cigarettes and stale baguettes around here. I thought we wuz makin' Amuricah great agin.

Lafayette--

 

Nous Sommes ici.

 

And there would be have been no America, great or otherwise, without the assistance of these two Frenchmen--Lafayette et Beaumarchais.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lafayette--

 

Nous Sommes ici.

 

And there would be have been no America, great or otherwise, without the assistance of these two Frenchmen--Lafayette et Beaumarchais.

Interesting series on the History Channel (I think) about the Revolution.  France did contribute mightly to America's victory and nearly bankrupted itself in the process.  However, the big picture was that France would do anything to belittle Great Britain and to lessen its position in the world.

Not sure that we could not have won without Lafayette.  Benjamin Franklin also did a lot of "negotiating" in France on America's behalf.

Comte de Rochambeau (Fr. Army)and Comte de Grasse (Fr. Navy and Army) appeared to have more to do with the victory at Yorktown which sealed the fate of the British in America.

Regardless, without the aid of the French the US would not have won the war.  At least not then.  But who knows, Napoleon's rise would also have created a problem for the British if the US had rebeled then.  See War of 1812.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the funniest political joke next year will be, I think, that hillary clinton actually wanted to debate donald trump. :lol:

 

Trumpus Maximus Americanus!

 

destroyer of corruption

:D

 

She is a skilled debater and politician. Trump can only be the apprentice!  :ph34r:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...