Trump's performance was uneven tonight. Its his first time in a controlled setting with specific questions and time constraints. He will need to up his game in the next one. I just hope he doesn't bow out. Him getting the nomination will not be giving to him. I thought the winners tonight were Cruz, Paul, Rubio and Huckabee was poised and quick on his feet.
Donald Trump for President
- Thread starter Average American
- Start date
Cruz sometimes seems like the best of them but damn it, hes such an Israeli firster and war hawk, that it negates the rest of his positives. The advantage of Trump is that I don't think he is ideologically driven, which means he won't just go to war based on some agenda and would hopefully use his business sense to help him make decisions. Paul is good on a lot of things but he's such a squish on race that he would be more then useless on matters important to racially aware people. The Donald at least is up on PC thinking and doesn't bother with it for the most part.
It's too bad they didn't have more questions on the all important hot topic abortion issue. What year is it?
And it's always nice to see a bunch of slime balls profess how much they read the Bible and love Jesus.
Donald Trump didn't give specifics - but who did? I've never heard specifics at any debate in my entire life.
A candidate who unapologetically refuses to parrot that classic party lines that bore people to death would win the nomination and Presidency. I don't really see one. Trump was the closest on the immigration issue. Looks like President Sanders can erect the White House Menorah year round.
And it's always nice to see a bunch of slime balls profess how much they read the Bible and love Jesus.
Donald Trump didn't give specifics - but who did? I've never heard specifics at any debate in my entire life.
A candidate who unapologetically refuses to parrot that classic party lines that bore people to death would win the nomination and Presidency. I don't really see one. Trump was the closest on the immigration issue. Looks like President Sanders can erect the White House Menorah year round.
Rand Paul did on his reforming the tax code.
Thrashen
Hall of Famer
Don Wassall said:
Yes, like all Professional NeoCons, this squalid lot of Zionist Christians seem thoroughly convinced that Israel is America’s “greatest ally on planet earth” and that future war-mongering in the Middle East is the one and only solution to end Muslim terrorism cells and should continue unabated. The real terrorists, of course, dwell in Washington and have been dispatching their mercenary assassin pawns to the Middle East for nearly three decades to “spread democracy”…because it’s worked so well here in the Anglosphere!
The pencil-necked, racially-Marxist libertarian twerp, Rand Paul, was the only candidate to talk about (at long last) the de-funding of Israel’s xenophobic death-machine in Palestine…oops, I mean “Israel.” Faux News moderator, Megyn Kelly, took Paul to task for this “disturbing” thought and in the lamest manner possible, Paul stood his ground.
Trump was humorous, but was asked mostly silly questions and didn’t get to speak enough. The Donald’s one and only “pro-white” idea is the border wall and the deportation of illegals from South/Central America. It’s the only reason at all that he’s become so popular, so quickly, amongst white Americans. What political issue could possibly matter more than preventing millions of non-whites (the vast majority of whom are criminals who breed like bacteria, are involved in the drug trade, and will either end up in prison, a street gang, or on government assistance) from entering a white-majority nation that’s already tearing at the seams with non-white filth?
Also, LOL at Trump’s joke concerning the remarks he made many years ago toward the ultra-liberal butch lesbian, Mr. O’Donnell…
[video=youtube;s9lcr-wsYOk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9lcr-wsYOk[/video]
Kelly's question about the “War on Women” might as well have been plucked straight out of Gloria Steinman’s maggot-infested mind. Why such a pathetic display of eternal female victimhood for such a supposedly “empowered” gender of “damsels in distress” (when it’s in their best interest) and “ass-kicking testicle smashers” (when they're on the rag and feeling delusional). Meanwhile, the “War on Men” is all too real and no one (except of few thousand fringe internet posters) could care less…but that’s exactly how “gender equality” works in the US of Gay.
Last edited:
Some white knight cuckservative has banned Trump from an upcoming GOP debate because of Trump's remark that Megyn Kelly had "blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."
Heaven forbid that someone make a reference to the menstrual cycle in a "culture" obsessed with talking about and showing male genitalia. Because the poor, fragile flowers that today's women are can't take it. Actually it's the cuckservative men, tens and tens of millions of them -- always going along with the feminist agenda that pretends it's still 1950, just as the black agenda still pretends that it's 1850 -- who are offended more than the average female.
These "men" -- submissive to their wives, always ready to tear up when the topic is women or blacks -- are the most obvious symptom of the successful takeover of the U.S. from within.
There's a genuine, virulent war on men taking place in this country -- rabid man-hatred in the media with violence against men either glorified or played for laughs, tragically unfair laws when it comes to child support and parental rights, the phasing out of men at colleges and White men in society generally -- but these pathetic jellyfish are all feeling sorry for Megyn Kelly, who is a walking talking poster girl for what a "woman" is supposed to be these days: independent, tougher than nails, physically attractive but with an insatiable dislike of men.
The establishment -- both its "liberal" and "conservative" wings -- are desperate to derail Trump. Will be interesting to see how he handles this latest contrived controversy. Hopefully he'll stick to his very powerful theme that Americans are fed up with "political correctness" aka cultural communism.
Heaven forbid that someone make a reference to the menstrual cycle in a "culture" obsessed with talking about and showing male genitalia. Because the poor, fragile flowers that today's women are can't take it. Actually it's the cuckservative men, tens and tens of millions of them -- always going along with the feminist agenda that pretends it's still 1950, just as the black agenda still pretends that it's 1850 -- who are offended more than the average female.
These "men" -- submissive to their wives, always ready to tear up when the topic is women or blacks -- are the most obvious symptom of the successful takeover of the U.S. from within.
There's a genuine, virulent war on men taking place in this country -- rabid man-hatred in the media with violence against men either glorified or played for laughs, tragically unfair laws when it comes to child support and parental rights, the phasing out of men at colleges and White men in society generally -- but these pathetic jellyfish are all feeling sorry for Megyn Kelly, who is a walking talking poster girl for what a "woman" is supposed to be these days: independent, tougher than nails, physically attractive but with an insatiable dislike of men.
The establishment -- both its "liberal" and "conservative" wings -- are desperate to derail Trump. Will be interesting to see how he handles this latest contrived controversy. Hopefully he'll stick to his very powerful theme that Americans are fed up with "political correctness" aka cultural communism.
Colonel_Reb
Hall of Famer
Don, thanks for posting this, as I generally avoid most news sites and was not aware of this. I do hope you bring this up on the third hour of TPC tonight, if the topics to be covered allows for it. I also hope Trump stands up for himself through this. By the way, Erickson is a typical PC weak-kneed neo-con/jew-fetishist republican party hack. I'm not surprised by this at all.
Last edited:
Trump has replied in strong fashion, reframing the accusation and going on the offensive.
Mr. Trump made Megyn Kelly look really bad — she was a mess with her anger and totally caught off guard. Mr. Trump said “blood was coming out of her eyes and whatever†meaning nose, but wanted to move on to more important topics. Only a deviant would think anything else. This related to the debate, which because of Mr. Trump had 24 million viewers — the biggest in cable news history. According to TIME, Newsmax, Drudge Report, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Hill and many others, Mr. Trump won the debate.
By the way, the guy (Erick Erickson) who made the decision about RedState called Supreme Court Justice David Souter a “goat [expletive] child molester†and First Lady Michelle Obama a “Marxist Harpy.†He was forced to make a humbling apology.
Also, not only is Erick a total loser, he has a history of supporting establishment losers in failed campaigns so it is an honor to be uninvited from his event. Mr. Trump is an outsider and does not fit his agenda.
Many of the 900 people that wanted to hear Mr. Trump speak tonight have been calling and emailing—they are very angry at Erickson and the others that are trying to be so politically correct. To them Mr. Trump says, “We will catch you at another time soon.â€
By the way, the guy (Erick Erickson) who made the decision about RedState called Supreme Court Justice David Souter a “goat [expletive] child molester†and First Lady Michelle Obama a “Marxist Harpy.†He was forced to make a humbling apology.
Also, not only is Erick a total loser, he has a history of supporting establishment losers in failed campaigns so it is an honor to be uninvited from his event. Mr. Trump is an outsider and does not fit his agenda.
Many of the 900 people that wanted to hear Mr. Trump speak tonight have been calling and emailing—they are very angry at Erickson and the others that are trying to be so politically correct. To them Mr. Trump says, “We will catch you at another time soon.â€
Fortitud3
Guru
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2013
- Messages
- 481
My favorite part is somehow a supposedly unbiased debate asked a question about third party run or supporting the party nomination.
Why would that even be a debate question? Why would that even effect how you vote other than voting for them just for the sake preventing a potentially popular 3rd party run? Most of all, why was it directed at the front runner?
I don't like Trump, because I think he is fraud, but his fraudulent views are pissing the GOP off and showing that there is disenfranchised white voters that want to be represented.
Its too bad though, that Trump will never actually confront the GOP on being Israel firsters. No matter what, everything for them leads back to Israel, but but but the Jews! We gotta protect the Jews... And watch Left Behind... Which we say is important and accurate portrayal of future of events, but they need our help!
Why would that even be a debate question? Why would that even effect how you vote other than voting for them just for the sake preventing a potentially popular 3rd party run? Most of all, why was it directed at the front runner?
I don't like Trump, because I think he is fraud, but his fraudulent views are pissing the GOP off and showing that there is disenfranchised white voters that want to be represented.
Its too bad though, that Trump will never actually confront the GOP on being Israel firsters. No matter what, everything for them leads back to Israel, but but but the Jews! We gotta protect the Jews... And watch Left Behind... Which we say is important and accurate portrayal of future of events, but they need our help!
I liked Megan Kelly. But why the question of Trumps remarks toward women? He is obviously a great father to his daughter and his wife. His ex wife states she has an excellent relationship with him. Why did she do this?? Can you imagine the MSM asking obama in 2008 or 2012, "Senator Obama, what year did you snort cocaine as stated in your book? and how many times did you use cocaine?" It never happened. Obviously the establishment Repubs in alliance with Foxnews are trying to take out Trump. I will never look at Kelly the same way. Rather than rejecting an irrelevant question and saying no, she bowed down to Ailes and the establishment. Trump will have a mountain to climb, but I think there are enough pissed off Americans mostly White that will assist him. Also, Cruz and Trump have formed an alliance against the the PTB. I hope they succeed.
At least O'Reilly and Hannity have Trumps back. Interesting times ahead.
At least O'Reilly and Hannity have Trumps back. Interesting times ahead.
In the video below at the 4:40 mark cuckservative Ultra-feminist Kelly talks about her belief in WHITE PRIVILEGE! She then goes on to cite numbers from the Pew Center to bolster her ridiculous assertions. Sadly this is what passes for "conservative" talking heads these days.
My favorite quote on Megyn Kelly was from her ex-husband who said something like, "At the time of our marriage I wanted a wife ........ and so did she." This was after the jilted gold digger falsely accused him on national TV of being a cheater - later admitting that he wasn't.
[video=youtube;9QKUjBRCYMg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QKUjBRCYMg[/video]
My favorite quote on Megyn Kelly was from her ex-husband who said something like, "At the time of our marriage I wanted a wife ........ and so did she." This was after the jilted gold digger falsely accused him on national TV of being a cheater - later admitting that he wasn't.
[video=youtube;9QKUjBRCYMg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QKUjBRCYMg[/video]
Heretic
Master
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 3,261
I think you answered your own question.
On the air, she comes across as being a very authoritative, tough, and knowledgeable anchor or moderator (in debates), but that's just a ruse so that the viewers will accept what she says as having some substance or backing, when it doesn't. It's all part of the propaganda campaign and how they do it and she's just happens to be a pretty puppet for them, which makes it even more effective.
Her attractiveness can lead to mind manipulation because many (men, at least) will tune into her show just to look at her. If she looked like Candy Crowley, with everything else being equal, her message wouldn't be nearly effective as it is (or was.) She's a honey trap. She can get away with talking about "White privilege" as Kaptain showed because she's given a pass for her looks and has convinced many of her viewers that shes' "a Conservative" (like them (when she's not)), so they'll buy into it at least somewhat of what she's saying.
Her sole purpose is to obediently support the current totalitarian system (a strange mix of Corporate Fascism and Cultural Marxism) and the politicians that will do the same. They are tied-at-the-hip...one-and-the-same. She (and Fox "News") will support Hillary over Trump, Rand, or Cruz because Hillary is one of the supporting pillars of this current totalitarian system as well.
At the Snark Enlightenment Twitter account there's a retweet of muckraking journalist Charles C Johnson saying the following:
"It was a really bad move for Megyn Kelly to attack Donald Trump. People are now going to find out about her extramarital affair with a fellow Fox News personality. Stupid."
Johnson's Twitter account is suspended at the moment but he has broken several stories over the past year so this could get interesting.
op2:
[video=youtube;5NsrwH9I9vE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NsrwH9I9vE#t=106[/video]
DixieDestroyer
Hall of Famer
Kelly a glorified pom pom girl who's rightful place is in the kitchen clanking pots & pans...not trying to "grill" White men running for POTUS. Also, they needn't ever place a skirt as "moderator" for these debates. Let the White men take care of that role.
As for that "Erik(a) Fairykscum" punk, he's a gutless neocon, zionista shill. I recall him trying to "minimize" Dr.Ron Paul during the last election. "He" is another pantywaist eunuch posing as a modernist "coinsoyvative".
As for that "Erik(a) Fairykscum" punk, he's a gutless neocon, zionista shill. I recall him trying to "minimize" Dr.Ron Paul during the last election. "He" is another pantywaist eunuch posing as a modernist "coinsoyvative".
L
Lew
Guest
I'd like to see Trump win but he really comes off like a spoiled child or a stereotypical black guy. He doesn't behave the way a white man should. He's always making childish remarks like "you guys aren't very nice to me", shamelessly bragging about himself, being too sensitive, and insulting people. I think he would be perfect as the face of post modern America though, especially if he chooses some slimy Jew as his running-mate. A big dumb goy with a little jew weasel whispering in his ear. That's a microcosm of present day America
Thrashen
Hall of Famer
In this video clip from 2007 (Season #6 of his hit show, “The Apprentice”), Trump becomes exceedingly enraged and immediately “fires” a contestant named Derek Arteta after he refers to himself as “white trash.” After Trump confronts him about it, the bumbling, self-loathing imbecile tries to justify his use of this anti-white slur by saying “I’ll eat at restaurants with deep-fried appetizers” and then says “I’m from a small town”…
[video=youtube;3A-Z5sRwgLM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A-Z5sRwgLM[/video]
After Derek calls himself white trash, Trump says things like:
“What does that mean? You don’t joke about that!”
“That’s a pretty stinking statement!”
“I don’t like it as a joke…you know what, Derek, you’re fired!”
“I think that is so stupid for you to say. You’re fired! Go!”
“You shouldn't use that expression anymore, either. How stupid can you be?”
“You know what, ‘white trash’ is a terrible expression, and it’s not a nice expression.”
CAPTION: Anti-White Prick Taught Lesson by Trump
I'm extremely proud to be from a very rural area and I destroy anyone who uses phrases like “hick,” “redneck,” “hillbilly,” and “white trash” in my presence. Incidents like this make me like Trump more and more. Who would’ve thought that an NYC-based, German-Scottish billionare, real estate mogul, investor, author, businessman, and reality TV star in his late-60's would relate to the common man far more than any politician has in decades? At this moment, Trump may be the most famous person on planet earth. Everywhere you look, everyone is talking about The Donald. Every single person I’ve spoken to is excited about voting for him because they love his unapologetic, take-no-prisoners approach. He’s the one and only reason that anyone watched their little NeoCon debate and he knows it. Here’s what he wrote on Twitter…
[video=youtube;3A-Z5sRwgLM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A-Z5sRwgLM[/video]
After Derek calls himself white trash, Trump says things like:
“What does that mean? You don’t joke about that!”
“That’s a pretty stinking statement!”
“I don’t like it as a joke…you know what, Derek, you’re fired!”
“I think that is so stupid for you to say. You’re fired! Go!”
“You shouldn't use that expression anymore, either. How stupid can you be?”
“You know what, ‘white trash’ is a terrible expression, and it’s not a nice expression.”
CAPTION: Anti-White Prick Taught Lesson by Trump
I'm extremely proud to be from a very rural area and I destroy anyone who uses phrases like “hick,” “redneck,” “hillbilly,” and “white trash” in my presence. Incidents like this make me like Trump more and more. Who would’ve thought that an NYC-based, German-Scottish billionare, real estate mogul, investor, author, businessman, and reality TV star in his late-60's would relate to the common man far more than any politician has in decades? At this moment, Trump may be the most famous person on planet earth. Everywhere you look, everyone is talking about The Donald. Every single person I’ve spoken to is excited about voting for him because they love his unapologetic, take-no-prisoners approach. He’s the one and only reason that anyone watched their little NeoCon debate and he knows it. Here’s what he wrote on Twitter…
| Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump | |
| It amazes me that other networks seem to treat me so much better than @FoxNews. I brought them the biggest ratings in history, & I get zip! |
Last edited:
Carolina Speed
Hall of Famer
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,757
I agree for the most part, except for the slimy Jew part. I know what you're saying Lew, but if Trump were somehow able to win the nomination, I think in order to win the Presidency, he's going to have to go with maybe a Ted Cruz type of running mate.
I'm not sure how Trump's polling with women, but my wife actually likes Trump also, except as you said Lew, she was turned off by the childish behavior. He also made a lot of child-like faces during the debate, reminiscent of when my kids, when they were small children and didn't get their way. I agree, he needs to improve his mannerisms.
Gregory Hood may be the best "alternative right" writer of them all.
She's Lost Control
by Gregory Hood
Like the “Pakis†in Jurassic World (and the UK), Donald Trump is out of control.
In what appears like a coordinated hit, FOX News aggressively targeted Trump during the first Republican presidential debate. And with staggering speed, the Narrative swiftly shifted from Trump holding his own and even being identified as the winner in online polls (and Taiwanese cartoons) to the Beltway Right declaring a disastrous night for the Trump campaign and conservative organizations moving to freeze out The Donald.
The catalyst, of course, was Strong Professional Woman and GQ eye candy Megyn Kelly trotting out the curdled Democratic talking point of a “War on Women.†Trump skillfully reframed and launched a broadside against political correctness and conservative hate target Rosie O’Donnell. After the debate, Trump counterattacked Kelly and the White Knights of the Beltway Right leapt to Kelly’s defense, notably lumpy cuck cliché Eric Erickson. It’s worth noting even leftists seemed indifferent to the attack on O’Donnell. As the former progressive champion is already reduced to the status of a punchline in a Deadpool trailer, neckbeards had to be content with avenging Kelly’s outraged honor.
Trump’s continued attack against Kelly was probably a mistake in political terms, having already cost him his key advisor Roger Stone and shifting the national discussion away from immigration into a soap opera about internal dissent within Trump’s campaign. Yet on a deeper level, this might be the best thing Trump could have done. He is at his best when dismantling the efforts at shaming and signaling by his political opponents on both Left and Right, rather than when he’s trying to describe a political platform during the confines of a 10-person debate.
When Trump was forced into that position, it did not go well. Trump’s comeback against Kelly aside, he showed his utter lack of preparation. Having launched his campaign on the accusation that the Mexican government is exporting its underclass to the United States, it seemed he didn’t even bother to look up the easily available evidence that this is true. His answer on healthcare actually showed awareness of the deeper issues involved, but was delivered in such a rambling fashion that the only phrase that stood out was his odd claim that single-payer healthcare would have worked in the past, but not now. (One couldn’t help but wonder if he meant that such a system would work well, as it once did in Scandinavia, in a country still overwhelmingly White.) And when asked about his evident shifting positions on various issues, including abortion, Trump gave his one politician-style answer, referring vaguely to his “evolution†and making a context-free reference to Ronald Reagan.
Yet none of this really matters. It’s not as if other candidates offering up polished platitudes had anything more substantial to offer. After all, Jeb Bush spent the debate denying he ever supported Common Core and admitting he would pass amnesty, but would simply call it something different. And Trump isn’t being attacked on anything real. Instead, he’s being attacked because of the very things that make him so popular—his indifference to the Beltway Right’s opinion, his naked hostility to the press, and that self-confidence and assurance that borders on megalomania. The result may very well make him stronger.
The Beltway Right’s critiques of Trump are weak objections offered up by weak men. Take Eric Erickson’s prissy fretting about Trump’s attack on Kelly being a “bridge too far†and pompously lecturing about common decency. This from a guy who called a justice of the Supreme Court a “goat ****ing child molester,†as the Trump campaign delightedly reminded reporters. And all it has done is embolden those making charges of “racism†against Erickson himself and calling for RedState to purge its comment section of racism, homophobia, and whatever other invented sins leftists have created.
Similarly, Jonah Goldberg and Kevin Williamson moaned about Trump’s “rudeness†and his being “ungallant.†Goldberg even lazily signaled about “mouth-breathing anti-Semites and white nationalists.†In both the policies they support and the rhetorical tropes they deploy, the Beltway Right apparatchiks are just leftists a couple years behind the times. (You should at least be up to “****lord†by now, Jonah.)
The heart of their objection is that Trump is emboldening people who should not be allowed to participate in the national conversation. As Kevin Williamson puts it:
It is true that the our inability to control our borders is an existential threat to these United States and that the crisis of illegal immigration is felt most intensely in downscale communities that do not register on Washington’s radar or Wall Street’s. But Trump’s buffoonery makes it less likely rather than more likely that something substantive will be done on the question. It is the case that the cult of political correctness is very much alive, that it is used to stifle criticism of powerful people and institutions and to render certain thoughts unspeakable. But if your solution to political correctness is to abandon manners and standards of conduct wholesale, then you are simply muddying the waters, making it less likely that we can respond intelligently to the little autocrats when they pipe up.
Yet if the inability to control our borders is an “existential†threat, meaning one that actively endangers the continued existence of the nation, why is the Beltway Right so blasé? After all, contra his complaints about “Trump’s buffoonery,†the only reason people are even talking about immigration is because Trump made it an issue, as The Donald himself pointed out during the debate. Williamson himself has characterized himself in the past as a “squish†on this apparently “existential†challenge. Trump has proven Peter Brimelow correct when he stated at the American Renaissance conference that all it would take is “one speech†to move immigration to the forefront of political consciousness.
More importantly, the Beltway Right, and National Review specifically, has gone out of its way to drive those who wanted to do something “substantive†on immigration out of the movement. Peter Brimelow, who used to write NR cover stories about the danger mass immigration posed to both the GOP and the nation, was famously purged over the issue, and John O’Sullivan demoted. National Review continuously crusades against political leaders like Pat Buchanan who actually would have done something about the immigration disaster and whose politics are far more moderate than many of the magazine’s own past editorials.
Even today, when former National Review contributor Ann Coulter penned the bestselling Adios America, a tightly reasoned case against the catastrophe American leaders have invited, the magazine’s sole acknowledgement was a bizarre non-review. Author Jay Nordlinger acted almost as if he didn’t know who Coulter was, ignoring her own past with the magazine and her termination, which led to her coining the #cuckservative prequel to describe the NR editors, “girlyboys.†Coulter was fired largely because of her comment in her post 9/11 column about converting Muslims to Christianity; as Eric Erickson showed with his initial reaction to #cuckservatism, references to Christianity are only permitted in the Beltway Right when it’s time to explain to the proles why they aren’t allowed to fight back against the people who hate them.
Goldberg makes the ritualistic invocations of Reagan in his attempted takedown of Trump, but as Nordlinger casually admits in his article, mass immigration has made Reagan’s career impossible. Even as President Obama executes an astonishingly overt and expansive program of demographic transformation more permanent and devastating than any military occupation, NR and the conservative movement remain utterly silent, focusing their attention on fedora tipping for m’lady and joining forces with noted American patriot Chuck Schumer to kvetch about Iran.
More importantly, it is supremely dishonest to pretend that the deliberately intellectually stunted Beltway Right is even open to serious discussion on important issues. The contemporary American conservative movement can’t even indulge the nostalgic conservatism of a Russell Kirk (who, we should remember, endorsed Pat Buchanan). Instead, conservatism today is a tired series of clichés about “American exceptionalism,†continuously redefined “values,†which are nonetheless defended as eternal, and faux patriotism towards the oxymoron of a “proposition nation.â€
Serious scholars within the conservative movement were systematically driven out if they exceeded these narrow boundaries. M.E. Bradford, whose failed nomination to the National Endowment for the Humanities is widely regarded as the first battle of the civil war between the “paleoconservatives†and “neoconservatives,†expressed an authentic conservative position when he wrote:
To apply the rhetoric of the common good to the last thirty years of civil rights revolution is to ask whether the changes produced by Court and Congress in the official situation of the American Negro have been worth the danger to us all which went with these transformations of the United States Constitution: the risk of converting a nomocratic, customary, procedural government into a power able to attempt whatever it thinks fit; into a teleocratic instrument, ready and able to do whatever it defines as good. It is to ask whether the tradition of restricted Federal authority produced and natured by two hundred years of American history must give way because other grievances or misfortunes of one segment of our population are more important than limitations on the scope and outreach of the law which honor the liberty of all free men – or at least attempted to do so before the fundamental law was reconstructed by judicial ingenuity into something new and strange.â€
In contrast, Matt Lewis tells us:
I fear that more people on both ends of the political spectrum are embracing what should be fringe views in America. I can’t police the left, but my hope in writing this is to sound the alarm on the right. And message is simple: Be optimistic about America. Embrace our pluralistic society. And don’t let these vile goddamn racists pollute our message. They are not our friends, they are not on our team, and conservative leaders must roundly condemn them.
Apologizing in advance for my Eric Erickson-like language, but this pedo-faced simpleton has less insight into American politics than a flyover country CR chair snorting coke in a bathroom at CPAC.
And since Conservatism Inc. successfully drove out the Bradfords and replaced them with noodle-armed pushovers who think Charles Krauthammer is heavy reading, it’s no surprise the emerging Identitarian movement has no patience even for the ideological premises of paleoconservatism.
None of this was necessary. But this is the future they chose. By refusing to take action on what is becoming a civilizational crisis, and even banning serious discussion about it within the sanctioned American Right, conservatives not only invited the physical dispossession of their demographic base but their ideological dispossession by a new force that is alone capable of resisting the Death of the West.
Donald Trump, of course, is not a part of that movement. He may not even be the most hardline Republican candidate running for President on immigration. Yet he is a herald of what comes next because, even if his campaign ends tomorrow, he has shown the White base of the Republican Party is as impatient with Conservatism Inc. as they are with the “liberal media.â€
They are not White Nationalists or even racially conscious, but they know the leaders of the American conservative movement gave away their country so liberals wouldn’t call them mean names. The frenzied attacks on Trump are a desperate attempt to break his threat to the Beltway Right’s control. Unfortunately for Conservatism Inc., its contempt of Donald Trump is being interpreted (accurately) as contempt towards its own voters. And unless those voters are given the choice of supporting someone who they think will actually resist their dispossession, they are going to stay home and once again, the Republicans are going to lose.
Donald Trump does not have the support of a majority of Republican voters. But he has the power, and perhaps the willingness, to destroy Republican chances in the next election cycle if he can maintain his level of popular support. As we know, the power to destroy a thing is the power to control it. Today, Trump has that power over the American Right. And perhaps in a far shorter time than many expect, so will we.
http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2015/8/10/shes-lost-control
She's Lost Control
by Gregory Hood
Like the “Pakis†in Jurassic World (and the UK), Donald Trump is out of control.
In what appears like a coordinated hit, FOX News aggressively targeted Trump during the first Republican presidential debate. And with staggering speed, the Narrative swiftly shifted from Trump holding his own and even being identified as the winner in online polls (and Taiwanese cartoons) to the Beltway Right declaring a disastrous night for the Trump campaign and conservative organizations moving to freeze out The Donald.
The catalyst, of course, was Strong Professional Woman and GQ eye candy Megyn Kelly trotting out the curdled Democratic talking point of a “War on Women.†Trump skillfully reframed and launched a broadside against political correctness and conservative hate target Rosie O’Donnell. After the debate, Trump counterattacked Kelly and the White Knights of the Beltway Right leapt to Kelly’s defense, notably lumpy cuck cliché Eric Erickson. It’s worth noting even leftists seemed indifferent to the attack on O’Donnell. As the former progressive champion is already reduced to the status of a punchline in a Deadpool trailer, neckbeards had to be content with avenging Kelly’s outraged honor.
Trump’s continued attack against Kelly was probably a mistake in political terms, having already cost him his key advisor Roger Stone and shifting the national discussion away from immigration into a soap opera about internal dissent within Trump’s campaign. Yet on a deeper level, this might be the best thing Trump could have done. He is at his best when dismantling the efforts at shaming and signaling by his political opponents on both Left and Right, rather than when he’s trying to describe a political platform during the confines of a 10-person debate.
When Trump was forced into that position, it did not go well. Trump’s comeback against Kelly aside, he showed his utter lack of preparation. Having launched his campaign on the accusation that the Mexican government is exporting its underclass to the United States, it seemed he didn’t even bother to look up the easily available evidence that this is true. His answer on healthcare actually showed awareness of the deeper issues involved, but was delivered in such a rambling fashion that the only phrase that stood out was his odd claim that single-payer healthcare would have worked in the past, but not now. (One couldn’t help but wonder if he meant that such a system would work well, as it once did in Scandinavia, in a country still overwhelmingly White.) And when asked about his evident shifting positions on various issues, including abortion, Trump gave his one politician-style answer, referring vaguely to his “evolution†and making a context-free reference to Ronald Reagan.
Yet none of this really matters. It’s not as if other candidates offering up polished platitudes had anything more substantial to offer. After all, Jeb Bush spent the debate denying he ever supported Common Core and admitting he would pass amnesty, but would simply call it something different. And Trump isn’t being attacked on anything real. Instead, he’s being attacked because of the very things that make him so popular—his indifference to the Beltway Right’s opinion, his naked hostility to the press, and that self-confidence and assurance that borders on megalomania. The result may very well make him stronger.
The Beltway Right’s critiques of Trump are weak objections offered up by weak men. Take Eric Erickson’s prissy fretting about Trump’s attack on Kelly being a “bridge too far†and pompously lecturing about common decency. This from a guy who called a justice of the Supreme Court a “goat ****ing child molester,†as the Trump campaign delightedly reminded reporters. And all it has done is embolden those making charges of “racism†against Erickson himself and calling for RedState to purge its comment section of racism, homophobia, and whatever other invented sins leftists have created.
Similarly, Jonah Goldberg and Kevin Williamson moaned about Trump’s “rudeness†and his being “ungallant.†Goldberg even lazily signaled about “mouth-breathing anti-Semites and white nationalists.†In both the policies they support and the rhetorical tropes they deploy, the Beltway Right apparatchiks are just leftists a couple years behind the times. (You should at least be up to “****lord†by now, Jonah.)
The heart of their objection is that Trump is emboldening people who should not be allowed to participate in the national conversation. As Kevin Williamson puts it:
It is true that the our inability to control our borders is an existential threat to these United States and that the crisis of illegal immigration is felt most intensely in downscale communities that do not register on Washington’s radar or Wall Street’s. But Trump’s buffoonery makes it less likely rather than more likely that something substantive will be done on the question. It is the case that the cult of political correctness is very much alive, that it is used to stifle criticism of powerful people and institutions and to render certain thoughts unspeakable. But if your solution to political correctness is to abandon manners and standards of conduct wholesale, then you are simply muddying the waters, making it less likely that we can respond intelligently to the little autocrats when they pipe up.
Yet if the inability to control our borders is an “existential†threat, meaning one that actively endangers the continued existence of the nation, why is the Beltway Right so blasé? After all, contra his complaints about “Trump’s buffoonery,†the only reason people are even talking about immigration is because Trump made it an issue, as The Donald himself pointed out during the debate. Williamson himself has characterized himself in the past as a “squish†on this apparently “existential†challenge. Trump has proven Peter Brimelow correct when he stated at the American Renaissance conference that all it would take is “one speech†to move immigration to the forefront of political consciousness.
More importantly, the Beltway Right, and National Review specifically, has gone out of its way to drive those who wanted to do something “substantive†on immigration out of the movement. Peter Brimelow, who used to write NR cover stories about the danger mass immigration posed to both the GOP and the nation, was famously purged over the issue, and John O’Sullivan demoted. National Review continuously crusades against political leaders like Pat Buchanan who actually would have done something about the immigration disaster and whose politics are far more moderate than many of the magazine’s own past editorials.
Even today, when former National Review contributor Ann Coulter penned the bestselling Adios America, a tightly reasoned case against the catastrophe American leaders have invited, the magazine’s sole acknowledgement was a bizarre non-review. Author Jay Nordlinger acted almost as if he didn’t know who Coulter was, ignoring her own past with the magazine and her termination, which led to her coining the #cuckservative prequel to describe the NR editors, “girlyboys.†Coulter was fired largely because of her comment in her post 9/11 column about converting Muslims to Christianity; as Eric Erickson showed with his initial reaction to #cuckservatism, references to Christianity are only permitted in the Beltway Right when it’s time to explain to the proles why they aren’t allowed to fight back against the people who hate them.
Goldberg makes the ritualistic invocations of Reagan in his attempted takedown of Trump, but as Nordlinger casually admits in his article, mass immigration has made Reagan’s career impossible. Even as President Obama executes an astonishingly overt and expansive program of demographic transformation more permanent and devastating than any military occupation, NR and the conservative movement remain utterly silent, focusing their attention on fedora tipping for m’lady and joining forces with noted American patriot Chuck Schumer to kvetch about Iran.
More importantly, it is supremely dishonest to pretend that the deliberately intellectually stunted Beltway Right is even open to serious discussion on important issues. The contemporary American conservative movement can’t even indulge the nostalgic conservatism of a Russell Kirk (who, we should remember, endorsed Pat Buchanan). Instead, conservatism today is a tired series of clichés about “American exceptionalism,†continuously redefined “values,†which are nonetheless defended as eternal, and faux patriotism towards the oxymoron of a “proposition nation.â€
Serious scholars within the conservative movement were systematically driven out if they exceeded these narrow boundaries. M.E. Bradford, whose failed nomination to the National Endowment for the Humanities is widely regarded as the first battle of the civil war between the “paleoconservatives†and “neoconservatives,†expressed an authentic conservative position when he wrote:
To apply the rhetoric of the common good to the last thirty years of civil rights revolution is to ask whether the changes produced by Court and Congress in the official situation of the American Negro have been worth the danger to us all which went with these transformations of the United States Constitution: the risk of converting a nomocratic, customary, procedural government into a power able to attempt whatever it thinks fit; into a teleocratic instrument, ready and able to do whatever it defines as good. It is to ask whether the tradition of restricted Federal authority produced and natured by two hundred years of American history must give way because other grievances or misfortunes of one segment of our population are more important than limitations on the scope and outreach of the law which honor the liberty of all free men – or at least attempted to do so before the fundamental law was reconstructed by judicial ingenuity into something new and strange.â€
In contrast, Matt Lewis tells us:
I fear that more people on both ends of the political spectrum are embracing what should be fringe views in America. I can’t police the left, but my hope in writing this is to sound the alarm on the right. And message is simple: Be optimistic about America. Embrace our pluralistic society. And don’t let these vile goddamn racists pollute our message. They are not our friends, they are not on our team, and conservative leaders must roundly condemn them.
Apologizing in advance for my Eric Erickson-like language, but this pedo-faced simpleton has less insight into American politics than a flyover country CR chair snorting coke in a bathroom at CPAC.
And since Conservatism Inc. successfully drove out the Bradfords and replaced them with noodle-armed pushovers who think Charles Krauthammer is heavy reading, it’s no surprise the emerging Identitarian movement has no patience even for the ideological premises of paleoconservatism.
None of this was necessary. But this is the future they chose. By refusing to take action on what is becoming a civilizational crisis, and even banning serious discussion about it within the sanctioned American Right, conservatives not only invited the physical dispossession of their demographic base but their ideological dispossession by a new force that is alone capable of resisting the Death of the West.
Donald Trump, of course, is not a part of that movement. He may not even be the most hardline Republican candidate running for President on immigration. Yet he is a herald of what comes next because, even if his campaign ends tomorrow, he has shown the White base of the Republican Party is as impatient with Conservatism Inc. as they are with the “liberal media.â€
They are not White Nationalists or even racially conscious, but they know the leaders of the American conservative movement gave away their country so liberals wouldn’t call them mean names. The frenzied attacks on Trump are a desperate attempt to break his threat to the Beltway Right’s control. Unfortunately for Conservatism Inc., its contempt of Donald Trump is being interpreted (accurately) as contempt towards its own voters. And unless those voters are given the choice of supporting someone who they think will actually resist their dispossession, they are going to stay home and once again, the Republicans are going to lose.
Donald Trump does not have the support of a majority of Republican voters. But he has the power, and perhaps the willingness, to destroy Republican chances in the next election cycle if he can maintain his level of popular support. As we know, the power to destroy a thing is the power to control it. Today, Trump has that power over the American Right. And perhaps in a far shorter time than many expect, so will we.
http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2015/8/10/shes-lost-control
Trump is clearly not stupid. He may not have the high IQ of some guys but you don't get to be a billionaire of uninherited wealth without having the smarts to be able to negotiate, read people, plan, and take calculated risks.
The "buffoon" label is often associated with being dumb because in America 1.0 proper social behavior and manners were often the key to success, failure to play by those rules was considered due to a lack of brains or perhaps poor upbringing. We don't, of course, live in America 1.0 and thus there are few reasons to follow that line of thinking anymore, as his popularity suggests.
As Don pointed out the media likes to control politicians by keeping them in the straitjacket of faultless manners and constant self policing of what is said. They are required to act like it still is the 1950's (America 1.0) and this keeps them from wandering past the acceptable boundaries of political discussion. Clearly it is terrifying for them to have a guy able to kick in the doors of their phony restrictions, who knows where that may lead?
Trumps popularity has been attributed to many things. He's an outsider, a brash or straight talker, his personality, etc. Absolute frustration with their current elected leaders on the Republican/conservative side is a big part of it but it goes farther then that. There is a video that has gone viral of two black woman who do a video blog called something like the Viewers of The View, and they vociferously defend Trump against Kelly Megan or Megan Kelly (as they refer to her) in a TFNB style of verbal assault. Contrast that with ultra-liberal, MLK marching, black loving Bernie Saunders getting kicked off his own stage by another two fat black women of the TNFB persuasion. Could there be anymore of a startling contrast between the career politician and The Donald?
Trump has the backing of fat, black, loud mouthed, women? Why would that be? How could it be? Trump is the antithesis of who a black woman should support. He's an old pale white male, who is rich, pompous, strutting, aggressive, bragging, blowhard.
My pet theory is that Trump seems like the only guy in the political realm who might possibly have the balls to say "NO" to the many aggrieved freaks of our society who are able to rule and bully their way to power due to the complete surrender at every level of government. Most white and black people I talk to shake their heads when the discussion comes up about stuff like gays putting small shops out of business, trannies forcing their way into women's bathrooms, kids getting lessons in condom application and anal sex techniques, unrestricted illegal immigration, criminal immigrant behavior, unending war, loss of jobs to every other country in the world, riots, criminals treated like heroes. This is madness and no one has the will to take a strong stand against it.
Heck I know gay guys that are shocked that a bakery or photo shop can be fined for not doing business with someone wanting a gay marriage. A lot of people are in the middle and we are being ruled by the fringe.
Who was the last politician that would take an unpopular stand based on his own personal principles? Jesse Helms? A generation ago? I think people feel that Donald Trump has some basic middle of the road beliefs and if elected, might actually stand his ground on those issues because he is so opinionated, so pompous, so egotistical, all those things that are otherwise considered "negatives" but are qualities needed in a "leader".
The "buffoon" label is often associated with being dumb because in America 1.0 proper social behavior and manners were often the key to success, failure to play by those rules was considered due to a lack of brains or perhaps poor upbringing. We don't, of course, live in America 1.0 and thus there are few reasons to follow that line of thinking anymore, as his popularity suggests.
As Don pointed out the media likes to control politicians by keeping them in the straitjacket of faultless manners and constant self policing of what is said. They are required to act like it still is the 1950's (America 1.0) and this keeps them from wandering past the acceptable boundaries of political discussion. Clearly it is terrifying for them to have a guy able to kick in the doors of their phony restrictions, who knows where that may lead?
Trumps popularity has been attributed to many things. He's an outsider, a brash or straight talker, his personality, etc. Absolute frustration with their current elected leaders on the Republican/conservative side is a big part of it but it goes farther then that. There is a video that has gone viral of two black woman who do a video blog called something like the Viewers of The View, and they vociferously defend Trump against Kelly Megan or Megan Kelly (as they refer to her) in a TFNB style of verbal assault. Contrast that with ultra-liberal, MLK marching, black loving Bernie Saunders getting kicked off his own stage by another two fat black women of the TNFB persuasion. Could there be anymore of a startling contrast between the career politician and The Donald?
Trump has the backing of fat, black, loud mouthed, women? Why would that be? How could it be? Trump is the antithesis of who a black woman should support. He's an old pale white male, who is rich, pompous, strutting, aggressive, bragging, blowhard.
My pet theory is that Trump seems like the only guy in the political realm who might possibly have the balls to say "NO" to the many aggrieved freaks of our society who are able to rule and bully their way to power due to the complete surrender at every level of government. Most white and black people I talk to shake their heads when the discussion comes up about stuff like gays putting small shops out of business, trannies forcing their way into women's bathrooms, kids getting lessons in condom application and anal sex techniques, unrestricted illegal immigration, criminal immigrant behavior, unending war, loss of jobs to every other country in the world, riots, criminals treated like heroes. This is madness and no one has the will to take a strong stand against it.
Heck I know gay guys that are shocked that a bakery or photo shop can be fined for not doing business with someone wanting a gay marriage. A lot of people are in the middle and we are being ruled by the fringe.
Who was the last politician that would take an unpopular stand based on his own personal principles? Jesse Helms? A generation ago? I think people feel that Donald Trump has some basic middle of the road beliefs and if elected, might actually stand his ground on those issues because he is so opinionated, so pompous, so egotistical, all those things that are otherwise considered "negatives" but are qualities needed in a "leader".
DixieDestroyer
Hall of Famer
Good summarization Jax. In an environment of spineless jellyfish, any man with some "stones" is gonna stand out (amongst the field of pansies).
Last edited:
Phall
Master
Very strong take. Jaxvid is CF's own Gregory Hood, except more tenured and wise/weathered through experience.
I agree with all this and Andrew Anglin's take, which he reasserts often at the outlandishly off-color 'Daily Stormer' site. Trump is a swerve from the straight line; a black swan. With regards to his past indiscretions and moral disqualifiers, we are not watching auditions for the next pope. (more like the next rare pepe) The norm has gotten us filth, degradation, self-mutilation, scorn for normalcy, and all the rest. The Donald is a swerve. I respect the original The Don - Don Wassall - for all his work, and I just discovered his podcast. If I recall correctly, his party anointed Virginia Abernathy (a verbose, noble, proud, and unimpeachable Old Maid) as its vice presidential candidate. She helped her ticket win a few public TV interviews to trump the usual media slurs of "disaffected young white men"... however, her presence on the ticket specifically alienated actual disaffected young white men. At least she offended few people.
I'm voting Trump, and I might even register for the first time to do so in a primary. He's hotter than Forbes, more in touch (by way of pompous rhetoric) than Ron Paul, and certainly more of a simply "**** you" vote than McCain against Obama in 2008.
If Trump doesn't work so that El Jebbito loses by 20% of the electorate, we whites are looking at a necessary violent declaration of independence soon in order to stay alive (figuratively), in my opinion. But we hate violence, so we will get squeezed and squeezed into a smaller share until it's literally fight or die for your organic cucumber crop on your roof-top coop in hipsterville, Brooklyn.
Republican hopeful and distinguished ambassador "Señor Economy" may cite all his extra profits during his ambitious dictatorship advertising campaign and violent seizure of government buildings. LOL just kidding, there will be no ground wars in America amongst ourselves. Every gate violation is a 0.1% "progressive tax" increase!
Thrashen
Hall of Famer
Nice post, Jax and others.
More “controversial,†“racist,†un-PC Twitter messages from Der Donald over the past few hours…
Trump hasn’t backed off his polemic comments regarding illegals whatsoever. If anything, it’s only intensified and over the past month, he’s gone on the offensive (like always) and written on Twitter about several violent crimes that illegals have committed against whites. There is nobody, of any level of fame, who is willing to do this. I never thought I’d see a presidential front-runner discussing these matters openly in public…
CAPTION: Billionare Bad-Ass
More “controversial,†“racist,†un-PC Twitter messages from Der Donald over the past few hours…
|
| Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump | |
| We must stop the crime and killing machine that is illegal immigration. Rampant problems will only get worse. Take back our country! |
|
| | |
| Again, illegal immigrant is charged with the fatal bludgeoning of a wonderful and loved 64 year old woman. Get them out and build a WALL! |
Trump hasn’t backed off his polemic comments regarding illegals whatsoever. If anything, it’s only intensified and over the past month, he’s gone on the offensive (like always) and written on Twitter about several violent crimes that illegals have committed against whites. There is nobody, of any level of fame, who is willing to do this. I never thought I’d see a presidential front-runner discussing these matters openly in public…
CAPTION: Billionare Bad-Ass