The most merciful thing in the world, I think,” wrote the American horror writer H. P. Lovecraft in the opening to The Call of Cthulhu, “is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents.”
In the Lovecraftian mythos, this refers to the occult world of the Great Old Ones, eldritch gods from outer space, as old as time itself who lie beyond our ken, dead but still dreaming. If we could only grasp their existence and see how fragile our imaginary world really is, we would go mad. Thus, we go on believing in an illusion and subconsciously hope Cthulhu and Azathoth never show us their true faces.
With the Democrat Party embracing full hardcore totalitarian Leftism, the secret to being a successful Democrat is very similar.
While President Trump was holding his Monday (2/11) rally in El Paso for a packed stadium, the hapless Beto O'Rourke was hosting his own pathetic anti-wall protest, his "March for Truth," a quarter of a mile away.
His little march attracted about three hundred people. Beto spoke Spanish while his supporters waved Mexican flags, and his gathering was close enough to the Trump event that the big rally's music could be heard.
It may be safe to say that Beto's potential run for president is over before it has begun. He is a self-serving, anti-American intellectual lightweight like Kamala Harris, Joe Biden, and every other Democrat who has thrown his hat in the ring for 2020.
There is a famous poem by Sir Walter Scott published in 1805 that perfectly describes people like Beto, Obama, Hillary Clinton, Schumer, Harry Reid , Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the Left:
“We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom — and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair. Here in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” --President Donald Trump, February 5, 2019This was the President’s Declaration of War upon “Socialism,” i.e. Marxism, Fascism, and Communism.
After all, the three greatest mass-murderers of all time were “Socialists” – Hitler the National Socialist (30 million), Stalin the leader of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (40 million), Mao the leader of “the Socialist revolution” of the Chinese Communist Party (60 million).
The reason Trump's outspoken opposition to socialism is so timely, more necessary than ever in our country, is the catastrophe of America’s schools. While few were noticing, our educational system -- from the earliest years through college -- has been turning, indeed has turned for the most part, into a virtual indoctrination program for socialism.
As the shutdown heads into its fourth week, the nation is getting used to the radical idea that we can actually do without the fleets of bureaucrats who, in the immortal words of the Declaration of Independence, have been "sent hither to harass our people and eat out their substance."
For decades, as the federal leviathan has grown ever larger, and poked its voracious snout into all manners of unconstitutional fodder, the people of the United States have largely sat idly by, hoping to catch some of the droppings from the creature's maw in the belief that it will not eat them too as it forages merrily along.
Still, life has gone on otherwise pretty much as before -- and the longer the shutdown continues, the more easily the way we were can be forgotten.
So the longer Donald Trump wrangles with his two superannuated cartoon antagonists, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, the stronger the president's position becomes.
On the one hand, higher education’s professional schools in medicine and business, as well as graduate and undergraduate programs in math, science, and engineering, are the world’s best. America dominates the lists of the top universities compiled in global surveys conducted from the United Kingdom to Japan.
On the other hand, the liberal arts and social sciences of America’s universities are expensive engines of propaganda and intolerance.
Few believe any more that current liberal-arts programs have prepared graduates to write persuasively and elegantly, to read critically and to think inductively while drawing on a wide body of literary, linguistic, historical, artistic, and philosophical knowledge.
By and large, the bachelor’s degree, even in a liberal-arts major, no longer certifies that a graduate will be able to read, reason, compute, or draw on a body of knowledge far more effectively than those without an undergraduate degree.
The decline of the university has been an ongoing tragedy since the 1960s, but the erosion has accelerated because of ideological bias and its twin, incompetence. Here are five major recent and additional catalysts.
[The President’s magnificent address to the nation on border security last night, 1/08, with full transcript following]
America proudly welcomes millions of lawful immigrants who enrich our society and contribute to our nation.
But all Americans are hurt by uncontrolled, illegal migration. In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults, 30,000 sex crimes, and 4,000 violent killings.
Over the years, thousands of Americans have been brutally killed by those who illegally entered our country, and thousands more lives will be lost if we don’t act right now.
This is a humanitarian crisis — a crisis of the heart and a crisis of the soul. This is the tragic reality of illegal immigration on our southern border. This is the cycle of human suffering that I am determined to end.
Just as the Republican Party is purging itself of hackneyed lawmakers, bitter neoconservative commentators, and insatiable interventionists, along comes Mitt Romney to remind us of what we definitely are not missing.
In a late New Year’s Day sermon published in the Washington Post, the incoming senator expressed his disappointment in the president and, by extension, in all of us. It was filled with the sort of juvenile platitudes that at one time mollified Republican voters, but now either amuse or enrage them.
The reaction on the Right to Romney’s missive was fast and furious. His niece, head of the Republican National Committee, sided with Trump, while the President again teased the man he once teased with the prospect of a cabinet position, tweeting yesterday morning:
Yet, something new seems to be emerging across the country. Politicians have long felt the need to disguise raw political agendas in the pretense of principle. That pretense has disappeared.
In this Age of Rage, voters seem to have no patience, let alone need, for leaders speaking of abstract principles. They want immediate unequivocal action in supporting or opposing President Trump.
For Democrats, that all-consuming purpose has led to the abandonment of core unifying values, including many that first drew me to the Democrat Party. While they would vehemently deny it, Trump is remaking the party in his inverse image. This past month shows how far that transformation has gone.
Pittsburgh—It’s just before 7 p.m. on a frigid December night, and already the Allegheny Elks Lodge No. 339 on the city’s North Side is filling up quickly—both the long bar and the tables in the adjacent hall.
There’s a woman collecting for a 50-50 raffle. (You may as well give in; she won’t take no for an answer.) Elks volunteers young and old are manning the bar and the kitchen, where the special tonight is a gourmet grilled cheese (black forest honey ham, Gouda cheese, and bacon).
Upstairs a six-lane sparkling white and red art deco bowling alley straight out of the 1920s is filled with young people from a local league. The floor above that is where lodge meetings are held; it is a beautiful ballroom also straight out of the Roaring ’20s.
The beer is cheap and cold. The food is cheap and tasty. Soon the entire building is packed to the rafters, people lining the walls in the hall and the bar. It’s as if Frank Capra made a movie in this century.
Civic life like this has been dying for decades, accelerated by the isolating effects of gaming and smartphones, and the anti-social components of social media. Today, the sense of community, security and civic duty that fraternal organizations can cultivate is returning.
Thanks to the flow of foreign information into the Hermit Kingdom, North Korea is changing from the inside out — and Kim Jong Un is running to catch up. The growing split between the North Korean people and the state is proving difficult for the Kim regime to reverse.
The influx of foreign media and knowledge has been growing for years, and like the red pill from The Matrix, it has the power to transform North Koreans’ understanding of the world. It permeates all levels of North Korean life, and civilians are becoming increasingly self-aware.
Foreign media infiltrating the North — South Korean dramas, in particular — have done the most to reshape the way North Koreans view their southern neighbors and, in turn, their own realities. From fashion to an awareness of human rights, foreign ideas now increasingly color the lives of ordinary North Koreans.
By “rule of the best” ( the Greek aristokratia), I mean the ancien régime was no longer understood to suggest wealth and birth (alone), but instead envisioned itself as a supposed national meritocracy of those with proper degrees, and long service in the top hierarchies of government, media, blue-chip law firms, Wall Street, high tech, and academia.
The 2016 election and refutation of the ruling class did not signal that those without such educations and qualifications were de facto better suited to direct the country. Instead, the lesson was that the past record of governance and the current stature of our assumed best and brightest certainly did not justify their reputations or authority, much less their outsized self-regard.
In short, instead of being a meritocracy, they amount to a mediocracy, neither great nor awful, but mostly mediocre. Let us count the ways they are and how Donald Trump is their repudiation.
These people, these Democrats in Congress, are among the most privileged persons on the planet. They have enjoyed, more than most, the blessings bequeathed by the Founders, the authors of the Constitution. Yet they are determined, like Obama, to transform us into something this nation was never meant to be: a land without borders.
While all of them are on record supporting a border wall in the past, now that Donald Trump is president, they all oppose it with every fiber of their being. They know that it will work, and they cannot abide Trump having a win. These people – Schumer, Pelosi, Gutiérrez, etc. – are truly venal.
It should be obvious to every American by now that our “progressive” regressive Left does not have the best interest of Americans at heart. Quite the opposite. They have become a Curse blighting our beloved country.
I debated for a few minutes. Dues have inflated since I joined in the eighties and are now a hefty $450 per annum. Nevertheless, spendthrift that I am, I bit the proverbial bullet and went for it. Call it the inability to break a bad habit. Or an addiction to the non-stop influx of screeners that arrive at my door every December, not that I watch many of them. (I suspect I'm not alone in that.)
But it wasn't just the money that had made me hesitate. On one level, I wouldn't have re-upped up for $4.50, let alone $450. I mean -- what was the point of this? Does anybody care who wins the Oscar anymore? I certainly don't -- and I'm a voter.
Here’s why this year the Oscars will continue on their downward spiral toward life support.
That’s as prosecutors once again work overtime to turn extramarital affairs and the efforts to keep them secret into impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors.
Except it’s worse. Unable to get the witnesses to compose the stories they want, today’s prosecutors are discovering they can simply compose the crimes by manipulating the pleas of men desperate to protect their families. That never happened in 1998.
The Michael Cohen Sentencing Memo of November 30 took aim directly at both Cohen and President Donald Trump. It was used, unethically, to cast the president as directing a criminal conspiracy to make “secret and illegal” payments. Then again, when has Mueller and his gang done something ethically?
Robert Mueller’s legal team may write a damning report on Trump’s ethics, based mostly on flipping minor former business associates of Trump’s and transient campaign officials by threatening them with long prison sentences.
So far, we know that the U.S. government decided to intervene in a political campaign to help one candidate and to smear the other — under the pretext of Russian “collusion.” That would be Obama’s government helping Hillary to smear The Donald.
And so it hired or made use of spies and informants including Hank Greenberg, Stefan Halper, Felix Sater, and others to contact Trump campaign officials to catch them in supposed collusion traps.
It enlisted the help of foreign intelligence agencies, specifically the British and Australians.
It misled FISA courts into granting warrants to spy on Americans and, post factum, threatened long prisons sentences with those surveilled and interviewed.
Why has Robert Mueller investigated absolutely none of this?
These sanguine claims are made despite the fact that internal controls are often so poor, or even nonexistent on election integrity, that it is nearly impossible to know if voter fraud has even occurred.
In every critical area—voter identification, voter registration, duplicate voting, absentee ballots, ineligible voting, ballot custody, ballot destruction, counterfeit ballots, voting machine tampering—gaping holes exist that invite systemic fraud.
But so what? How relevant is voter fraud, if the entire system is already rigged to favor one party – the Democrats – over the other?
Come to California to see what’s going to roll out across America in time to guarantee a progressive landslide in 2020. It may be perfectly legal. But it’s so rigged it would make Boss Tweed blush.
The team Mueller hired really foretold the story — Andrew Weissmann as the stop-at-nothing pit bull and a group of Democrat lawyers, including some who have represented the Clintons, had the obstruction of justice charge ready to go on day one.
The investigation, I believe, has come up truly empty on its central charge related to the president — collusion with the Russian government. They are now trying to find someone, anyone who had any contact with Julian Assange with the aim of calling that collusion-lite.
But mostly what Mueller’s team is doing is bludgeoning witnesses on unrelated charges to piece together a case against the president. They are shaping that case through the indictments -- and threats of indictments -- that are being used to get guilty pleas to make the president seem like an obstructor or co-conspirator. They are literally creating the crimes.
Let’s review what Mueller and his team are doing:
President Trump scored major successes at the G-20 summit that concluded over last weekend in Argentina (12/01-02).
Specifically, the community of nations agreed in their official communique to “necessary reform” of the World Trade Organization, a top White House priority, recognized the decision of the U.S. to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, and to still utilize “all energy sources and technologies, while protecting the environment.”
In addition, the Chinese promised to up their purchases of U.S.- made goods and to discuss other demands in exchange for postponing an expected hike in tariffs; President Xi also committed to designating the deadly drug Fentanyl as a controlled substance in China, and vowed to help with de-nuclearizing North Korea.
It was an all-round win-win for the president, who needed one.
As the fall elections approach, it's clear that the Left side of the aisle is getting nuttier by the day.
The public spectacles of the two funerals, Aretha Franklin's and John McCain's, brought forth the usual characters from our long-running American sitcom-cum-political soap opera.
Lecherous Bill Clinton, race-hustler Al Sharpton, shakedown artist Jesse Jackson, and anti-Semitic hate monger Louis Farrakhan in Detroit for the Queen of Soul.
Leading lights of the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party, including George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Lieberman, in Washington for the now-sanctified Maverick – who seemed not to have the dearly departed on their minds, but their bête noire in the White House, Donald Trump.
Old feuds, such as that between Bush and McCain, were forgotten as, like Marc Antony over the bleeding corpse of Julius Caesar, they delivered their orations designed not so much to praise McCain but to bury Trump.
The great engine of American capitalism is once again firing on all cylinders, as shown by the 4.1 percent annualized growth of America’s gross domestic product (GDP) in the second quarter of this year.
Most Americans (with the exception of Democrats in Congress) are celebrating the good economic news. There is quiet rejoicing in many European and Asian capitals as well, since their mostly sluggish economies will now be drawn along in America’s powerful wake.
But there is one capital where the American economic renaissance is definitely not welcome news. Consternation reigns in China, where President Xi Jinping is nervously watching his “China Dream” of dominating the United States go up in smoke.
You see, surprising though it may sound, America’s economy may now be growing at a faster clip than China’s. And this changes everything. Actually, as the photo of the US and China First Ladies symbolizes, ever since Trump, it’s no contest.
It’s possible to derive some comfort from contemplating the Chinese. Sure, unless something radical is done, Western civilization is going to collapse due to the most intelligent women having the fewest children, combined with massive low IQ (and highly fertile) immigration from the Third World.
So argues Edward Dutton in his forthcoming At Our Wits’ End. Some will then argue that surely civilization will be preserved by the Chinese. Unfortunately, research is showing that this is just wishful thinking.
Such as leading IQ researcher Professor Richard Lynn actually proclaiming in his book Dysgenics that China’s one child policy—introduced in 1979 and abolished in 2015—was the savior of civilization.
Unfortunately for China, this is not what research by a young Chinese psychologist has found -- that such dysgenics has caused a drop in overall Chinese IQ. The problem is compounded by research showing that Northeast Asians are genetically less intellectually creative than Europeans. It asks: Why Do Northeast Asians Win So Few Nobel Prizes?
I first became aware of Donald Trump when he chose to make cheating on his first wife front-page news.
It was the early '90s. Donald and Ivana Trump broke up over the course of months. Not that divorce is shocking, mind you; among the glitterati marriage seems more unusual. Nor is infidelity exactly novel.
But it requires a particular breed of lowlife to advertise the sexual superiority of one's mistress over the mother of one's children. That was Trump's style. He leaked stories to the New York tabloids about Ivana's breast implants -- they didn't feel right. Marla Maples, by contrast, suited him better.
She, proving her suitability for the man she was eager to steal from his family, told the papers that her encounters with the mogul were "the best sex I've ever had." It wasn't just Donald Trump's betrayal that caught my eye, nor just the tawdriness: It was the cruelty.
The paradox of the individualistic society is that it can only exist if individuals embrace virtues that are greater than their own needs and whims.
A society where each individual acts as a little tyrant, pursuing his desires with total selfishness at the expense of everyone else becomes collectivist as the little tyrants turn to a series of big tyrants to get what they want no matter who gets hurt by it.
As individual virtues and social compacts break down, selfish squabbles escalate. Tribalism turns into legal civil war. Laws become the means by which one group imposes its will on the other and by which one man seizes the property of another. The people come to view the system with contempt. All virtues and principles are abandoned as neighbor turns on neighbor in resentment and hatred.
Ideas can exist objectively. Feelings only exist subjectively. Identity politics resolves this problem by treating the objective response to feelings as privilege. But even subjective empathy can never truly approach the subjective experience of the crybully.
Even a member of that same identity group will differ in some way from the multiple intersectional identities of the crybully. And that difference is its own privilege. This isn't really politics. It's self-help narcissism crossbred with stale Marxism.
It is seldom that the fate of a nation can be traced to what happened on one particular day. But that may be what happens in the United States of America today, Tuesday, March 15, 2016.
That is because the front-runners in both political parties are not merely inadequate but appalling -- and the vote in today’s primaries in Florida, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, and North Carolina may be the last chance for the voters to unite behind someone else.
The trends that brought us to this crucial day go back for years. But whatever the paths that led to this crossroads, we are in fact at a crossroads and our future, and our children's futures, depend on whether we can come up with some presidential candidate better than either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.
In other times and in other conditions, one bad president could not ruin a great nation. We survived Jimmy Carter and we may survive Barack Obama, but there is no guarantee that we can survive an unlimited amount of reckless decisions in a dangerous world.
Charismatic leaders like Trump who articulated the just grievances of the people have often risen to power on the basis of that talent alone. And those who put them in power have often paid a catastrophic price afterwards. That story was repeated in countries around the world in the 20th century.
Will that story be repeated in America in the 21st century? The vote today may give us a clue.
Donald Trump recently picked an interesting quote of Benito Mussolini’s to re-tweet on Twitter:
On one hand, I can understand the sentiment. I myself have often quoted Emiliano Zapata’s famous line “Better to die on your feet, than live on your knees” and it doesn’t necessarily mean I know much about Zapata (which I don’t), much less whether I would have agreed with him about much else.
Still, Trump’s use of “Ilduce2016” in his tweet hashtag caught my eye as somehow strange, almost a little too enthusiastic. So I found myself wondering, if Trump finds this historical figure inspiring, perhaps we should study the other teachings of the “Duce” to see whether there are other areas where their philosophies are similar.
[This is the most eloquent and moving explanation of support for Trump I have ever seen. One caveat is that the GOP Elite does not run California, the Democrats do and totally. –JW]
During the most recent Detroit debate (3/03), even a reformed “inclusive” and “presidential” Donald Trump still was crass and vulgar. (Has a candidate ever crudely referred to the size of his phallus, and in our sick world is that a Freudian admission of doubt, or a macho reassurance in LBJ fashion?)
Trump gave more than enough evidence that his positions are liquid and change as often his perceptions of his flatterers and critics. He is a blank slate, who as president could build or tear down a southern wall with equal ease, depending on the dynamics of the political deal of the moment.
In the debate, in passive-aggressive fashion Trump pouted and pounced, furious that others had broken the Golden Rule and done unto him what he has done unto others. His entire moral universe is predicated on a preteen morality of liking those who praise him, and hating those who criticize him.
All that said, I doubt Trump will lose much of his 35-45% support in the next rounds of elections. There are quite understandable reasons why.
Today, Evangelical communities in the US number anywhere between 60 and 150 million people, depending on who is counting. They form the backbone of American support for the Jewish state. It is the support of the Evangelical community, rather than the Jewish community in the US that ensures that come hell or high water, no matter how Israel is demonized in the media and in academia, the majority of Americans continue to support Israel.
But will this support last?
One of the more surprising aspects of the 2016 elections is Evangelical support for businessman Donald Trump. Trump in many ways personifies everything that people who take the Bible seriously are supposed to oppose. He owns casinos. He curses and uses profanity in his public appearances. He has donated to Planned Parenthood and forcefully supported abortions on demand. Trump has also insisted repeatedly that he will be neutral toward Israel.
Perhaps the most extraordinary aspect of Evangelical support for Trump is that he takes these positions as he runs against primary opponents who all wear their faith on their sleeves. All of his opponents have records of standing with the Evangelicals on social and other salient issues – including support for Israel. What are we to make of this seemingly inexplicable phenomenon? To understand, the Christ at the Checkpoint conference taking place this week in Bethlehem is a good place to look.
President Vladimir Putin’s approval rating is regularly accepted as a proxy measure for the level of Russia’s internal cohesion. And his support remains on a sky-high plateau, where it has stood since the explosion of jingoism caused by the annexation of Crimea in March 2014.
However, powerful and divisive forces are eroding this purported cohesion, turning Russian society into a disillusioned and apathetic crowd—resembling the nation that failed, 99 years ago, to turn the dethroning of Tsar Nicolas II into a lasting liberating moment.
Stalin’s grave on Red Square was covered with flowers last Saturday (March 5), on the day of his death; and many Russians still cherish or long for a “firm hand,” no matter the millions of destroyed lives such authoritarian leadership has historically produced (Slon.ru).
This urge to escape from the apparent dead end of the present by reliving the “glorious” past translates into a desire to ignore the disasters that mark Russia’s current decline.
The worst political blunder of all time, according to scientist Freeman Dyson, was the decision of the emperor of China in 1433 to cut off his country from the outside world.
In the wake of that decision, China lost its position in the forefront of human achievements and fell behind, over the centuries, to become a Third World country.
Before the end of this month, the United States of America may break that record for the worst political blunder of all time.
Professor Dyson attributed the Chinese emperor’s blunder to “powerful people pursuing partisan squabbles and neglecting the long-range interests of the empire.” That can be our path to disaster as well.
The US Secretary of State, John Kerry, thinks his country has a ‘profound interest… in a very strong United Kingdom staying in a strong EU.’ President Obama is planning to join in campaigning against the “Brexit” (Britain’s exit from the EU, on which there will be a national referendum on June 23).
They say this not because they think it is good for us British, but because it is in their interests that we influence Europe in a free-trading, Atlanticist direction.
Well, two can play at that game.
How would Americans like it if we argued that it is in our interests that the United States should forthwith be united with all the countries in their continent north of the Panama Canal — Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Belize, Honduras, El Salvador and Panama — into a vast customs union governed by a trans-national, unelected civil service.
Let’s call it the American Union, or AU.
Eyes roll whenever comparisons to Nazi Germany are made, and for good reason. The analogy is almost never called for, and is almost always an example of rhetorical hyperbole. George W. Bush was compared to Hitler. Barack Obama has been as well. Neither comparison is fair.
But that does not mean Nazi comparisons are always inappropriate. If anything, the overuse of Nazi references has desensitized the public to manifestations of actual fascism. When "fascist" becomes nothing more than a pejorative, few will take its meaning seriously.
Right now, we have an actual fascist running for president of the United States, and he seems poised to secure the Republican nomination. Donald Trump is a fascist, not in a vague rhetorical sense, but according to the father of fascism's own definition.
Benito Mussolini coined the term and defined it as complete subjugation of the individual to the state. He wrote:
[Skye’s posts on the Forum are among the most valuable assets to being a TTPer. His is the voice of calm reasoned argument. I have treasured his friendship for well over 40 years. As someone whose IQ could not be measured by MIT as it went so far beyond the upper measurable limit of 220, Skye’s words deserve our careful consideration. --JW]
Everyone is scared witless by the potential outcome of the upcoming election. Some more, some less – but there is more than enough reason for much of these fears.
Conservative, libertarian, and constitutionalist Republicans fear populist Republicans. Establishment Republicans fear all of the above and vice versa. Establishment Democrats fear populist/socialist Democrats and vice versa. Republicans fear Democrats, Democrats fear Republicans, and Independents fear both.
Unfortunately, these severe fears are not paranoid delusions. The central government has become so powerful, so out of control of both the Constitution and the electorates, so deeply wrapped around the roots of everyone’s everyday life, that the “other” truly has become an existential threat.
The only hope that I can think of for escape from the onrushing Armageddon of Americans warring against Americans with the guns of the central government is restoration of constitutional restraints on the central government.
Thus the vital question: who among the various candidates is the most determined to restore constitutional limitations on the central government?
In his victory speech in South Carolina, Donald Trump vowed to sweep the twelve primaries held on Super Tuesday, March 1, and implied the race would then be over: “Let’s put this thing away!”
He also belittled rivals who claimed that as the field shrinks, they will be able to close on Trump and deny him the nomination. “They’re geniuses!” he mocked. “They don’t understand that as people drop out, I’m going to get a lot of those votes also.”
Not so fast, Donald.
Trump is the front-runner, but he has to find a way to win a majority of the delegates, and the kind of campaign he’s running is making it harder for him to crack a ceiling of about a third of the vote.
In the run-up to South Carolina, Trump came out in favor of the health-care mandate, defended Planned Parenthood, accused George W. Bush of lying about the Iraq War, and stood by his call to impeach Bush. (He later retreated on the mandate and on Bush’s supposedly lying.)
His consistent inconsistency helps explain why only four in ten GOP voters in a new Associated Press poll view Trump in a positive light. He will have trouble growing his coalition to win a majority of delegates, even as more candidates drop out.
This week: Scalia's legacy, Democrats on late-term Supreme Court nominations past, the question of whether Republicans will find their spines, and whether they can avoid a recess appointment even if they do.************ Also, Sanders surges against Hillary both nationally and in Nevada, Cruz surges against Trump both nationally and in South Carolina, and Trump and the Pope have (separate) meltdowns. ************Plus, the meltdown of U.S. foreign policy in Iran and North Korea, contempt for Obama in Moscow, and a graphical representation of the real enemy. ************It's all right here, in this weeks' Half Full Report.
This is a pretty astounding clip from an Obama press conference yesterday. Obama was waxing poetic about the obligation of the Senate to confirm whatever judicial nomination he throws up there when a reporter stunned Obama into literal silence with what should have been an easily foreseeable question. When Obama finally stumbled and fumbled his way into an answer, he basically admitted that he and his party were a major part of the problem with judicial nominations.
If a state doesn’t vote for Hillary Clinton, it’s racist.
That’s the label that poor New Hampshire, the state just too white to appreciate the virtues of a white woman with dyed blonde hair who occasionally puts on a bad fake southern accent and switches from loving the Yankees to hating them, was stuck with after turning her down.
Sensing trouble up the road in Nevada, Clintonworld tried to accuse Nevada, a state with a sizable Latino population, of also being too white for Hillary. If a state that is a quarter Latino is not diverse enough for Hillary Clinton, where can she win except in her imaginary village based on a fake African proverb?
If you don’t vote for Hillary Clinton, you’re a racist. If you’re a woman who doesn’t vote for her, you’re going to hell. If you ask her about her illegal email server or her speaking fees, you’re sexist.
The sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia has sharpened the divide between the progressives’ idea of technocratic federal power, and the Constitution’s limited government that Scalia eloquently championed for almost 30 years. This division has a long history that transcends the failed presidency of Barack Obama.
The Democratic Party grew out of opposition to the elitist Federalists, whose president John Adams was known as “His Rotundity” for his girth and alleged aristocratic tendencies. James Madison in 1792 established the contrast between the two parties that persists to this day: the Federalists were “more partial to the opulent,” and believed that “government can be carried on only by the pageantry of rank, [and] the influence of money and emoluments.”
Those who would become Democrats, Madison wrote, believed “in the doctrine that mankind are capable of governing themselves,” and he charged that power lodged “into the hands of the few” is “an insult to the reason and an outrage to the rights of man.” In short, the Democrats were about power to the people rather than to privileged elites.
Obama’s visit to a pro-terrorist radical Moslem mosque last week (2/03) is a clear signal of how he intends to spend his last year in office. It tells us that during this period, Obama will adopt ever more extreme positions regarding radical Islam.
Obama’s apologetics for radical Islamists is the flipside of his hostility for Israel. This too is escalating and will continue to rise through the end of his tenure in office.
The US Customs authority’s announcement on January 23 that it will begin enforcing a 20-year old decision to require goods imported from Judea and Samaria to be labeled “Made in the West Bank,” rather than “Made in Israel,” signals Obama’s intentions.
Part of the reason Obama is acting with such urgency and intensity is that he knows that regardless of who is elected to replace him, the next president will not be as viscerally hostile to Israel or as emotionally attached to Islam as he is.
This is true even if it is a Democrat – but far more so if it is a Republican.
It’s the worst and most obvious political snow job in history. The media uses Donald Trump for ratings. Donald Trump uses the media to keep himself front and center in the Republican field, and as an object of two minutes’ hate for his crowd.
The media “attacks” Donald, knowing it will solidify his support with his crowd, and the Donald whines and moans about how “unfair” the media is to him ad nauseam. Lather, rinse, repeat.
You can get a sense for how the media really feels about things when the mask slips, and they say what they really think. With respect to Trump, that happened last week when Chris Matthews let slip his nakedly bigoted remark about not wanting to watch a debate between “two Cuban guys,” Cruz and Rubio.
In the same way, Donald Trump really has no idea what he would talk about if he were suddenly disallowed to claim that the media was being unfair to him. Just see the video clip below.
The symbiotic relationship between Trump and the media in which they pretend to be enemies while they profit off of each other has been great for both Trump and the media, but it’s been terrible and cancerous for the Republican party. Here’s why.