For some odd reason, it has been one week since the start of the DNC and we find ourselves still talking about the DNC. The three major cable news outlets are still running soundbites from Bill and Barack and Michelle, and this week with Donald Trump's "botched" response, I have watched that now infamous clip of Mr. Khizr Khan dramatically tugging at his copy of the Constitution about a dozen times. This speech in particular has been making the rounds for liberals and phony conservatives alike to take another opportunity to condemn that big racist Donald Trump, clutching their pearls as they vicariously take umbrage for all those helpless people of color.
The Democrats brilliantly drummed up the perfect speaker. A speaker so sympathetic that a short six minute speech was enough to distract even the most staunch conservative from the 238 terror attacks by radical Islam in the month of June alone. He was a Muslim, check; gold star father, check; immigrant, check; and, what's this? A Constitutionalist?? Check, check, check! How irresistible to globalist neoconservatives like Paul Ryan and Fox News! Just like the Judge Curiel incident, here was a reasonably believable instance to opportunistically trot out "conservative principle" to take that populist schmuck down a peg. Watching Khan's speech for the first time, any Trump supporter would be hard pressed not to even slightly reconsider their position on their controversial champion. Khan had a pocket Constitution after all! But this intrepid journalist is not just any Trump supporter.
Behind this visually and rhetorically ingenious presentation lies a very sinister hypocrisy that is not readily apparent. At first glance, it seems almost impossible to refute Mr. Khan's message. As he endearingly grapples with the English language he demonstrates that all Muslims are not terrorists. He seemingly dismantles Ben Carson's totally Islamophobic remarks several months ago that the Constitution is incompatible with Sharia. Liberals will cite a man holding the Constitution as evidence that a 1400 year old religious doctrine cannot contradict the Constitution. He talks about the American dream and patriotism and sacrifice and, hey, you know what? Maybe this whole Muslim ban thing isn't what we're all about, huh? A touching Utopian sentiment, but tragically compassionate at the expense of reason.
Let's break down the sophistry and political theater and try to find some sense in all of this, as this is what conservatives do. The most misleading aspect of this speech is that the very concept is intended to construct and then deconstruct a straw man argument. The vast majority of conservatives weary of Islam are not ignorant bigots who believe that 1.6 billion religious nut-jobs are laying dormant for the biblical showdown between faiths. And yet Khan's performance implicitly attempted to disarm this nonexistent bigotry. Because us Republicans are constantly under siege by virtue signalling social justice warriors, the response to this Muslim patriot and his sacrifice in many minds was reflexively defensive. Even though every sensible person who saw this speech does not believe that all Muslims are fifth columnists, in a very subversive way Mr. Khan gets us thinking "well of course this man can be a patriot!" And he can be! But this red herring disorients a critical ear. The argument from Trump and from grassroots conservatives was never that Muslims are bad and we're going to have a reverse Holocaust against them, as the Huffington Post seems to have it; but by intentionally framing the dialogue in this context, we find ourselves already sympathetic to this disingenuous political operative.
Moreover, he is the father of a veteran. In this blessed country, veterans and their families are sacrosanct. In virtually no other country in the world is there a comparable reverence for military service and this is among our great strengths. But it can be our greatest weakness as an electorate for it has become so rhetorically easy to ruthlessly exploit blood for political gain. This gold star father decries Donald Trump from atop the grave of his fallen son. Shame on him. I do not have children, I have never lost anyone close to me (with the exception of Billy Mays). But it seems to me unfathomably callous and sick for a father to speak of the death of his son so cavalierly at a national political rally of all places. Shame on him.
Even more sickening is the cause for which this patriot was unceremoniously exhumed to endorse: Hillary Rotten Clinton and her pervert husband for President. Benghazi is but only the most famous example of the Clinton's flagrant disregard for the lives of American service men and women. At the RNC last week, in a perfect parallel, the mother of a Benghazi victim said that she personally holds Hillary Clinton responsible for the death of her son. Convenient how this clip ended up on the cutting room floor. Now I know what many liberals and some observant conservatives may be thinking at this point; but this mother is not comparable to Khan. Unlike him, she was personally misled and victimized by the woman she spoke against. If Trump was responsible for the IED that killed Khan's son and then conspired with the whole government to mislead the entire nation about the cause of death, this would be comparable; but that the father of a slain veteran can endorse those corrupt butchers only compounds the unforgivable sin of politicizing the death of his son.
And why exactly did his son die? That's the $64,000 question. Khizr Khan's son was killed by an IED in Iraq; and he and that IED found each other as a result of the failed neoconservative foreign policy of the globalist Bush family establishment. This interventionist foreign policy represents an ideology which Hillary Clinton continues to support in general and a disastrous war which she voted for in particular. A war for which she had no qualms casting a vote to send Khan's son to fight and die in America's great crusade to democratize the Middle East only to abandon him and that cause less than a decade later when it became politically inconvenient baggage. This flip flop betrays the most malicious form of political corruption. Obviously the great sacrifice that Khizr Khan talked about was not so great to Hillary. If there was any measured consideration for the worthiness of the cause of the Iraq War to spill American blood, it was apparently overridden by political ambition just five years later.
And what has since happened to Iraqi Republic? Surely Khizr Khan's son did not die for nothing. Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq War and in doing so put American men and women in harms way, surely she fought to secure their gains as Secretary of State when she presided over then a thriving and stable democracy in Baghdad. Of course we know all too well that presuppositions of Democrat integrity are soon punctuated by the vicious thrust of a knife to the back. The spoils of the Iraq War won by George Bush were eagerly surrendered by Barack Obama and Crooked Hillary in exchange for their exalted pedestal on "the right side of history." All it cost was the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of beating hearts, son and daughters, mothers and fathers, and the immortal souls of two of the most malevolent Alinskyites to enter American politics. But hey, what difference at this point does it make? Right Khizr?
Khizr Khan is a hypocrite and a bad man, so what? He still made a valid point about Islamophobia and the Constitution! Still woefully wrong. If we investigate further, we get to the real meat and potatoes of the issue: Islam itself. Sure we can blame George W Bush for having a bad foreign policy. He was a good man with good intentions and the wrong idea. We can point fingers at wretched Democrat villains who see veterans as no less disposable than cigars and interns. What else is new? But the true antagonist of this whole affair dates back to a small caravan town in 7th century Arabia.
Oh yeah, I'm going there. Kizr Khan died for his country because 19 Islamist zealots slaughtered 2,996 innocent Americans in the name of their prophet and their god; and if Saddam Hussein had it his way, there would be a smoldering radioactive hole in the middle of Manhattan delivered by the same menace. This is not to say that all Muslims are terrorists, they're not. This is not to say that all Muslims are radicals (this is an important distinction), they're not. There are many millions of Muslims and sects of Islam who express their faith peacefully and have adjusted to life after medieval times; but many millions haven't. Hillary Clinton knows this, Khizr Khan knows this, Donald Trump knows this, and the American people know this. This fact is the root of Donald Trump's proposed moratorium on Muslim immigration and why the silent majority supports it.
Because in June of 2016 alone, 2,055 innocent lives were taken in the name of the Prophet. We see week after week on our Facebook feeds the mangled bodies, the grieving widows, the bloodied stuffed animals. There is a terror proto-state the size of the United Kingdom in the heart of the Muslim world that has declared war on the United States and promised to raise their black flag of Islamist barbarism over the White House. They have terror cells operating in all 50 states and they are sending more. ISIS operates in nearly every Islamic nation from Morocco to Indonesia and it is somehow Islamophobic to temporarily suspend immigration from those countries? Would it not be anything but prudent to handle the apocalyptic death worshiping cult with a country and an army before we import one more potential operative? Kizr Khan, whose son exploded with an IED laid by a radical Islamist, should understand more than most that we are at war and the nature of the enemy; that drastic times call for drastic measures. Radical Islam took his son and yet Islamophobia seems to be the only real blip on his radar.
Then Mr. Khan produces the pocket Constitution to dramatic effect, probably supplied to him by a Democratic politico who never read the damn thing, as if there is a real commitment the rule of law in the Muslim world. As I casually noted earlier, one man holding a piece of paper does not discount a millennium of Islamic jurisprudence which speaks directly to the contrary. Here is a thorough and helpful examination by the Center for Security Policy for a step by step comparison of the Constitution and the Quran. The important point is that on the most fundamental level Islam calls its followers to reject man-made law in favor of God's law, the Sharia. This is not some crackpot, tin foil hat, uncle racist theory cooked up on Fox News, this is textbook Islam as Allah dictated and Muhammad wrote. In fact, the greater the geographical proximity to the two holy mosques and historical continuity of Muslim rule, the more rigorously Sharia law is applied. The most obvious cases are Saudi Arabia and Iran, the capitals of the respective Sunni and Shia sects which enforce some of the most brutal provisions of Islamic law; provisions which if even spoken of at the DNC would incite a riot.
On just about every count, this speech is hypocritical or dishonest or both. The scandal is not that Democrats are dishonest hypocrites, this has always been the case. The scandal is that this liberal minstrel show put on year after year by George Soros and the moneyed puppet masters is shamelessly broadcast and consumed without objection by millions. Nobody thought the disabled girl with cerebral palsy was overkill? The pandering to the "Taco Bowl vote" (DNC leak found that this is code for Hispanics to Democrats) in Spanish and with illegals is acceptable? Khizr Khan's revisionist Islamic rendition of Yankee Doodle Dandy is a pandering, dishonest, hypocritical, misleading, and soullessly careless attempt at framing Donald Trump as a threat to democracy. It won't work.
The NJF Blog was experiencing technical difficulties and the subscribe feature was not functioning properly. It has been fixed! So click on the "Contact" page and enter your email to receive email updates when new op-eds are posted.
All the best,
The tepid conclusion to the Democratic National Convention with the coronation of Hillary Rotten Clinton on Thursday night demonstrated that our favorite crooked matriarch is beyond saving in the general election. This week they pulled out all the stops: Michelle Obama drudging up slavery again in a booming endorsement speech which disturbingly echoed that of her husband in 2004. Bernie Sanders bending a knee to kiss the ring in order to secure the last #Bernieorbust holdouts susceptible to conversion. Former President and sexual predator Bill Clinton attempting to humanize the most advanced piece of hardware out of Texas Instruments he calls a wife in that lovable "aw shucks" manner that makes most people forget that he raped people. Crazy uncle Joe Biden yelling phony Irish nonsense for effect. And then the grand finale, 2008 Barack Obama making a rare appearance to appeal to all the principles which he diametrically opposed while actually governing for 8 years.
Woven throughout these heavy hitters were sports stars, actors, singers, Senators, an illegal immigrant, and moms of criminals all pledging allegiance to the Democratic machine on the grandest stage of them all before thousands of cheering zealots. The press coverage was kind due to "the Hillary standard," and unlike the Republican Convention, the Democratic establishment was actively trying to help their nominee. The production value of the DNC was greater than the RNC and it got more views too! Surely this Democrat jamboree-palooza spectacular should be the political equivalent of a nuclear bomb, strategically placed in the heart of a precariously placed swing state. This week of stars and speeches and money and power should blow that tremendous blonde mop right off Donnie's big beautiful head! Right?
If the Democrat nominee was any living human person other than Hillary Clinton this would be true. But after three successive nights of oratorical powerhouses, the much anticipated acceptance speech by the queen HRC herself proved to be the biggest non-climax since the end of the Cold War. While the collusive left-wing lamestream media derided Donald Trump's "dark" and "fearmongering" acceptance speech, Americans that have been living the reality of Obama's America for eight years heard an acknowledgement of the true state of the union that before was uttered only on Fox News. The power of Trump's acceptance speech was in the content, notably because the speech had content. The whole speech was content. There could not have been a sharper contrast in the sweeping, flowery rhetoric heard at the DNC which could barely drown out the chants of angry dissenters. The combined speeches of two Presidents, a Vice President, a first lady, and Hillary Clinton offered little more than about fifteen liberal platitudes left over from 2012 and about a dozen toothless zingers aimed at Trump.
Do any Republicans or Independents buy what the Democrats were selling? That the country would be better off with more of the same incompetence of the last eight years? Not one of those speakers convincingly made that case. In fact, the DNC might have driven down Hillary's numbers with the Stalinist suppression of Bernie holdouts both in and around the convention center. Neither party can win a national election without some of the other and most of the middle. With the climax of this self indulgent remake of DNC '08 and '12 featuring an old, white, corrupt hag poorly delivering a badly written speech, it is hard to imagine how Democrat money and clout can save a fundamentally bad candidate. This is hard to imagine because it will not happen.
The media has convinced itself that Donald Trump is the long shot, that there is no way an outsider can succeed in their insider game. But all of the excitement in this race is in the Trump camp. When that unmistakable silhouette sauntered onto the RNC stage to "We are the Champions" in a cloud of fog to introduce his supermodel wife; it worked for him. Many establishment types (the haters) of course found this to be ostentatious and absurd - but a lot of people didn't - and that means a lot.
It is very easy to underestimate the power of enthusiasm; but compare Obama's margin of victory in 2012 to 2008. When Obama had the whole "hope and change" charade going and Chris Matthews was getting thrills up his leg, he could count on his people to get off the couch and cast their vote. Will that constituency turn out for corrupt lame-o Hillary Clinton? There is a culture on the internet that refers to Donald Trump as "the Emperor-God of Mankind." As a millennial, I can say with some authority that Donald Trump may be the most ubiquitous internet meme of all time. The record amount of Republicans that turned out for him in the primaries in a 17 man race will turn out loyally in November. Are there a whole lot of Democrats jumping out of their seat to vote for Hillary in November?
Consider the importance of messaging as well. There was no ambiguity at the RNC as to what the party of Trump is all about: Make America safe/work/first/one/great again. Ask any Trump voter from Oregon to Texas and they're voting for Trump to make America great again. This is a clean, elegant, concise phrase that achieves versatility through its strong appeal to a universal sense of patriotism. The Trump brand is the America brand. And what about ol' crooked Hillary? What was the theme of DNC 2016? The only consistent message I could discern from that four day word stew was "Donald Trump is a racist, I'm not Donald Trump." If this becomes the dominant narrative of the Hillary campaign, as it is shaping up to be, she will have a much harder time winning on a platform that is wholly dependent on framing the public's perception of Trump. The media has not figured out how to do this in the 13 months since he launched his campaign.
The failure of the DNC is symptomatic of the intrinsic flaw of the Hillary campaign. She must defend the status quo. This has meant a status quo DNC. A candidate from eight years ago wheeled out the same tired rhetoric of eight years ago to win over an electorate that created Donald Trump to reject the legacy of the last eight years. Half of her own party voted to reject the last eight years with the breakout success of insurgent Bernie Sanders. If she could barely put down a revolt in her own party led by a 70 year old Jewish socialist from Vermont even with hundreds of millions of dollars, name recognition, the support of a sitting President, and a party system actually rigged to nominate her, how does anybody expect her to stop the most remarkable political phenomenon in American history?
All the President's men cannot resurrect the political zombie which should have been laid to rest in 2008. This election year will be the year of judgement. The media has controlled the discussion for decades and the Democratic political machine has gone unchallenged by an impotent Republican establishment. After six years of betrayal, the American people have found their voice in Donald Trump, the instrument of righteous popular retribution against a downright evil political class. And this year, at long last, Hillary Clinton's time has come; and she is beyond salvation.
A newsletter feature has just been added to the NJF Blog! Enter your email on the "Contact" page to receive an email notification whenever a new op-ed is posted!
There has been much talk of "division" in this election year. The main stream media has worked tirelessly to propagate the narrative of Donald Trump's populist coup against the Republican establishment as the emergence of some fascistic cult of personality. His common sense approach to immigration, specifically with regards to the southern border and the Muslim word, has been branded "hateful," "xenophobic," "racist," "divisive." The iconic symbol of the Trump movement, the Great Wall of Trump, has had bleeding heart humanitarians salivating at the potential for empty Hallmark card rhetoric about building bridges and not walls. All too predictably, the Democrats launched a full offensive on this "xenophobia" on the first night of the DNC (Mexican night) with a session which seemed to be jointly hosted by MSNBC and Telemundo. An illegal immigrant took to the stage to denounce Trump's positively medieval approach to immigration and assure her partners in crime that Hillary Rotten Clinton has no intention of enforcing the laws, the sole Constitutional duty of the American President.
But what of the wall? It has obviously struck a chord within the electorate and has had a polarizing effect across ethnic and party lines. Many support the wall knowing that a vast number of illegal immigrants can infiltrate the country in a variety of other, less sexy ways than crossing the Rio Grande that the wall could not prevent. Senator Cruz was arguably just as strong, if not stronger, than Trump on immigration; Senator Rubio talked about drones, and E-Verify, and all other sorts of nifty tech for the "New American Century." None of this rhetoric, which most would agree is far more sensible than "we're gonna build a wall," gained any comparable traction. But behind this seemingly sophomoric approach to border control lies a profound sentiment that is absolutely vital to the survival of Western civilization. In truth, the Great Wall of Trump has little to do with immigration at all and everything to do with affirming a distinct and separate American identity.
In fact, "xenophobia," is a precise explanation for the appeal and the necessity of the wall. Liberals hurl this word around as an insult, in the same vein as racism or sexism; to them, "xenophobia" borders religion in its absurd, antiquated view of the world. But this fear is well founded. The dictionary lists xenophobia as "an irrational fear of people from other countries," but as far as I'm concerned there is nothing irrational about this fear. Western Civilization is unique in its invention and embrace of the liberal democratic values that both parties cherish as necessary for the maintenance of a free society. Values such as pluralism, tolerance, freedom of expression, egalitarianism, secular governance, democracy, and limited government have made the Western world the most free and prosperous civilization in the history of man. In fact, there is not a single country on the planet today which shares these values to a significant degree that has not had those values imposed on them by the West at some point in the last three hundred years.
The Great Wall of Trump is an implicit affirmation that the culture and identity of the United States of America is distinct and separate from that of the globalist/internationalist fiction that is the "world community." There is no world community. There is the modern world of the US, West Europe, and Britain's English-speaking former colonies, and there is barbarism. This is not to say that the people of other civilizations are lesser or barbarous, but their culture is. If you disagree, you are welcome to take the next flight to Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Sudan, Ukraine, or North Korea and if you come back in one piece having exercised the rights we take for granted in America, you can call me an ignorant Western chauvinist. Good luck with that.
Of course America welcomes immigrants and of course they can retain the elements of their heritage which are benign and colorful; that is the historical tradition of this country as a diverse melting pot. But part of becoming an American and inheriting all of the rights and privileges that come with citizenship is assimilating into the broader American identity which our progress possible. The lack of American flags flying at the DNC earlier this week was a scandal but not a shock. The half dozen minority voting blocs which comprise the new progressive majority do not identify primarily or even secondarily as Americans. When they wave the Mexican flag or the Palestinian flag at a convention to nominate a candidate for American President, there is nothing racist or bigoted in acknowledging that this is problematic for a culture that is quickly becoming unrecognizable.
This is why the proposition of a Great Wall of Trump has resonated so deeply with Republicans and Democrats alike. When Luis Gutierrez got on stage in Philadelphia and ended his speech with a chant of "si se puede," his presentation became a rallying cry for Donald Trump! When this week in Normandy, yet another savage terrorist attack by radical Islam (to the surprise of no one) claimed the life of an innocent Catholic priest, the Great Wall became a little bit easier to swallow, as it does with each terrorist attack. When we watch our sister country, the European super-state, consumed by the most successful Arab invasion since the siege of Vienna in 1638, we must know that this is a glimpse into our future if we continue down the blood stained path of multiculturalism.
As Donald Trump himself said, "We need to build a wall and it has to be built quickly," as the invasion is well under way. This week, it was revealed by US Customs and Border Control that the number of illegal family units illegally entering the country is set to double this year. With no end in sight to wave after wave of uninterrupted mass immigration from Mexico and Central America and without drastic action, the very fabric of the country will be irreversibly altered within 50 years. Just as importantly, without the cultural and democratic affirmation of the American people that their culture is distinct and worth protecting, any measure to secure the border will be impermanent without a popular commitment to its goals.
But perhaps the grandest irony of the debate itself is the stark hypocrisy of the leaders of the opposing camp to a man. Leading the charge against Trump's Great Wall has been Pope Francis, President Obama, and Hillary Clinton; and there is something peculiar that each of these bridge building crusaders have in common: Vatican City, the home of the Pope, is surrounded by a wall. The White House, home of Barack Obama, is guarded by a fence. And the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, which has nominated Hillary Clinton to run for President to stop Donald Trump's insidious wall, has taken place within the gates of a fence that stands eight feet tall and four miles long. It is all too easy to vehemently oppose a wall while standing behind one.
Walls get a bad rap in a world so concerned with inclusiveness and diversity. The humble wall has many unfortunate connotations like the Berlin Wall or the walls of a prison; but the wall is also a necessary and unmistakable symbol of the defense of a common people. 99.9% of all Americans who have taken a position on the Great Wall of Trump, whether for or against, happen to live within walls themselves. That is because people want to protect their spouses, their children, their families, and their property from strangers, whether they be potential friends or enemies, and they know the first way to accomplish this. We must come to see our nation in the same way. We must not sacrifice our distinct and exceptional identity on the altar of politically correct tolerance or inclusiveness. It is past time to pull up the drawbridge to Fortress America and affirm our identity as that shining city on a hill we once knew. This is an ode to walls.
There has been much debate within the electorate this election year about what defines "true conservatism" or "true liberalism." With wildly popular grassroots insurgent candidates threatening the ideological orthodox in the Republican and Democratic party, the bipartisan globalist elite which rules both has been floundering in their attempt to appease their respective base constituents.
On the conservative side, we have witnessed what our beloved Sean Hannity has endearingly dubbed "a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party." Beginning in April of 2015 and featuring 17 substantively unique candidates, the GOP Primary was a true intellectual civil war. The entire right wing ideological spectrum was represented, from the ultra-conservative Ted Cruz to the compassionate conservative John Kasich to the neoconservative Marco Rubio. Over the course of 12 debates and 44 contested primary votes, everyday Americans chose a new path for their party at the ballot box. Ultimately, the prevailing ideology which emerged from this cage match of personalities and platforms was not the Democrat-lite conservatism of the establishment, represented by John Kasich; not the Christian Constitutionalism of the insurgent Tea Party, represented by Ted Cruz; but something new on the national stage. Not new to We the People, but something new to the national dialogue dictated and controlled by a bipartisan political media cartel. The champion of tomorrow's Republican Party and winner of its nomination was the purest, most primitive, raw, and natural governing principle of conservatism. A principle as old as time. Order. Donald Trump is the law and order candidate.
And what of the liberals? What of the Democratic primary then? It is only appropriate that the logical inverse of law and order, of Republican Donald Trump, must be lawlessness and chaos. And can anyone imagine an administration more lawless or more chaotic than that of Hillary Clinton? Just as the GOP Primary manifested the conservative penchant for rigorous discourse and intellectual (and personal) integrity, so the Democratic primary manifested the liberal inclination towards insanity, corruption, and impracticality. This year, only five rich/old/white politicians participated in the nominating contest for America's party of diversity and the disenfranchised. There was Lincoln Chafee, from the city-state of Rhode Island, who dropped out after explaining that he voted incorrectly on Glass-Steagall because his dad died and he was confused. Jim Webb who, when asked which enemy he was most proud of, said a man he killed in Vietnam. Martin O'Malley who had the nerve to say "All Lives Matter" out loud (he apologized for this racist remark later). And then of course we were left with the main characters of the primary, Bernie and Hillary. What resulted between the two was essentially a scorched earth campaign led by a lunatic socialist to drive the Democratic party to the left of Karl Marx. He almost succeeded if not for his mistaken assumption that the Democratic party favored insanity over corruption (regular democrats do, but not the party).
Today is the beginning of the end of that primary, the first session of the Democratic National Convention. This week, the ideological clash between law and order represented by the Republican Party and the corruption and chaos represented by the Democratic Party will be on full display with the this parallel convention in Philadelphia. It is only appropriate that this week will be a week of massive protests, broken English, and perhaps seizures (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzCQg94oOmk). And it will also be the last supper of liberalism in America.
The election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008 completed the ascendancy of progressivism and of the new Alinsky coalition. This combination is lethal and I'll tell you why. The problem with the dominant progressive narrative of "social justice" is what Thomas Sowell calls the open-ended fallacy in his Economic Facts and Fallacies. The best definition of the open-ended fallacy is any movement or argument for which more is never enough; and we have seen this in nearly every liberal policy position of the last 8 years from healthcare to race relations to deficit spending. Historically and by definition, liberalism is a revolutionary ideology which has served as a vessel to topple the status quo in culture, politics, and economics. Liberalism cannot govern, liberalism can only revolt, as was demonstrated in France in 1789 and Russia in 1917. Social Justice then acts as a perpetual and open ended revolution against the American culture. This is why civil rights turned into black lives matter. This is why gay tolerance turned into bake this cake or we shut down your business. This is why women's suffrage turned into a Ghostbusters remake that if you don't like you're a sexist and you can't be on Twitter (#FreeMilo). The progressive ideology in general and the social justice narrative in particular have the virality and resiliency of a biological weapon.
The problem with the Alinsky coalition, that is the liberal constituency of disenfranchised minorities and city dwellers invented by Saul Alinsky, is that this ragtag bunch of alienated proletariats is not a viable governing coalition. There are no shared principles between the black community, the LGBT community, the Muslim world, Asians, Hispanics, illegals, and rich whites in New York and LA. For this reason, the Alinsky constituency is a mob. A mob united by one aim, which is to destroy Western culture and to punish the West for perceived historical wrongdoing. This is why #BlackLivesMatter cares more about neutering police and lecturing whities than actual black lives. This is why third wave feminists care more about men spreading their legs on the subway than, you know, every woman in the Middle East. This is why gays will protest Christians and Republicans after a Democrat and a Muslim kills 50 homosexuals in a night club after pledging allegiance to ISIS.
So what happens when you give the most toxic ideological bio-weapon in American history to a mob of violent Marxists united only in their hatred of America and their support for the Democratic party? First you get two terms of Barack Obama. You get socialized healthcare, you get the largest deficit in history, you get two activists on the Supreme Court , and then you get a Republican majority in the House in 2010. You get ISIS, you get the worst economic recovery since World War II, you get executive overreach, and then you get a Republican majority in the Senate in 2014. You get more dead cops, more terrorism, transgender bathrooms, and then you get a Republican President in 2016.
In 2008 and 2012 the social justice mob was the most fierce political fighting force since the Bolshevik Party in Russia, but for the past 8 years the Democratic establishment has held the reigns, or at least that was the illusion. This year the mob has broken free and is on the loose. This explains perfectly the rise of Bernie Sanders, the only logical candidate for the black-hole of entitlement spending and white male cuckoldry that is the snowballing progressive movement. Hillary tried to brand herself early on as "the progressive that can get things done." But the funny thing about mobs is that they're impatient, and they're not very prudent. Why wait for meaningful reform and swallow compromise when their bum Senator from a non-state can deliver a political revolution now and all the goodies and happy rhetoric that comes with it? Of course Hillary Clinton of the establishment does not crave the idealistic reform of a crusading mob, she wants to be the dispenser of small favors, she needs the masses dependent on her as power broker. But with their dominant role during the reign of Obama, the masses have come to wrongly see the establishment as an instrument for their vendetta against the West. This vision contrasts sharply with the reality, which has the mob as an instrument of the establishment for votes and power. They have been shown this with brutal force in the beat down of their candidate, they were sent a message that anybody wandering to the left of the political plantation sleeps with the fishes. But now they're pissed.
This convention will celebrate the coronation of the ultimate Wall Street-Washington crony and her conservative white/male running mate. Bernie Sanders, once the outspoken underdog, the only honest guy in the race (so they think) will crawl onto the stage, beaten and castrated, defeated, to grovel before the crooked chieftain of a national political machine. The DNC took a baseball bat to Sanders in primary after primary by hiding debates and outspending him at every level. They kicked him in the teeth when the leaked DNC emails came out this week revealing favoritism towards the Clinton camp, and to apologize the Clinton camp hired the corrupt DNC chair. This week they burn the fallen idol of the mob, Bernie, as he too submits to the will of the Party in primetime as they silence any echo of his radicalism on the ticket.
The Democratic National Convention will be the last straw for this vicious mob of social justice warriors and leftist zealots. As dictated by the open-ended fallacy, more is never enough. The mob does not want a third term of Barack Obama, they had moved far to the left of him years ago; and they cannot be satiated by token concessions from the disingenuous flip-flopper who now expects to lead them into battle. Just as Republicans turned on Republicans this year, so too will the Social Justice mob turn on the Democratic Party; although this mob has no intention to win, they would rather cannibalize their own party. As they themselves tweet, it's #Bernieorbust. Their revolution will go down in flames to bust and this fate will be sealed this week in Philadelphia. This is the last supper of liberalism. And liberalism is what's for dinner.
Now my devoted readership may start to think that this blog exists solely to get Trump elected President as so far everything I have written has been about America's beloved Republican nominee. If my blog has the unintended consequence of winning support for a movement that will restore and possibly save Western Civilization, I would not mind so much. However, my current fixation and America's obsession with the mad man is well founded. What we are witnessing is a transformative event certainly in American history, quite possibly in world history. With the now complete integration of social media, independent journalism, and the internet in general into American politics, we have the ability to witness this historical critical juncture in real time as never before. This is why many days will be Trump days.
Today is another such day. This past Thursday at the final session of the 2016 Republican National Convention, Donald Trump forever changed the Republican Party. As many conservative pundits have already observed, regardless of the outcome of this election the Republican brand will be forever changed. Gone are the days of neoliberalism, neoconservatism, Bushism, and all the fancy "isms" that will die with the well connected intellectual elite that once ruled. Tomorrow is the Republican Party of Trump, a party by Americans for Americans. And this party talks like Americans, and it thinks like Americans. This was on full display in Trump's historically long acceptance speech in which he put Hillary Clinton on trial, at long last demanded an end to open borders, made the case for restricting immigration from Islamic countries "compromised by terror," and overall expressed the righteous indignation of America's silent majority. And it is about damn time that someone did it. Newt Gingrich said this Trump "rivals Reagan at his peak." CNN reported 56% of viewers were more likely to vote for Trump after the speech and 75% reacted positively. Nate Silver's 538 election forecast reported an increase by several percentage points in Trump's statistical probability of winning the election.
But of course, no great victory is complete without its detractors. Without the haters. And there was no shortage of small minded phonies, "NeverTrumpers," to rain on the nationalist parade. Throughout the convention, these zealots seemed to exist only as fuel for the Clinton News Network and others in the mainstream media to craft the narrative of a "chaotic convention" that is "off the rails" and "a total disaster." It began with the pathetically short lived coup attempt by the so called "free delegate" movement which failed to steal the nomination through parliamentary tricks, and of course ended with the non-endorsement of Lyin' Ted Cruz. The conservative media was split on this one. Those on the Trump Train like Laura Ingraham, Pat Buchanan, and others rightly called him a traitor. The likes of Ben Shapiro, Mark Levin, and the rest of the Cruz Crew were quick to defend their biblical messiah as a principled conservative. Because this man was calling for Republicans to "vote their conscience" in accordance with the Constitution. How could those fascist Trumpsters boo that benign statement? They must hate the Constitution! Well, in actuality, not only did Ted Cruz break his loyalty pledge that he took at the first Republican debate (so much for principle), he is in effect calling mugwumps within the Republican Party to not vote for Trump by omission. He is calling on Republicans to vote for a spoiler candidate like Gary Johnson and thus assisting a felon, a liar, and a liberal Democrat become the commander in chief of the United States of America. Is that principled Constitutionalism?
It seems that the NeverTrump crowd and even the Trump people ought to be reminded just what is at stake here in 2016.
If Hillary Clinton becomes President, she will appoint probably 3 Supreme Court Justices. Obviously our beloved Justice Antonin Scalia has died, Justice Clarence Thomas has stated that he will retire after this election, and the worst judicial activist on the bench, Justice Ginsburg, will also be stepping down within the next four years. This puts Crooked Hillary in a position to shift the Supreme Court to the far left for a generation; and with six progressives/activists and a faux "conservative" like Justice Kennedy, the Bill of Rights, including and especially the first, second, and fourth Amendments, are in serious peril. Given the historical lawlessness of progressive Presidents in the past from FDR to LBJ to Barack Obama, we will be lucky if anything remains of the Constitution other than the general welfare clause by the conclusion of a Hillary Administration by stroke, indictment, or foreign invasion.
If Hillary Clinton becomes President, Barack Obama's executive order granting amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens becomes permanent. The invasion from our southern border will continue unimpeded and in fact increasingly accommodated by a Democratic President until swing states like Colorado and Nevada become solidly blue and eventually conservative strongholds like Arizona and Texas turn purple. Should this happen, and it will under President Clinton, the Republicans will never win the White House again. Not to mention that no cleft country, that is a country with two civilizations within it concentrated in two separate regions, has ever survived the culture war that inevitably results from the friction between competing ethnic pluralities.
If Hillary Clinton becomes President, we will have a Commander in Chief that will not commit to fighting radical Islamic terrorism. Clinton will import 500% more Syrian "refugees" (I prefer to call them insurgents or migrants) than even our current President. If you want to see what the Clinton doctrine on foreign policy will look like in 2016, look back on the failures of the Clinton doctrine in 2008. Surely under the interventionist Clinton we will have more war in the Middle East, more regime change in stable and friendly allies, more Russian aggression, more Chinese aggression, and of course more terror. ISIS has explicitly stated that they plan on infiltrating the USA by posing as refugees. The FBI has explicitly stated that there is no way to vet these refugees. Does anybody then see a small problem with importing even a single refugee? Not to mention that the so-called refugees that aren't terrorists currently invading Europe by the millions have caused nothing but trouble. Take France for example, Muslims in France are incarcerated at twenty one times the rate as the average Frenchman. In many cities, across Europe, from Marseilles to Cologne, to Molenbeek, to Brussels, to Berlin, police officers and fire fighters simply refuse to operate in Muslim neighborhoods because they are attacked by mobs when they attempt to enforce law and order.
If Hillary Clinton becomes President, Obamacare becomes the law of the land. Social Security remains insolvent. The national debt continues to rise. The Obama "recovery" ambles on for another four years of less than 2% growth. The minimum wage goes up. Taxes go up. Interest rates remain low possibly ad infinitum. And this is the primary reason why any "principled conservative pundit" that has the temerity to tweet that "NeverTrump" hashtag is the most horrible, deceitful, hypocritical, insincere dog in the country today. Because the Mark Levins, the Ben Shapiros, the Glenn Becks, they are in the top tax bracket, people. They are millionaires. They will not be hurt in any meaningful way by a third term of the Obama economy. They will be able to afford the best healthcare, the safest housing, and if shit really hits the fan they can parachute back to the promised land or Prague or a private island. In fact, they may be better off in a Clinton economy because business will be much better screaming and yelling about the apocalypse than if their President is actually doing something about it. So they have the luxury of being "neverTrump." They have the luxury of being picky. They can wait for a "real" conservative for another four years if they don't particularly like Trump's trade policy. HIS TRADE POLICY. Meanwhile, they will continue to take money from good Americans who will face real consequences in the event that Donald Trump does not become the 45th President.
These are the stakes that we as Americans face in 2016. It is a binary choice. Don't be fooled by anybody that says Gary Johnson or Jill Stein has a chance, they don't. Donald Trump is the only candidate who can beat Hillary; and if you do not help the only candidate that can beat Hillary, you are helping Hillary. Nobody should have to spell it out so explicitly because the logic is obvious; but there is a lot of propaganda, especially from the right, that suggests otherwise. Obviously there are legitimate criticisms of Donald Trump, I get that. But when facing a crook and a socialist like Hillary Clinton, the hashtag from every conservative ought to be "NeverHillary," and never NeverTrump.
In The Divine Comedy, Dante rightly had a very special place for traitors to country. Beyond the murderers, the usurpers, the sodomers, the larsonists, and the adulterers. In the fourth ring of the ninth circle of Hell, where no light could penetrate sat Satan frozen in ice; and in his jaws were the worst sinners known to man, traitors to their benefactors: Brutus, Cassius, and Judas. Should any "principled NeverTrumper" help a crook take down the greatest country in the history of the world, they may not face justice in this world but they should know they will in the next.
For many smug liberal comedians and demagogic conservatives, the prospect of "President Donald Trump" is a joke. When The Donald first announced his candidacy, our media overlords, with their trendy slim little suits and ironic glasses (looking at you Chris Hayes), could hardly contain their high brow cocktails laughs. Such relatable and down to earth characters as Joy Reid and Rachel Maddow cackled at the mere thought of that ridiculous haircut in the Oval Office. Bill Kristol Ball repeatedly opined throughout the second half of 2015 how each successive "scandal" would bring down the surely mortal being that is Donald J. Trump. The Huffington Post, a segregationist publication (see the "black voices" section), excommunicated him from the world of political journalism by branding Trump news "entertainment news!" In retrospect it is hard to believe he came back from such a critical hit.
And yet! The repeated onslaught from our trustworthy fifth estate only made Him stronger. Much stronger! The Teflon Don far surpassed governors, senators, neurosurgeons, Hewlett Packard CEOs and ascended to a long and undisputed reign as the front-runner for the nomination. But why? How? Many politicos and poor Jeb Bush are still scratching their heads. How could this man who was ridiculed and ostracized every hour of every day on every cable news channel and by every late night talk show host come to win more votes than any other Republican in history?
Because Donald Trump is smarter than every single political institution in the United States of America. He made his debut in the seventeen man race the same day as, then favorite, Jeb Bush and needless to say he made it memorable. In a conventional election, the debate stage would have been prime real estate for a slick babyface like Rubio to steal the show. Instead Trump consumed media coverage with some blasphemous heresy against the approved lexicon of political speech: "Only Rosie O'Donnell," "The World Trade Center came down under your brother," "Ted Cruz is the biggest liar, probably worse than Jeb." Pundits young and old, liberal and conservative, playful and analytical, everyone from Ben Shapiro to Bernie Sanders himself, with slavish diligence dissected every move, every word. Throughout the primary season, the childlike simplicity and abrasive delivery of his "policy" positions unfailingly aroused a response from candidates and news outlets on both sides. By deliberately baiting his opponents into a political street fight, he became the center of attention for a week; and then his soundbites were played literally billions of dollars worth of times over the course of the primary.
Perhaps most ironically of all, an entire subsection of Trump coverage is the meta (and wrong) analysis of Trump coverage. Those fast talking "political junkies" on The Economist and FiveThirtyEight have become too smart for their own good! For Christ's sake, he explains this modus operandi in the very first chapter of The Art of the Deal! Fittingly, he calls it a "Trump card."
The fourth and final session of the Republican National Convention is tomorrow, concluding the most boring and over-hyped week of politics in an election year. Empty, repetitive, bumper sticker rhetoric; old rubes in silly costumes; and whatever the hell that house band was. But we're all still talking about Melania's speech. Tomorrow we'll be talking about the non-event that was Ted Cruz's speech. And all of next week will be dedicated to whatever grand finale Mr. Trump has in store for those gullible fools behind the cameras. WAKE UP AMERICA.
The prologue to the legend of Nicholas J Fuentes:
I was born 3 years before the World Trade Center fell; 5 years before Saddam Hussein fell; 10 years before the election of a fifth columnist to the Presidency; and 18 years before the stakes of a Presidential election were raised to the fate of a civilization.
My timely birth allowed me to watch on the nightly news the spoils of the American experiment squandered for one final time before the dying gasp of a once exceptional people as the free world and economic abundance of Ronald Reagan was inherited by the lizard people. To understand how far the country has come from the virgin constitutional republic born of the Revolution to the corrupt, unitary technocracy of a new Statist century. From George Washington to George W. Bush. Everyone knows the country is going to hell and if you don't then you're a liberal apologist arguing why the change your President promised you is all that it was cracked up to be.
My generation is the generation of hopelessness. They don't see it that way because Buzzfeed can use upbeat stock background music, punchy graphics, and a self-righteous punk weakling to dress up cultural suicide as egalitarianism. But we know better. With George W. Bush we got a neoconservative Utopian who could not wage the culture war and when center right Dubya collapsed in 2008 we got a communist Islamist sympathizer whose entire candidacy and governance was wholly founded on the ignorance of the masses and a media that would just plain lie night after night. And in 2015, it looked as though we would have the proverbial "more of the same," "lesser of two evils," "business as usual." 2016 looked to be a grand orgy of stockholm syndrome induced cultural cuckholdry in which we, the free men and women of the United States of America, would grudgingly but unflinchingly elect either our third bumbling conservative Bush lite or our second white trash criminal Clinton. Having spent the entire century being blown up by IEDs in the desert. The worst economy since the great depression. The largest government in the history of the world. Flagrant lawlessness at the highest level. An invasion from the South and from the MidEast. An education system infiltrated and conquered decades ago by Marxists. A Bill of Rights in peril by the death of an actual conservative Supreme Court Justice, the last soul in the way of the loss of the republic. A terror state, a new Cold War, a billion people saying they own the ocean, more dollars in debt than atoms in the universe, Seth Rogen, boys are girls and girls are boys, facts are racist, feminism, infanticide as a right, Tumblr.
And then, with deliberate ambiguity, Donald Trump said of Mexico either that "they're rapists" or they bring "their rapists," and the rest is history.
This was the tipping point. Americans have had enough (I had to stop myself from typing this sentence with caps lock on). This is the time for a grassroots movement. Now is the time when the vulnerable underbelly of the sick bloated leviathan establishment is exposed - that panopticon monster of media, money, and government. Donald Trump has created an opening, we don't know for how long and we don't know if it's big enough, but an opportunity for the American people to throw off the yolk of the new age orthodoxy which has enslaved us. Already a militia of Trumpian minutemen has risen to the battle cry of the mad as hell majority from the brilliant and iron willed Pat Buchanan to the most fabulous super-villain Milo to an army of alt-right meme machines.
My purpose has always been to promulgate and preach the good word of the American restoration. Of the Constitution, of individual liberty, and of free markets. And at last the time has come when fate of the nation rests in the hands of each individual voter, each opinion of each citizen, and each blogpost to affect the direction of the executive which leads this nation which leads this civilization. The eyes of the world are upon you now. The eyes of generations of Americans unborn are upon you. The time is now. America hangs in the balance. Western Civilization hangs in the balance. Freedom itself hangs in the balance!
The purpose of this blog is not to educate and not to inform. There is too much "informing" and "educating." How condescending that a jag off with a computer and an opinion claims the mandate to teach rational American minds. The purpose of this blog is to speak the truth as I see it, without apology, and in a purposefully mean way; because for far too long the rights of free Americans have been raped as the polite "good men" of politics have stood by arguing with civility and respect. As Ayn Rand said, "We owe no morality to those who hold us under a gun." This blog is not for pretentious bon vivants or any pretentious tool throwing around fancy bourgeois french words. This is a blog for the good, humble people who long for the voice of America's soul: a devilishly handsome 17 year old mischief maker with grit, a full head of hair, and some balls.
Welcome to the Blog of Nicholas J. Fuentes, the Villain America Needs.