One of the great ironies in the Trump phenom has been the behavior of ostensible conservative leadership in their recklessness on the Trumpoline. From Falwell to Coulter, from Hannity to Rush, they have been bouncing around like crazy on that thing — and mom has been standing in the back door stoop saying, “Someone’s going to get hurt.” Mom is usually right about such things.
The source of all the energy in the Trump revolt has been the fecklessness of the official and certified “right,” the established Republican leadership, mostly in Congress. Had they actually done what they promised every election cycle to do, we wouldn’t be in this jam. The principal issue that has enabled Trump to channel all the available resentment has been immigration. On that issue Trump has been manifestly out of step with the standing political correctness of the establishment — open borders as an article of faith. Given the seething exasperation, and given the years of dithering, it did not take much for Trump to take full advantage of it.
But wait, we’re not done. We are talking about three betrayals, seriatim. Those betrayed are the constituency who would support sane government if it were ever offered to them.
The first betrayal was just mentioned — the complicity of the Republican establishment in losing control of the border. The worst part of that was not found with those who want open immigration and say so openly, but rather with those who talked a good game but did nothing or worse. The poster child of this was Marco Rubio running for office as a Tea Party darling, and going native on immigration within months of his arrival in that malaria swamp we call the nation’s capital. So that one is in the books, and pretty much everyone understands it as a betrayal.
The second betrayal, the one we are in the middle of now, is the conservative commentariat betraying the same group of people in a fairly analogous way. The politicians were feather-bedded in office, and wanted to vote in ways that perpetuated their cozy spot, which they have been successfully doing. The chattering classes have their right wing — talk radio and Fox News guests — and these chattering classes are doing the same thing. They too have a cozy spot. It is a different cozy spot, but one that can certainly be perpetuated. As George Washington Plunkitt once put it so memorably, “I seen my opportunities and I took ’em.”
There are two kinds of consistency. There is consistency that follows from stated principle, and there is the consistency that flows from actual motivations. Let me take the case of Ann Coulter because I have read a number of her books. Just like a politician on the stump, she knows how to articulate the case for conservative governance. Given a content test on conservative ideals, I am convinced she could ace it. But just as it is impossible to draw a straight line from a politicians stump speech to his actual voting record, so also there is no way to draw a straight line from Coulter’s many books to her overdone support for Donald Trump. There is no possible consistency here — if we are talking about consistency that flows from stated principle. But there is always consistency at some level, and that consistency is working its way out now. The conservative chatterati are feathering a different nest than the politicos are, and the end result of that feathering is that the same people who were betrayed by the Republican establishment are now in the middle of being betrayed by their “thought leaders,” to use the trendy phrase.
The third betrayal will happen if Donald Trump manages to get elected president. That could happen, for example, if Hillary gets indicted at exactly the wrong time, or if the DNC rips off the Bernie voters in such a way as to guarantee a split in the Democratic Party. I have slowly been coming to the conclusion that 2016 has not been festive enough, and we need to see both major political parties turn into moon craters at roughly the same time.
But if Trump is somehow elected, he will let down those who put him there. He has all the sturdiness of a chocolate eclair. He has the core values of a wet napkin on the counter. He has the reliability of a lost carnival balloon. He has the gravitas of Miss Piggy.
“Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens” (Ex. 18:21).
If we read this, and the name Donald Trump comes to mind, then we deserve whatever we get, good and hard.
The election would certainly be more festive IF either or both parties drive their respective bases to a third party option! Remember if no candidates end up with enough electoral votes, then the Presidency is thrown into the US House: If memory serves me correctly the Jefferson v. Burr battle was the last time we saw that festival.
What is Trump wins . . . and disappoints? Well . . .
https://patriactionary.wordpress.com/2016/03/15/what-if-trump-wins-and-disappoints/
Even if everything negative you believe about Trump is true, he is still a better head of state than the USA deserves.
That makes is easier for me to vote for him if he wins the nomination. Of course, even Obama is better than we deserve if that’s the criterion.
Agreed.
And still better than Hillary.
My impression is that Miss Piggy is weighty, that she and gravity have a thing.
My impression is that some frogs you kiss, and still others you just sit on and flatten. The trick here is to try not to fall into the whole pond.
Why does Limbaugh say he’s supporting Trump?
If it’s pragmatics, that means Limbaugh doesn’t find deal-breaking features in Trump’s offering or features, right?
He doesn’t. He is backing Cruz. Every talk radio host is, save one, Michael Savage.
“But just as it is impossible to draw a straight line from a politicians stump speech to his actual voting record, so also there is no way to draw a straight line from Coulter’s many books to her overdone support for Donald Trump. There is no possible consistency here — if we are talking about consistency that flows from stated principle. But there is always consistency at some level, and that consistency is working its way out now. The conservative chatterati are feathering a different nest than the politicos are,” That is your argument against her? No further elaboration? I… Read more »
Maybe we can’t say everything all at once.
I agree it doesn’t ‘splain much WHAT she’s feathering, though.
I’d guess fame & fortune?
He has had plenty of time. She is right on immigration and so is Trump. While whether Trump will betray is an open question – we know that Cruz was weak on immigration up until Trump. We know that Cruz sat on his laurels and meekly criticized Rubio when he was in high betrayal with the Gang of 8. Cruz was big on H1B Visas, ‘we need to get control of the border’ but no wall – until Trump. Now he wants a wall. I’ll gladly take his conversion but it is all because of Coulter and Trump. They have… Read more »
Trump has been so brave in this area that he supports touch-back amnesty, gave money to Senators while they were supporting Gang of 8, said “Congress must protect our borders first. Amnesty should be done only if the border is secure and illegal immigration has stopped.” during Gang of 8 debate, supports the H1-B program (reversed his own policy in the debate), abused the H2-B program to hire foreigners over american workers, and hired illegals to build his casinos.
As a businessman he gave money to a lot of people; he changed his mind on amnesty after Coulter’s book; he stated after thedebate he was wrong and reissued a statement on H1B’s. As a business man you go with the best offer. ( I have an illegal cleaning out my yard as we speak.) As a politician you look at the larger picture as to what motivates business men.
If you care about the American worker, then you dont outsource your manufacturing, while berating other companies for doing the same. You dont hire foreigners over Americans who want the job, and you dont hire illegals. He said this in the debate: “I’m changing. I’m changing. We need highly skilled people in this country, and if we can’t do it, we’ll get them in. But, and we do need in Silicon Valley, we absolutely have to have,” This was his “reversal”: “Megyn Kelly asked about highly-skilled immigration. The H-1B program is neither high-skilled nor immigration: These are temporary foreign workers,… Read more »
“If you
care about the American workerare an honest person to whom anyone should grant any credibility, then you don’t outsource your manufacturing, while berating other companies for doing the same. You don’t hire foreigners over Americans who want the job, and you don’t hire illegals.”Fixed it for you. ;-)
You hire who you have to in order to compete in the market you are in. Politicians can make it so they have to hire Americans but they don’t.
Then you’d better not berate the people who are “hiring who they have to hire in order to compete in the market.” The definition of hypocrisy isn’t standing for one thing and doing another — it’s holding others to the standards you knowingly violate, but excusing yourself.
Hillary, Schumer, whoever are paid in order to have pull. He’s not in Idaho.
You outsource the jobs if you can’t find local workers to do seasonal work. Most Americans want full time work, not temporary.
His description of the H1B program there was in fact right on target.
There’s a reason Jeff Sessions endorsed Trump and not Cruz.
Trump employs over Twenty thousand people at Mar Logo alone. The fact that he has to use less than 80 foreign workers every year, for seasonal work is hardly controversial.
While brave they may be, isn’t it understandable that Doug would see her support of Trump as a betrayal of certain fundamental & religious non-negotiables?
Like what?
How about abortion?
Both she and Trump are against abortion.
Trump is against abortion in 2016 just like Obama was against gay marriage in 2008.
Do you agree that IF Trump were against abortion per se, all things being equal, but that it is sufferable in the big picture for the time being until more fundamental machinations are resolved (ala Coulter’s position), that would be an understandable deal-breaker for some folks like Wilson? Coulter to Piers Morgan: “I think all Republican candidates, um, apparently need to go through some sort of cattle prodding to learn to just say ‘Exceptions for rape, incest, life of the mother’ — is that so hard to get out of your mouth?” Morgan — “Is that your belief?” Coulter —… Read more »
In a previous post he criticized her for her lack of conservatism when she said “I don’t care if Trump performs abortions in the Oval Office, as long as he follows through on immigration”. She said that in order to underline her point that all issues are subservient to immigration since immigrants vote 8/2 for the Dems. It was a callous way to make a point and Pastor Wilson said that it was not conservative to talk like that. That is a fair point – but it is the only substantive criticism I have seen. The rest is all vague… Read more »
Coulter to Piers Morgan: “Can we deal with the two million who aren’t a result of rape and incest and just have that exception there? — Is that such a big problem??”
Is that a substantive point to criticize?
I hope she’s the SCOTUS justice that replaces the great Scalia.
Merrick Garland will replace Scalia.
The GOP will cave when the Dems and the media start calling opposition to Garland anti-semitism.
You can take that to the bank.
J Norris, There is an easy dodge. They could make the decision not to pick him on the basis they don’t want to seat a justice until the new president is elected. As Christ said, “anything more than yes, or no comes from evil”. Hope they don’t fall for it. Some conservative venues are already sending me emails stating the “danger” of this pick (hoping I’ll send money). Man, I got to tell you I’m sick of this crap. If the Senate said they won’t vote until the next president is seated, then don’t vote. I think we have enough… Read more »
Is your objection that he’s relying on you to be familiar with Coulter and with basic conservative principles, and letting you connect the dots about what someone is probably doing when they pretend to have a set of principles but actually don’t, instead of republishing the patent application on the wheel in this post?
The only thing I can take from your comment is that he didn’t write the post you wanted him to write. That doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with what he wrote.
He needs to flesh out her particular inconsistencies so we can measure the cost of the inconsistency with the larger goal of stopping immigration. He did that once that I have seen as I wrote above.
After your defense of Trump’s inconsistencies, I’m not confident you could spot one if it fell out of the sky and hit you on the head.
I can live without your confidence. I’d rather not live with 20+ million amnestied Democrat voters. Trump dragged Cruz to his current position which means 80% of the republican primary voters are voting for a wall. That is because of Ann Coulter writing a fantastic book on the subject.
The 20+ million democrat voters are already here. No one including trump is going to deport them. If someone got serious about trying to deport them there would have to be serious violations of the rights enumerated in the bill of rights of actual citizens to effectively pull it off. The wall will not be built. The deep problems in this country have nothing to do with those coming over the border illegally. If you were to get your way and deport all illegals and get a wall built this generation of voters is so far gone culturally the decline… Read more »
I’ve tried to make this point before. The deep problems of our culture are home-grown. They aren’t the fault of immigrants (legal or otherwise). Illegal immigrants are certainly taking advantage of our socialist folly and corruption, but it is our socialist folly. Because our government is intent on ignoring its own immigration laws, and because a significant portion of illegal immigrants profess Christ, it would seem to make more sense to identify with that Christian confession and work with it. What if we worked together based on our common identity in Christ to subvert the assumption that these illegal immigrants… Read more »
Katecho that was perfectly explained. I did a lot of automation work at construction sites in Texas. 99% of the workers on those sites were mexican, presumably illegal aliens. They were some of the hardest workers I have seen in my travels to construction sites all over our country. Conservatives who choose to put most of the blame on illegal immigration are just being lazy. We have socialist education and tax systems the vast majority of the population of this country actively supports.
No economy structured on the amount of debt USA and America have has ever lasted, immigration or no.
Why is population decline especially bad?
I’m certainly not suggesting that immigration can save us from our economic/monetary failures. Nor am I suggesting that we should have a monetary system based on debt and forced growth. I’m just observing that, under this system (which has been adopted globally) immigration will eventually to be sought after as a means of satisfying its demands for growth.
Operation Wetback.
Now is the time for all good men and women to hold their noses and vote for Hilary.
It’s not a bad idea. If all our leaders we’re sitting in federal prison before we even elected them, we’d already have some idea what we were getting.
No, a good man or woman can’t vote for anyone who isn’t pro-life. The purpose of our vote is as the purpose of everything, please God.
They can’t vote for someone who is “pro-life,” but they can vote for someone who has exploited the poor, profited off of destructive gambling, tosses women aside in divorce with little regard, and wants to kill children who HAVE been born? You may want to double check your calculus again on that one.
I’ll take that over a true criminal, with a much more corrupt past, who has no qualms about the legalized murder of over 54 million children. At least Trump has given many people legitimate private sector employment. That’s much more than you can say for Hillary, Bernie, Obama or other career politicans.
Yeah, I don’t really care what people like you who choose to speak in half truths says. Check the 9th commandment…and Jesus’ clarification.
In other words, you won’t engage with Hillary’s huge flaws. Instead, you only deal with you very subjective interpretation of one commandment. Again, Trump (with his own funds) has employed a lot more poor people than Hillary ever will.
No, I won’t engage with an argument that tells lies as if they were truth. Your straw man arguments are adorable, especially when they detract focus from the original premise: that the poster was okay with writing off a candidate because of one sin, while hypocritically ignoring the litany of sins that Trump not only does, but apparently is proud of. Apparently you have no problem with that hypocrisy either. And I love how you think my interpretation of the 9th amendment (and Jesus’ teachings in light of) is subjective. That I’s simultaneously amusing and baseless. What am I saying…I’m… Read more »
I guess “adorable” means “invisible” in your vernacular since I didn’t make any straw man arguments. You seem to recklessly throw around a lot of terms like that. The ironic thing is that Hillary/Bernie are in obvious violation of the 8th commandment. They’re in in a contest to see who can rob the most from productive Peter to pay lazy Paul (“free” college, health care, student loan forgiveness, food stamps and other handout-via-theft programs).
Well, aren’t we a little ball of moving target. Invisibly calling out Hillary’s “huge” flaws while baselessly labeling me as subjective when they aren’t anywhere close to the issue I brought up in order for you to argue against those points instead of the germane one is textbook fallacy. You are incredibly dishonest or incredibly unintelligent…or quite likely both. Taxation is not theft. Newsflash: the government has a legal right to tax. And again, the trail you’ve desperately gone down does nothing to rebut my critique of the original post.
Easy there, cupcake. You’ve either got to be trolling or projecting at record levels. Accusing me of a “textbook” fallacy while slinging an ad hominem? Really? Bringing up the 9th commandment as you’re defending one of the most corrupt, dishonest political families ever (Benghazi, Whitewater and even 1970s scandals like Hillary’s cattle futures trading–her results were practically impossible without insider connections). Even her body language screams “liar” much of the time. As for politicians promising free stuff to get votes and enforcing it via confiscatory taxes–that absolutely is theft for all parties involved. Try actually reading and applying the Bible… Read more »
I see you are of the oversimplified thought process that a conclusory observation is the equivalent of an ad hominem. It isn’t. If I just call you a moron because I have nothing else to say, that’s ad hominem. However, my response was based on the vapid responses you’ve posted so far. You have absolutely zero valid thought process that you have demonstrated here. You stick to unwarranted conclusions and conspiracy theories treated as fact while ignoring the entire crux of my original post. The original post that I replied to insisted that we can’t vote for Hillary because she’s… Read more »
All that? A simple “I’m given to fits of verbal diarrhea and non-stop prating” would do. Nothing I said about Hillary was dishonest, and supporting the legal murder of 54 million unborn is not something you can just, like, be “okay with,” man. Weightier matters of the law and such. As for your WAG my intelligence, I’ve easily scored high enough on IQ tests and college entrance exams to be admitted into MENSA, though I have no desire to join. I’ve been around extraordinarily intelligent types and wannabes, and it’s obvious which category you fit it. Go ahead and get… Read more »
How cute. Unverifiable claims that have nothing to do with my post. Your pretending to be smarter than you actually are is just plain sad. Is that what you usually resort to when you can’t rebut the actual argument being made? For crying out loud, you have repeatedly demonstrated you can’t even comprehend the claims being made, much less formulate a proper response to it. You say that “upporting the legal murder of 54 million unborn is not something you can just, like, be ‘okay with,’ man.” But that’s not true. Millions of democrats are exactly “okay with” it. So… Read more »
Hilary is the lesser of 2 evils : that’s why I said “hold their noses”.
That seems highly subjective.
They’re both evil. I’d rather write in a candidate.
Any candidate you write in is also going to be evil – we call it the doctrine of total depravity :-)
That’s actually not biblical reasoning. Scripture does indicate that we’re all sinners; it absolutely does not flatten out all moral differences between men. It rarely uses the word “evil” to refer to the general fallen human condition; scripturally, evil men are generally those actively and consciously opposed to God and His law.
Yes, this point needs to be emphasized more, at least in our generation. One consequence of buying into the “all equally have sinned, so all are equally evil” fallacy is inability to respond appropriately to what scripture calls evil. I think at worst it may incline professing Christians toward a kind of antinomianism.
Yes, but that is like saying that all sins are equal. Sure in God’s eyes they are, but there are different degrees of sin and different consequences depending on the degree. Trump has said that he doesn’t recall ever asking God for forgiveness. Hilary doesn’t seem to recognize her sins either. Consequently neither shows evidence of repentance. But there are candidates who are either no longer in the race or who aren’t leading in the polls who have shown the fruits of repentance, despite the fact that they are human and sinful by nature. I’d rather write one of the… Read more »
They might be repentant and incompetent which is not good either
If we have to vote for a crook, I’d rather vote for one that was competent enough to not get caught.
She’s not even competent at lawbreaking, how can she possibly be any good at lawabiding?
Besides, no good can possibly come of voting for someone who would voluntarily associate herself with the baby-killer party.
Now is the time for all good men and women to get on their knees and beg for God’s mercy on this country, and our squandering of the blessing and privilege we’ve graciously received for 2.5 centuries. The writing is on the wall (Daniel 5:26-27), and time is clearly running out.
HELL. NO.
How will Trump be worse than Hillary?
But, but, but … he’ll upset all the carefully arranged arrangements. And, he’s so tacky!
Good and hard.
What’s going on here is another political realignment; I’ve seen the comparison made between Trump and McKinley, who also campaigned on increased tariffs, as well as improving economic conditions for blue-collar workers. We’re moving out of a political era dominated by culture wars and into one dominated by nationalism vs. globalism. Whether Trump wins or loses is, at this point, less interesting than seeing what kind of successors he has.
The poles have reversed since McKinley’s time. McKinley, a Republican, was representing big business, which backed tariffs for the sake of protecting American industry (and profit). Populists, and the Democrats in support of them, demanded an end to tariffs, which they understood as an expense born by the working class consumer.
Indeed. I just offer the comparison because the coalitions for the parties are shifting again.
Your point is well taken. It is very interesting, if not instructive, to consider what has changed since the progressive era, and yet how much is the same now as it was then. You’re right, it’ll be interesting to see if what comes next is a major sea change, and if so, what shape it takes.
Actually, even though Repubs are still seen as backing big business and Dems are for the people, both say they are for the middle class but do everything in their power to shaft the people in favor of big business who line their (the pols) pockets. Even Trump admitted that’s what he did to garner the influence of his representatives – he paid off both sides to get his way. We need both parties to go away. However, we need to be careful, because when the Whig party died it was resurrected a few years later as the Republican party.… Read more »
True enough. What I was pointing out was the who/what/why of partisan stances on tariffs around the late 19c, as compared to now. I was not necessarily defending either party.
“He has the gravitas of Miss Piggy.”
I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to object here. Miss Piggy is the very epitome of gravitas. Dignity, seriousness, or solemnity of manner? Yep. Trust me, she’s not knocking out the frog for comedic effect, she really means it.
And that’s why (rumor has it) the frog has left her for a more sweet-mannered pig.
Great, now I’ve got an earworm.
Really? Which one? (Morbid curiosity, because so song is coming to my mind)
Also…sorry ^_^
I’ve been saying this for months. People who want to elect Trump for anything that he’s saying he will do? Trump will break any promise, cancel any debts, and lie through his teeth to gain power, and then do whatever it takes to maintain that power. He has absolutely no commitment to whatever it is that you are voting for, unless you’re simply voting for Pharaoh Trump, God on Earth.
Wise words there, but see if he’s our Pharaoh, then people think he’ll answer to them, serve them, represent them, because they put him in power. So, they want the biggest, baddest, meanest Pharaoh to fight their enemies for them. They miss the part where he kind of lacks that servant’s heart.
This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and… Read more »
God is shaking heaven and earth. Our eyes are open now, and we see that we are vulnerable. We are angry at the previous political gods, and blame them. But we are still going to reach for our gods, because everything is shaking. We demand a new strong man to stop the shaking.
Well said.
Curious why you think that — watching the first 10 minutes of this video, I get the impression he’s pursuing concerns he’s had for a long time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxf1XmVZ9qY
Why I think which of the things I accused Trump of? I think Trump will break promises because of his marriages, and because of his reversals on nearly every political issue once he started gearing up to run for president (back in at least 2011). I think Trump will cancel debts because of his bankruptcies, and the way he attempts to erase the wrongdoings of his followers (from the violence at his rallies, which is admittedly two sided, but his rhetoric and response has been encouraging of a violent response). I think Trump lies through his teeth because he’s constantly… Read more »
So Tumps goal is to make America rich again as opposed to great.
It’s un-American to think those are different. ;-)
Taking money from other countries and giving it to America is a more sensable economic plan than taking money from rich people and giving it to the governmemt.
On the reference to Exodus 18:21: “Willingness to be given authority” is not the chief requirement to look for in a leader. Ability and character are both important, but character is the more important of these two.
“Doublecross”? Really? I can think of several terms that are much more colorful.
The betrayal has come from the right wing media for demonizing Republicans who are actually trying to do something about border security and immigration (like Rubio) rather that spending eight years at gridlock while screaming at liberals (like Cruz).
The fact that Trump appeals to voters, especially Christian voters, has implications far beyond the winner of a particular political contest. Virtually everything about his appeal is a trait that should be repulsive to a follower of Christ. I’m not talking about his positions at all, which are just as unreliable as Pastor Wilson states and largely irrelevant to his followers anyway. I am speaking of the things he actually does to gain votes, which appeal to the worst instincts of fallen man.
When has anyone gotten elected to high office without gaining votes by appealing to the worst instincts of man? This seems like an odd charge to single out Trump for.
Indeed. We’re being told to not vote for someone because they will break promises, they have appealed to base instincts, and will disappoint in office. If that’s the argument, then we should simply stay home altogether.
Yes, and this includes “I’ll take from the evil 1% and give it to you so you can live the slacker lifestyle: ‘free’ healthcare, college, cell phones, food stamps, housing, utilities etc.”
Nevertheless, Ted Cruz is not a natural born US citizen, and the US Constitution *forbids* him occupying the office of US president (or vice-president).
Moreover, for all Trump’s many manifest faults, what harm can he do all by himself? Should he be elected, he will have no minions in Congress to protect him should he attempt to issue diktat.
Ilion’s argument depends on the idea that someone can be born a citizen, but still not be “natural born”. There’s no compelling evidence for such a distinction. I recently came across an article on the Supreme Court case of Virginia Minor v Reese Happersett which recognized only two types of citizen. From the court ruling: Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United… Read more »
Yawn. What gets me are sanctimonious GOP types who’ve said we need to hold our noses and vote for Bush/Dole/McCain/Romney for the last two decades. Now they’re suddenly outraged at the thought of Trump representing the party?
God will not be mocked, but He will be the One doing the mocking. We are, I fear being mocked. Clinton illustrates all that is wrong with our morals, and Trump illustrates all that is wrong with our egos.
There are egos on display on all sides.
We and the corporatocracy that has run things for a long time now, decided to go with the relative short-term gains of Pragmatism over Principle. We are so far gone, however, that I don’t believe there’s much left to be fixed! America-as-we-have-known-it is finished!
I wish that were true, but I expect we’re going to have to put up with around 20 more years of America-as-we-have-known-it.
I actually hope it takes less time to end (although I don’t want the end to come all at once, as that road leads to violence). There are lots of things to be negative about, for sure. But if we are looking for an outlet for constructive energy and thought, perhaps we should begin looking beyond those 20 years, or so, and considering ideas of how we would like to be positioned as a Christian people when “American-as-we-have-known-it” comes to an end. This may involve thinking more along the lines of a first-century Christian, where we may not be in… Read more »
I expect the circumstances will warrant thinking more along the lines of a fourth- or eleventh-century Christian.
I’m with you! I darned sure hope it doesn’t take that long, but as I believe Adam Smith famously observed, “There’s a great deal of ruin in a nation.” Your points regarding the church are important as well. For me, however, I believe we’re going to have to get a great deal more local in our orientation toward things; not that we totally reject the global, but that we cease our devotion to the abstract, the cosmopolitan, and get back to ordering our affections properly: the family, our local congregation, the community, etc., outward in that order. If the terms… Read more »
My reasons for wanting repentance or failure to come soon is that I don’t want to pass down this mess for the next generation to deal with. I can at least acknowledge that my generation had something to do with creating this monster, and should own the consequences.
A. Have some eclairs…http://tinyurl.com/j6rhsby B. Republicans take “Christians”, Pro-life, Pro-2A, pro-small gov, pro-common sense, pro-personal responsibility, etc. people for granted in the same way that Democrats take minorities for granted (with the exception of actually advancing their agenda). Simply placate them with stump speeches, then pass your unstated agenda. Neither party gives a rip about their constituents (unless they can weaponize the “useful idiots” in the group). It’s not uncommon to hear “conservative” pundits plead with minorities to see the fact that they’re in an abusive relationship… the irony is overwhelming. On conservatism RL Dabney circa 1897 http://tinyurl.com/zg6ceud (yet true… Read more »
Constantly tempted to post this quote on every single thread exhorting Christians to support “conservatives”. Conservatism is liberalism.
” I have slowly been coming to the conclusion that 2016 has not been festive enough, and we need to see both major political parties turn into moon craters at roughly the same time.”
I only wish I could embellish.
Jews are 2% of America, but will soon be 44% of the Supreme Court. Isn’t diversity wonderful? I know some out there are hoping the GOP will stick to their guns and refuse to confirm Merrick Garland, but that’s not going to happen. GOP leaders will cave when Dems start saying that opposition to Garland is anti-semitism. You can take that to the bank. By the way, Al Mohler isn’t anti-semitic. See, he doesn’t think there are too many Jews on the Supreme Court. Oh, heck no! He just thinks there aren’t enough Protestants, that’s all. https://twitter.com/albertmohler/status/710812168715898880 You’ll notice Doug… Read more »
Evangelicals have flocked to Trump for the same reasons they have been flocking to megachurches headed by pathological narcissists who use their organizations as personal money machines to feather their own nests and build their empires.
Trump most closely resembles the same charlatans evangelicals are entertained by every Sunday, support with their tithes and offerings, and make the most lame excuses for. And they will suffer the most heinous woundings when they come to the realization that they have been used, and thrown under the bus.
Sure you aren’t talking about Cruz?
Trump will get the nomination because the Republicans can’t credibly stop him. Trump will lose in November against Hillary, probably pretty handily. The Republicans have created this monster by nursing the resentments that drive conservatism while pursuing a political platform designed purely for the benefit of the 1%. Now it is trampling them. Well either that or they write Trump off as a black swan and proceed with business as usual until the next Trump comes along. The Democrats are more coherent and don’t have nearly the same problem: Sanders’ supporters will support Hillary easily in the general. Sanders’ effect… Read more »
This seems rather incredible. Trump got more votes in Ohio in the primary than Hillary did, and he didn’t even win the state. If Trump can overcome the opposition of the media and Republican party, why would he have any problem with a woman carrying tremendous political baggage who can’t interact with actual voters for more than 15 minutes at a time?
Trump has higher unfavorables than Hillary though. In order to even have a chance to win against her he has to do two things. First he has to somehow overcome the perception he has created so far of being a violent racist. Then he has to broaden his message to bring in people beyond the narrow demographic that has supported him up to now. He has to do both of these things while simultaneously not alienating his current supporters. On top of this, the electoral math is very unfavorable to republicans regardless of who runs. The Democrats, with just blue… Read more »
Plenty of people stayed home in 2012 that are coming out to vote now — and Obama generated a lot more good feelings than Hillary does. (And Bernie supporters hate Hillary.)
I’m convinced that Trump could have chosen to run on the Democratic ticket and won the nomination there instead. Of course, for such a campaign, he would have selectively cited his other record, and portrayed himself as a lifelong friend of progressives.
Perhaps Trump should have run both campaigns and been the first presidential candidate to win the nomination of both major parties.
Democrats are more coherent in the same way that Santa Claus is more coherent to eager children. It’s always more complicated to sell the fact that we have to scale back the toys because Santa’s factory is $19 trillion in debt.
“Sanders’ supporters will support Hillary easily in the general.”
The anti-republicans will vote Hillary, but a bunch of Berinie supporters are also anti-Hillary.
But are they anti-Hillary enough? Bernie supporters might not like Hillary, but they despise Trump. Best case is they stay home.
I know a few people who would vote Sanders over Trump but Trump over Clinton. Though I can’t confidently say who would win in either scenario.
I wouldn’t count on it. The left is pretty unified. And the Dems have been nominating pretty far-left candidates for some time. Watch their debates. They’re basically nothing but childish “I’m more socialist than you!” contests, though only Bernie uses the “s” word. Sanders’ slackers may complain about Hillary, but most will for vote for her.
Right now we seem to need a sober respectable guy like Samson.
Interesting info about Ted Cruz…..http://detonite.com/a-die-hard-ted-cruz-fan/
Hope this helps your voting decision.
Man, I can’t stand Cruz, but I couldn’t wade through that article. It’s poorly written and about 10 times longer than it needs to be.
I appreciate the effort Mr. Norris. I was really surprised at the deceit uncovered by the stay at home mom about Cruz. Man, he has really come across as something he is not, and this proves it. ashv, a poster on this sight stated that anyone running for President has to lie, which I agree with but this article exposes really slick deceptive practices.