Friday, January 22, 2016

Why Trump and not one of the others?

Here's why. Every damn one of them, except Rand Paul, has an absolutely rotten record and/or policy on immigration. And Rand, for all his good points, isn't getting any traction and is on records as being wrongheaded on the whole Black Lives Matter mess. [link] As for the Democrats, need you ask? Hillary is a sociopathic crook and warmonger, and Bernie lives in Cloud Cuckoo Land with unicorns and hobbits. And, again with the exception of Rand Paul, the Republicans (along with Hillary) are obsessed with the idea of invading and pounding hell out of the Middle East to destabilize it even further, by overthrowing Assad and lord knows who else, to keep the hemorrhage of "refugees" flowing, to Europe and America. Trump is the only one except Rand who plans to even slow immigration down — Never mind the current talk from Rubio, Bush, Cruz and the others. They've all been immigration enthusiasts and would have continued to be so if Trump hadn't brought the subject up in the first place.

And since the current wisdom is that it has to be either Cruz or Trump, ponder this. Cruz comes across as effeminate, arrogant, preachy, and fastidious. None of those except 'arrogant' apply to Trump, and he's arrogant with us instead of against us, if you know what I mean. Cruz won't attract the silent majority or the Reagan Democrats, and Trump can. My guess is, and I'm not alone in this, is that Trump can get more Black votes than Republicans have been managing lately.

If you need more evidence, this from Takimag [link]

Trump Has Had Enough

Sarah Palin just endorsed Trump in a shrill speech that sounded like the cheerleaders from Fast Times at Ridgemont High. It’s “yuge” for his campaign because she’s likely to bring all the Tea Party holdouts who didn’t think he was conservative enough. It’s even yuger for the liberals who hate him because they see this as another step toward America’s first Islamophobic president. We should be focusing on guns instead because…the children.

So much of these two opposing Americas come down to a simple question: What’s worse, being killed by a terrorist or being killed by a mass shooter? The left insists all this terrorism talk is just fearmongering that vilifies Muslims. The right insists all this gun-control talk is just fearmongering that vilifies guns. The odds of either thing happening to you or anyone you know are negligible. Even if you were working in Manhattan on 9/11 the odds of you dying were a fraction of a percent. Mass shootings are even rarer, with only a handful of people dying every year. In fact, France suffered more terror casualties in one year than America had mass-shooting casualties over Obama’s entire presidency.

Though these two threats seem similar, they couldn’t be more different. One is an unpreventable freak occurrence and the other is part of a general trend to wipe out the West. We’ll always have a couple of lunatics who pop a gasket. Mass shootings are not on the rise overall and banning assault weapons has no effect on them whatsoever. The only similarities I can find between shooters such as Adam Lanza, Dylann Roof, and James Holmes is way too much medication, but they were medicated because they were nuts. None of the background-check laws Obama is crying about would have prevented these shootings. Andrew Kehoe wasn’t worried about background checks when he committed the worst school massacre in history back in 1927. He used explosives to kill 38 children. You can’t fix crazy. It’s not indicative of a pattern and there are no I-told-you-so’s at the other end of the attack. What scare me are liberals. Their flagrant ethnomasochism and childish embrace of everything non-Western is downright dangerous.

The terrorists are not a freak occurrence. They are all following the same handbook. We can pretend only a tiny fraction of Muslims have any malice toward us, but the numbers range from 25 percent to way past 75 percent. That’s at least 3 million potential terrorists in America who think “violence is acceptable against infidels.” I have no delusions about the chances of a home invasion and I’m not scared of being blown up by a jihadist. I’m thoroughly confident I won’t be raped by a refugee in Sweden, but that doesn’t mean I don’t get angry when I see it happening. We all get mad because we know it’s not a random lunatic who’s flipped his lid. It’s the result of an inferior culture being invited by progressives to come and replace us. We rail against the #rapefugees not because we’re scared but because we told you so. We knew Merkel’s plan was a mess. The left’s solution is for men to dress in drag and sing, but that’s the kind of cuck behavior that got us into this mess. We need to be bullish because being tough is what got us here in the first place. It’s why immigrants want to come here. The progressive idea of progress is to encourage Western populations to decline as they are invaded by inferior ones that breed like rabbits.
Read the rest here:

Quibcag: The Sky Girls (スカイガールズ Sukai Gāruzu) look like they're ready to support Trump, though they're too young and too Japanese to vote here.

1 comment:

  1. Oddly enough, I was just reading about Andrew Kehoe yesterday. A bomb, of all things - and the worst killing of school kids, even today.