Ted Cruz For Liberty… Ted Cruz For President


“Those who aim at great deeds must also suffer greatly.”

– Plutarch

Many of us in the liberty movement saw the handwriting on the wall some time ago, as far as the Rand Paul campaign was concerned. He came in a distant fifth in Iowa, a state many thought he would win a year ago, his polling looked bleak in the other early states, and he was short on resources. He likely could have gone on, but instead, ended his campaign Wednesday morning. He’ll focus on securing re-election to the Senate, which he should easily accomplish. This turn of events has caused many of us in the liberty movement to despair, and even question the viability of the movement itself.

This must stop. What, did some of us think this would be easy? That the neoconservatives, the authoritarians, the entrenched interests, and all the rest who stand in our way inside the Republican party, would simply step aside? This sort of wishful thinking is all too common among those of us in the liberty movement. Reality is that it took over a century for the state to grow as it has, and for our liberties to be endangered the way they are now, and we won’t reverse that in a single campaign, a single election cycle, or even over the course of one pro-liberty presidential administration. We have a long fight ahead of us, and only over the past few years has it seemed as if we can begin to turn the tide. The sooner we realize this, the better our chances of making an actual impact. Our adversaries understand the value of incremental progress. So must we.

SPARTANBURG, SC - APRIL 3: Senator and GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz answers questions from local media following a town hall meeting at the Beacon Drive-in restaurant on April 3, 2015 in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The Beacon Drive-in, traditionally a popular venue for campaigning politicians, was Cruz's 2nd stop of the day in South Carolina. (Photo by Richard Ellis/Getty Images)

SPARTANBURG, SC – APRIL 3: Senator and GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz answers questions from local media following a town hall meeting at the Beacon Drive-in restaurant on April 3, 2015 in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The Beacon Drive-in, traditionally a popular venue for campaigning politicians, was Cruz’s 2nd stop of the day in South Carolina. (Photo by Richard Ellis/Getty Images)

To that end, we must take Senator Paul’s defeat in stride, assess our options, and recommit to the fight, supporting the best possible outcome for the advancement of liberty.

We cannot simply throw up our hands, take our ball, and go home. To do so would validate every criticism the establishment makes about liberty Republicans. That we’re not really Republicans. That we don’t understand the value of coalitions in politics. That we’re children who pitch a screaming fit the moment we don’t get exactly what we want. This will not do.

To that end, I believe wholeheartedly that liberty Republicans must work to elect Senator Ted Cruz, of Texas, the next President of the United States.

Along with Senator Mike Lee, he’s stood with Rand more than anyone else in the Senate. True, he’s not perfect, but he’s very good, and we can’t let the proverbial perfect be the enemy of the good.

He’s the only candidate still in the race who subscribes to an originalist interpretation of the Constitution. He’s the only candidate in the race who stands firmly against warrantless surveillance. He’s made some unwise comments about ‘making sand glow’ and ‘carpet bombing’, but for the most part, he rejects the ridiculous neoconservative foreign policy agenda. He’s with us on privacy and data security. However socially conservative he might be, he understands federalism, and would leave such issues largely in the hands of the states. He’d eliminate the odious TSA, along with a host of other superfluous federal departments and agencies. He understands the desperate need for sweeping criminal justice reform. Ted Cruz is our staunch ally most of the time.

Case in point: The USA Freedom Act. While it was much weaker than the original bill, it still ended warrantless government access to phone metadata, which was the major problem. That data is still collected by phone companies, and no bill yet seriously contemplated would stop that. Yet, many liberty activists are angry because he supported that version of the USA Freedom Act. That bill was the epitome of an incremental victory for liberty. We should thank him for supporting it.

The man just rolled into Iowa and beat the ethanol lobby in its backyard, winning Iowa with flying colors. The significance of that cannot be overstated.

He missed the latest vote in the Senate to audit the Federal Reserve, but that bill had vanishingly small chances of getting the 60 votes need to invoke cloture, and exactly ZERO chance of getting the 67 votes needed to override the inevitable Obama veto. Yet liberty Republicans skewered Cruz for missing the vote! Where was he? Winning, apparently. He knows we need a pro-liberty President if such a thing is to become law.

Once one compares Senator Cruz to the competition, the choice becomes even more clear.

I won’t spill a lot of ink here dealing with Donald Trump, as it’s been done elsewhere to great effect. Suffice it to say he’s a horrible demagogue with a long history of supporting Democratic candidates and policies, and for all the world seems like the bastard political child of Silvio Berlusconi and Benito Mussolini, with a dusting of liberal Yankee jackass for good measure. No. Just no.

Marco Rubio embraces the neoconservative “Invade The World/Invite The World” policy panoply with both arms and grinning enthusiasm. So on foreign policy and immigration, he’s a fresh-faced rerun of George W. Bush. No, thank you.

Rubio, Trump, Chris Christie, ¡Jeb! Bush, and to a lesser extent, John Kasich (who is the worst of the lot other than Trump), brag about how we need get back to violating the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans to stop terrorism. All are on board, to varying degrees, with perpetual entanglement in the Middle East.

Ben Carson, while a fine man, suffers upon close examination, and has looked feckless and inconsistent in debates and on the campaign trail. His campaign is fading, and with good reason.

Carly Fiorina will be a strong surrogate for whoever our nominee is, but her moment in the sun in this race has passed. Jim Gilmore is somehow still running, effectively as a fundraiser for Boyd Marcus. He was never a real factor.

For the first time since at least 1980, we have a chance to elect a President who will actually try and make a dent in the growing leviathan state, and strike a blow for liberty. We can win! Let’s prove the doubters wrong. Let’s join the rest of the wider conservative movement, defeat the establishment catspaw candidates, and WIN.

Cruz for liberty. Cruz for President.

Originally posted at The Bull Elephant.

This election season sucks


Stop the election! I want to get off!

I realize people are sick and tired of the same old, same old. I understand that every politician who is promising change in Washington is almost certainly lying. I get that they have to pander to certain demographics. But why, in the name of all that is light and good, have they turned 2016 into a bloody circus? Why?

It started with the GOP clown car, filled up with so many candidates, I began to think that maybe the old Volkswagen bug would explode! Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson. Trump decided to get in the race, Carly Fiorina, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie! At that point I began to ask what that poor clown car ever did to deserve such a fate, but then came the “others.”

Santorum, who finally ended his disaster of a presidential bid due to his dismal support. Get a clue, Frothy! No. One. Likes. You. My personal disdain for that anal polyp came during the last presidential campaign, when he shrugged off his drooling supporters booing – BOOING – a U.S. Soldier who just happened to be gay, and who just happened to have asked a question about DADT. While downrange. Deployed. Serving his country. In a hazardous duty zone. They booed him. And that zealot not only shrugged it off during the debate, but didn’t even bother thanking the Soldier for his service, or acknowledging that booing at a deployed troop was a sucky thing to do. Survey says: DOUCHE!

Huckabee, who apparently still wants to change the Constitution to “reflect the word of the living God.”

Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, who… I have no idea why he’s running, frankly. He wasn’t a horrible governor, but he has no campaign and no support. He only recently made an appearance at a debate, and at the “kids’ table” at that, and spent half his time complaining about the moderators not giving him enough time to yap. I think he may have gotten 12 votes in Iowa. Total.

Rick Perry, Lindsey Graham (the mad dwarf of the Senate who was only “running” to stop Rand Paul, apparently), Bobby Jindal (smart guy, but with the personality and energy of a toilet seat), Scott Walker, and George Pataki, who reminded me of the Cryptkeeper all entered the race, but didn’t get much traction.

The drama started early, with Trump leading the pack with stupid statements, narcissistic demands, a drama queen boycott of the Iowa debate, and ultimately a meltdown on Twitter about how he’s just not getting the recognition he deserves after coming in second behind Ted Cruz.


Apparently coming in second after the “anchor baby” from Canada dampened Trump’s enthusiasm for the White House. Trump’s gloating after the debate he chose to skip because he was too afraid of being asked tough questions when he was allegedly leading in the polls was shortlived.

“I think we’re going to do really well in Iowa. We’re leading in the Iowa polls. And Cruz is in the second place. He got really pummeled last night. I’m glad I wasn’t there. And they didn’t even mention that he was born in Canada,” Trump said at a speech at the Radisson Hotel here in Nashua on Friday morning. “So he got beaten pretty badly last night. And I don’t know what’s going to happen to him.”

Well, what happened to him, you narcissistic, spoiled rotten drama queen, is that he handed you your toupee-wearing ass, and the mini-meltdown you subsequently had on Twitter was the icing on top of a very ugly cake you’ve been baking since this insane campaign began.

The Iowa caucuses ended in yet more drama. Carson accused the Cruz team of spreading misinformation about Carson dropping out and demanded the staffer who did so be fired. I just love it when candidates make demands. Not. Cruz apologized. Carson accepted, but couldn’t resist one last swipe at Cruz, wondering whether there was a deeper “cultural issue” with the campaign.

And while I thought that he at least had some class left after his short, gracious speech in Iowa after Cruz was declared the winner, I was apparently too quick to judge. Trump has about as much class as a hairy, syphilis-infected testicle. Never to NOT take a loss personally, this screeching bag of douche has decided he will probably file a formal complaint accusing the Cruz campaign of fraud, because HOW COULD HE, THE DONALD, HAVE LOST IOWA? HE, THE DONALD, IS AWESOME! HE, THE DONALD, DOESN’T LOSE!

Cruz apologized to Republican presidential hopeful Ben Carson on Tuesday for rumors before the Iowa caucuses had finished that the retired neurosurgeon would drop out of the race, calling it a “mistake.”

Trump called it “one of the most disgusting things I’ve ever seen.” 

“What he did is unthinkable,” he continued. “He said the man has left the race and he said it during the caucus. And then when clarification was put out by Ben Carson saying it’s untrue, they got a statement and they didn’t put it out.”

“They apologized after the caucus was over. How does that help?”

Trump said Cruz’s actions were tantamount to “voter fraud.”

Never mind that CNN’s Chris Moody tweeted out the following:


Kudos to polistick for the screen cap. 

This apparently prompted the Cruz campaign to (erroneously) assess that Carson was ending his campaign. Cruz already apologized to Carson for the mistake, Carson admitted that his staffer did say he was going back to Florida, but Trump needs retribution, so…

Survey says: DOUCHE!

In the meantime, on the Democrat side, the Clinton and Sanders numbers were so close in Iowa, that rumblings have begun about fraud. NPR explains the details here, which makes it sound less nefarious than Berntards would have you believe, but hey, CORRUPTION! Sanders then tried to pull a Trump by threatening to pull out of the New Hampshire debate, unless the Clinton campaign agreed to MOAR debates! “I won’t debate unless you commit to more debates!”

Um… what?

Well, apparently that bit of fury has been settled as of this morning, and the Bernster will participate in the New Hampshire debate, if nothing else, to make himself look even more economically illiterate than he already looks, and that’s saying quite a bit.

Now, do you see why I want this campaign over with? I’m not sure I can handle any more cray.

Fox outrage – Much ado about nothing


I know a number of conservatives who read this site are going to disagree with me on this. They will be angry/disappointed/infuriated. I expect there will be threats to never read this site again.

OK, so be it.

I’ve never let that stop me from putting my thoughts down, and I refuse to do so now, so you’ve received fair warning. Your outrage and threats to leave will be met with the same scorn and ridicule heaped on anyone else who thinks they’re so important, that they need to issue a mighty YAWP! about their intent to boycott my blog.

I’m all about discussion and controversy, so I invite you to discuss and debate. For those of you who want to never come back… Bye, Felicia!

An interesting outrage/controversy/whatever you want to call it has caught my eye this morning. Apparently, there’s conservative outrage, because Fox/Google have invited an anti-Trump Muslim advocate and an a formerly illegal alien who came here as a child, (edited to add information I should have previously researched about this woman) to be among those asking questions of GOP candidate, and that the RNC approved their appearance. Leading the outrage brigade this time around is Michelle Malkin and the always dependable Trump shills at Breitbart, and for the life of me, I can’t figure out what the outrage is about – two questioners out of…. however many questions will be asked in several hours are opponents of the GOP’s immigration views and Trump views on Islam! OH NOEZ!

Here’s the thing…

The same people who whine about the mainstream media being unabashedly biased are screeching when Fox and Google are at least making an attempt to be balanced in this debate.

This is a chance for the candidates to really shine and address some of the completely outlandish policies some of these people espouse, as well as advance the GOP point of view on these issues in a structured, orderly manner. Hell, some of these radical leftists might get a lesson they didn’t really expect. I’m all for that!

Are the GOP candidates really scared of addressing opposition questions? I would think not. I would think they will welcome the opportunity to reply to some of the more idiotic accusations that have been lobbed against them in a formal, mature manner. Is it so horrible to ensure that questions reflect a broad swath of the population? Are they really expecting us to believe that the other point of view doesn’t exist?

Hate to tell you this, people, but the President is not just YOUR president. He’s everyone’s president, despite what some of the more rabid Obama supporters will tell you. So yes, he will face tough questions from audiences. He will face tough questions from the media. Many of the reporters in the White House press corps are and will continue to be hardcore leftists. And guess what! The President will have to face them and answer their questions as directly and seriously as any others! Yes, even questions from the rabid amnesty supporters. Yes, even questions from supporters of the frothing advocates of the current administration’s refugee plans! Yes, even those who lob ridiculous assertions about “Islamophobia.”

So what is so outrageous about Fox/Google making the debate more challenging and more balanced, rather than lobbing the usual softball questions at the candidates, or trying to pit everyone against Trump?

I’ll tell you what. Not a damn thing.

scared-emoticon-square-face_318-58590But now, what you outrageatrons have provided is yet another excuse for Trump to pussy out of this debate. Whereas a few days ago he was whining about Megyn Kelly, he now has the opportunity to claim that he pulled out of the debate, because of some insane Fox/Google conspiracy to load the questioners with his opponents, as well as supporters of amnesty for illegals. Breitbart has already started the outrage machine.

Trump two days ago: I’m going to pull out of the debate, because, MEGYN KELLY IS MEAN!!!!

Internet: This guy is afraid of Megyn Kelly, but promises to face the Russians, Chinese, and Iranians? LULZ

Breitbart today: Oh, noez! Conspiracy! ANTI-TRUMP!!!!

How long before Trump’s campaign jumps on that bandwagon? Noooooo, it wasn’t Megyn Kelly. He’s not afraid of Megyn Kelly! It’s the total lack of fairness! Fox is unfair to him! They’ve loaded the debate with *GASP!* opponents – a whole two of them – and those opponents will be allowed to *GASP!* ask questions!

Bush dealt with some pretty vicious, many times unfair, reporters.

Every President does. It’s part of his job

If a presidential candidate can’t handle a couple of YouTube “celebrities” tossing a couple of questions in his direction, he (or she) does not deserve the post!

Fact is, I’m pretty sure, at least several of the candidates can easily answer the type of questions these illegal alien advocates and jihadist defenders with grace and aplomb, while advancing the GOP point of view with facts. And I’m pretty sure they will.

And that’s why I think the outrage is much ado about nothing.

Oh, the ego! (UPDATED)


Well, quite the shit storm I caused with my last blog post about Trump’s continued arrogance and antics!

Some came to berate me about my language, because apparently I won’t convince anyone if I hurl insults. I will once again remind my readers that I’m not out to convince. I’m not out to cajole. Nor am I out to win hearts and minds. Sorry, guys, but I just don’t give a damn.

This is my blog. I pay for it. I write it, with the help of a couple of great guys. But ultimately, I write it for me. In response to one of the commenters, I wrote the following regarding my posts on Trump.

Larry, I never write to convince anyone. In the “About” section of this blog, I have said this more than once. This blog is catharsis for me, as is writing. Sometimes people read it. Sometimes people like it. Sometimes people link to it. I blog because it’s fun.

The problem with Trumproids is that there’s no convincing them. His little joke about shooting someone in the middle of 5th Ave. has a grain of truth in it. You can show them all the information possible about him supporting Democrats, about him wanting to suppress freedom of speech, about him wanting to use government force against his fellow citizens, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam. Problem is they don’t listen. So I’ve stopped trying. Now I just ridicule them, because there’s nothing left to do. They will do what they do, and no amount of factual information will stop them.

I stand by that assessment of Trump supporters. They came out in droves today to tell me how disingenuous I am, how I’m lying about him, how I’m perverting the truth about him, you name it. Just read the comments in last nights post! It’s as if they adopted his ever-so-bruised ego.

And what an ego it is!

150810103149-donald-trump-megyn-kelly-780x439I was watching Wolf Blitzer’s interview with Trump this morning, discussing whether or not he was going to skip the next debate, because Megyn Kelly bruised his labia.

“I’m not a big fan of hers at all. I don’t care,” said the candidate. “I mean … I might be the best thing that ever happened to her. Who ever even heard of her before the last debate?”

This is the same tactic Trump uses on other issues to boost his fragile ego. No one talked about immigration reform until he came along.  Ben Carson is a loser, according to a Saturday Night Live promo Trump did a few months ago. Sure it was meant to be funny, I suppose, but it was petty and puerile more than anything. Carly Fiorina is much too ugly to be President, according to Trump. It goes on and on and on…

This particular claim about Megyn Kelly is especially amusing, given the fact that Kelly has been on Fox News Channel since 2004 and was named to Time magazine’s list of 100 Most Influential People in 2014 – all without Trump’s help. She’s been profiled in the New York Times, GQ, Elle Magazine, and others. Yeah, I’m fairly sure, millions of people knew who she was before the Toupee-Clad Narcissist came along.

What’s even more amusing is that Trump is throwing a fit, threatening to boycott the next debate, because tiny little Megyn Kelly is MEAAAAAN to him, and Fox has told him to piss up a rope.

Of course, every time he opens his cock holster, he has to walk something back. Like when he claimed – after his comments about Megyn Kelly bleeding out of her… – that he really meant eyes… Like when he walked back his comments about Carly Fiorina’s looks… Like he walked back comments on Muslim registration… It’s not what he meant. He was taken out of context. Blah, blah, blah.

So he’s walked back his threat to skip Thursday night’s debate.

Too bad. It would have been nice not to see his smirking maw, or see him contort his snatch every time he’s asked a question he doesn’t like.

And by the way, just to show you that the Trumproids really can’t ever tolerate criticism of their dumpster fire of a hero, no matter how accurate said criticism, I give you a smidgen of the comments from one of the reports about his whining about Kelly.

If a man criticizes a woman, no matter the validity of the criticism, it’s sexist. If a non-minority criticizes a minority, no matter the validity, it’s racist. Isn’t it nice for people who may be legitimate targets for criticism to have a Saul Alinsky-type defense, no matter how valid the criticism? That way, they don’t have to defend themselves against the criticism; they need only cry ‘sexist’ or ‘racist’ and, in their minds, end the argument. Pathetic.


You’d kind of think if you were going to make the charge that Trump is sexist, you’d have at least ONE piece of evidence or even an example. If you took Kelly’s name out of it, there is not one single word said by Trump that would indicate his criticism is aimed at a woman. Even so, criticizing a female is not sexism. I’m not a Trump guy but I am against the absolute insanity that the media has become. Journalism in America is truly dead. This article is absolutely worthless trash.

Nope. No proof that Trump is sexist. Except for the barbs about Fiorina’s looks. Except for the comments about Ariana Huffington’s looks. Except for his comment’s about Katy Tur as a reporter. Except when he made a smarmy comment to former playmate Brande Roderick about being on her knees.

Nope, none at all.

Expect another stampede of Trumproids defending their hero in 3… 2… 1…

UPDATE: Reuters reports that Trump has pulled out of the debate.

Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, told reporters after a combative news conference held by the candidate that Trump would definitely not be participating in the debate scheduled for Thursday in Des Moines, Iowa, and co-hosted by Google .

Bye Felicia!

Still support him, Trumproids?


We already know Donald Trump is a statist dick weasel. What, with his love for eminent domain that allows him to use the courts to line his own pockets, his desire to control parts of the Internet, his intention to force Apple to move production to the United States, his refusal to rule out registering people based on their religion, and his insistence that Americans can be deprived of their rights without due process, is there really much more proof that’s needed here?

Apparently, yes.

Scrolling through my Twitter feed this weekend, I came across this retweet. Trump thought it would be amusing to give some publicity and retweet a post by a proud white supremacist.

trump neo nazi

Several media outlets found this to be a worthy story, with at least one openly questioning whether this was just a failure to do the research.

“Was it a genuine mistake?” Asks the Inquisitr.

I mean, we’ve all made the mistake of posting something we didn’t properly research, right? It happens. We’re human.

But after quite a few Twitter users responded that “Donald Trumpovitz” (who has since changed his Twitter handle to “Bernie 4 Prez” and completely changed the look of his account to look as if he was a Sanders supporter) was an openly anti-Semitic, white supremacist troll,

The original account before the Internet outrage hit.

The original account before the Internet outrage hit.

Trump said nothing, and didn’t even bother removing the post. A cursory scan of @WhiteGenocideTM’s account would have revealed that this is not something a presidential candidate should be promoting. The fact that the account’s location proudly states “Jewmerica,” the fact that its avatar is a picture of George Lincoln Rockwell – the founder of the American Nazi Party – or the fact that it openly talks about “race mixers,” while posting vile photos of Jews on its Twitter feed, might have given Trump or his Twitter minions a clue about just what kind of account this was.

But Trump doesn’t care.

Trump has tossed out all pretense of having any respect for his voters. He thinks they’re so loyal frothing, nothing could possibly make them abandon him. “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” he joked this weekend. “My people stay.”

And you know what? His drooling acolytes may just prove the egomaniacal shit heel right.

Yes, those really are Soviet medals.

Yes, those really are Soviet medals.

The same day he retweeted the neo-nazi filth, his campaign posted a campaign video that mistook Soviets for U.S. military veterans. The campaign replaced the video with one that cut out the Soviets a few hours later, but still… For someone who claims he will take care of our vets and be the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, he might want to brush up on what U.S. troops actually look like.

After I posted a link to Trump’s new racist BFF, a Trumproid replied that it was just a “typo,” and then promptly blocked me.

They don’t want to hear it. Trump’s gibbering sycophants don’t care what he does or says. They don’t care about his history. They blindly drool that they support him in order to challenge the establishment, even as he brags that he’s a part of it. They’re showing the same blind devotion to Trump as Obama supporters show the President, and that’s scary. It’s like we haven’t learned anything.

By the way, if you want to see the original video about Trump’s promise to hold the VA accountable, it’s here. Soviet medals and all.

Coalition Against Trump


Mannational review… I give that tool way too much space on this blog already, but when a coalition of people who love and respect freedom stand up against the current GOP frontrunner, I need to say something. This is pretty big, folks. This is not just National Review bloviating against Trump. This is a compilation from some of liberty’s greats standing up in unison and rejecting Trump and rejecting his crazy, authoritarian agenda. These greats include libertarian firebrands such as Thomas Sowell and David Boaz, just to name a couple. He’s not a conservative. He doesn’t even come close to libertarian. He’s a statist fuck masquerading as someone who loves freedom.

But guess what! Using the word “freedom” to win an election does not equal loving freedom, and as I pointed out in a previous post, Trump’s agenda is anything but liberty-oriented. If anything, it’s a big government, fascist scheme, and angry meatheads are falling for it.

Trump promotes himself as an outsider, but he’s bought so many politicians, it’s hard to imagine him as such. And the very establishment Republican National Committee, upon seeing National Review’s call to reject Trump, has now stripped the publication of its hosting gig in the next debate. Yeah, some outsider.

National Review publisher Jack Fowler wrote Thursday that his publication was being stripped of its hosting duties for a GOP debate with CNN in late February.

“Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited. The reason: Our ‘Against Trump’ editorial and symposium. We expected this was coming. Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald,” Fowler wrote.

RNC spokesperson Sean Spicer confirmed to ABC News that National Review will no longer be participating in next month’s GOP debate.

Like there haven’t been other debate hosts that have been openly hostile to Republican candidates?

Ahhhh, but no. We will yank the debate gig from a publication that doesn’t like our candidate. That’s the ‘MURRICAN thing to do, right?

Never mind that the National Review editors are on point! Trump is a plague on conservatism. He’s a threat to freedom. He’s a caricature of what the left believes America’s right to be.

trumpAside from the litany of fascist diktats Trump is on the record as supporting – or at the very least not forcefully opposing, like any sane person would (forcing Mexico to pay for a wall using some unknown fascist mind-control unicorn dust to keep illegal aliens out, forcing manufacturers to bring jobs back to the United States from overseas, registering people based on their faith, depriving people of their rights without due process, depriving them of their property through eminent domain, etc. etc. etc.), he also supported the stimulus, the Wall Street bailouts (“it’s worth a shot“), and the auto bailouts. He luuuuuuves him some ethanol subsidies, and thinks we should pour more American taxpayer money into that black hole of crap. Is it any wonder that the establishment porkers of Iowa love Trump and hate Ted Cruz, who bravely stood up and said “NO MORE!” to dumping millions in taxpayer dollars into Iowa to pay it to grow corn?

Oh, and let’s not forget that Trump helped sell out Virginia with a nice, healthy donation to the campaign of Terry McAuliffe!

Can you get more establishment than that – on either side of the political spectrum? Can you get any more authoritarian than that – on either side of the political spectrum?

National Review is right.

Trump is not an outsider. He’s as establishment as it gets, and the fact that he posits himself as a “deal maker” should be a red flag to any so-called “conservative” who bitched and moaned about “RINO Republicans” being too willing to compromise.

There was an article recently detailing the type of personality that supports Trump.

My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate. Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.

I won’t pretend that the findings are objective or even remotely scientific, as I really haven’t had a chance to examine the methodology behind these results. That said, given Trump’s penchant for statism, the authoritarians’ love for him is unsurprising.

Please, people. Stop and think.

Trump claims that the National Review is a dying publication that “lost it’s [sic.] way.” Whether it’s true or not, when economic heavy hitters like Thomas Sowell publicly stand up in opposition, perhaps we should carefully listen.

Making America Great Again… through force


Sarah Palin America’s screeching Trailer Trash Barbie caricature just endorsed the GOP’s front runner Donald Trump America’s authoritarian ass weasel. I was subjected to her screeching, incoherent word salad on what seemed to be an endless loop on Fox News last night until I wanted to gouge my own eardrums out with an electric drill.

donald-trump-dumb-and-dumberSeriously, I weep for America. The meatheads who are supporting Trump are now squealing with glee that he got the endorsement of a woman who is making a career of whipping up excitement among America’s fucktard confederacy while offering no substance whatever. She now has glommed on to the campaign offering her the most attention in an apparent attempt to evade irrelevancy.

So she got up on the stage with Trump, who looked part psychotic, and part constipated, and she spewed a few platitudes.

Well, I am here because like you I know that it is now or never. I’m in it to win it because we believe in America, and we love our freedom.

Well, if we in America love our freedom, why in dog’s name would we EVER support Trump?

Is it his contention that people who are put on the terrorist watchlist – without due process, and sometimes without actually having any affiliation to terrorism whatsoever – should be denied their rights?

trumpIs it his use of eminent domain to line his own pockets while depriving Americans of their property?

Is it his refusal to rule out registration of people based on their faith?

Is it his desire to shut down parts of the Internet?

Or is it his latest promise to FORCE Apple to build computers in the United States?

Trump didn’t just single out Apple in his 45-minute speech – he also took a swipe at Ford, which produces many of its automobiles in Mexico.

“Free trade is good. But we have to do it [force them back to the US]. Or we won’t have a country left,” he said.

You know… for someone who claims to love freedom, Trump sure loves to use government force a lot! And for someone who claims to support freedom, Palin is certainly anxious to ride that authoritarian’s coattails out of obscurity and back into the spotlight.

Trump seems to comprehend economics about as well as Bernie Sanders does, that is to say not at all. Despite Palin’s glowing recommendation about Trump’s economic acumen, “Where, in the private sector, you actually have to balance budgets in order to prioritize,” Trump seems to have little understanding about what will keep companies from outsourcing.


If he wants to bring manufacturing back to the United States, perhaps making the conditions more attractive for companies to do so would make more sense. Making it more attractive for businesses involved in the supply chain to operate in the United States would probably help, since that’s part of the reason why Apple manufactures its phones in China. But what about the raw materials that are mined in China? Is Trump going to produce a magical unicorn to shit the raw materials needed to produce an iPhone here in the United States?

Force Apple to relocate its manufacturing facility back to the United States, and you’ve just increased the cost of making an iPhone, because raw materials have to be shipped from Asia to Apple’s factories here. Aren’t iPhones expensive enough already?

Plus, from what I’m reading, manufacturing in the United States is on the rise, not on the decline, and it is automation that is largely responsible for any reduction in American manufacturing jobs, not trade, but note how quickly Trump wants to kick free trade in the nuts.

Hey… spew enough platitudes without any coherent planning or strategy behind them, and the oaf contingency lines up to worship you!

Yeah, he’ll FORCE Mexico to pay for a wall to keep illegal aliens out.

Yeah, he’ll FORCE manufacturers to bring jobs back to the United States from overseas.

Yeah, he wants a “deportation FORCE.”

He’ll FORCE us to be great again.

And the fact that the simpletons who support him don’t see the contradictions in his statements or the vapid cluelessness in Palin’s screeching bromides makes me really wonder about the future of America.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: