The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Paul Ryan, Another Guy Who Never Built A Thing
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As of May 7, the outgoing neoconservative priestly cast had raised its game. Since Donald Trump has effectively clinched the Republican Party’s nomination, based on his America First platform, they had an ultimatum for him: Stop your nonsense and we’ll take you back.

If Trump quits denouncing George Bush and his Good War, and starts to blame only Barack Obama for Iraq—said commentator-cum-soldier-cum-global crusader Pete Hegseth to an exultant Gretchen Carlson at the Fox News Channel—all would be forgiven. Recall, Trump called Bush a liar and went on to win South Carolina … and Nevada. He continues to denounce the “made by Bush” Iraq war.

But now that Trump has won the nomination, the losing neoconservatives are insisting he get real, renounce the winning plank and perjure himself to The People.

Well, of course. To the losers belong the spoils.

As if on cue, after the deciding Indiana primary, Fox News broadcaster Sean Hannity began beating on breast, begging Trump to hire failed candidates—the kind the country was fleeing. Some of the candidates offered-up by Hannity for his Party healing circle: Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, the man who had scolded former GOP nominee Mitt Romney, in 2012, for his candid and correct “47 percent” comment. (“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for [president Obama] no matter what … who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them.”)

Touted too by Hannity was South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. This divisive Party favorite had chosen last year to excise a part of Southern history: Haley tore down the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia from the State House grounds, even though the Confederate flag had never flown over an official Confederate building, and “was a battle flag intended to honor the great commander Robert E. Lee.”

The most venomous cobra head to rise spitting at Trump has been House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“I’m just not ready to back Mr. Trump,” he noodled to the networks. “The burden of unifying the party” was Trump’s. To get a nod from the Speaker, the “presumptive nominee” would need to “appeal to all Americans in every walk of life, every background, a majority of independents and discerning Democrats.” (Much as Mitt Romney did, right, Mr. Ryan?)

To which the presumptive nominee responded gallantly: “I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan’s agenda. The American people have been treated so badly for so long that it’s about time for politicians to put them first!”

ORDER IT NOW

While neoconservatives like Paul Ryan claim—even believe—they are making “the very idea of political conservatism more acceptable to a majority of American voters” (in the words of scholar Paul Gottfried, scourge of the neocons), their impetus consists in marketing a bastardized idea of American conservatism. Where they haven’t already converted people to liberal multiculturalism, pluralism and carefully crafted globalism; their election strategy has been to alienate the natural Republican core constituency in favor of courting powerful, well-heeled minorities.

The ousted core constituency has coalesced around Trump.

Speaker Ryan, who voted for the $1.1 trillion 2016 Omnibus Spending Bill, last December, is demanding Trump show him his conservative credentials. This is as though a guy who never built a thing were to mock a man who has built lots of things. This, too, happened; Obama has mocked Trump’s private productive-sector achievements.

With the Republican establishment’s death rattle growing raspier by the day, here’s what observers need to take away from the Ryan contretemps ongoing. Over to Trump:

Paul Ryan said that I inherited something very special, the Republican Party. Wrong, I didn’t inherit it; I won it with millions of voters!

How many Americans voted for Speaker Ryan, who represents a mere congressional district in Wisconsin? To the role of Speaker, moreover, Ryan was elected by the House of Representatives, not by The People. To be precise, only 236 members of a full House chose Ryan as their speaker.

The People have chosen Trump.

Millions of them.

The People’s voice is not God’s voice—no libertarian worth his salt would countenance raw democracy, a dispensation in which majorities overrule the rights of individuals. But in the confrontation between Paul Ryan and Trump, the Force is with The Donald.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Donald Trump, Paul Ryan 
Hide 84 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Kyle a says:

    so when has a liberal like Ryan ever supported anything resembling a conservative position? Between him and the moron govenor of that state( get at least a piece of paper from a two year school dolt) it’s no wonder Wisconsins better days where when Laverne and Shirley were labeling beer bottles.

    • Agree: edNels
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  2. “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for [president Obama] no matter what … who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them.”

    “There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what … who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. … These are people who pay no income tax. … and so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives,” Romney said.

    The second quote is from here:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/09/romneys-47-percent-chosen-as-years-best-quote/1756833/

    Because I am dependent on Social Security and Medicare I am one of Romney’s 47%. I am now 71 years old. I have been working (part time now) since I was 14. I am a veteran and I have no criminal record. And here is the kicker – I’m a white guy. It’s ok for a Republican to say these things about black and brown people. Didn’t Romney know that to get to 47% he would have to stigmatize some white folks? Of course even Romney is not stupid enough to alienate 47% of Americans while running for office. He had reason to believe that I would never find out what he said. One of my own secretly recorded the asshole. That bartender should get the BFM (Big Fucking Medal).

    But I’m not defending Jindal. I live in Louisiana. He broke Louisiana to please Grover Norquist in the insane belief that he had a future in national politics.

    Hannity? I hate his guts. I will let it go at that. Ryan is a whore just like his governor.

    My contempt for Mitt and his ilk is more visceral than his contempt for me I am sure. I am solidly and permanently behind Donald Trump. His enemies are my enemies. Its not just politics. It’s personal. THEY MADE IT PERSONAL.

  3. Renoman says:

    Ryan is the poster child of the old school GOP that EVERYONE hates. I hope Trump fires his ass along with all his neocon arse licking buddies.

    • Replies: @Eric Novak
    , @Tani J
  4. John C says:

    Doesn’t getting coffee and writing papers for Jack Kemp count?

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Clyde
  5. Piss on Paul Ryan, that bought-and-paid-for hack. He’s a perfect example of everything that’s wrong with Washington, District of Corruption.

    Vote Trump!

    • Replies: @edNels
  6. Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    There was a time when Conservatives had a more uptight and proper political style.

    But boomer Clinton changed all that, campaigning with his saxophone and acting like a late night party dude.

    And Libs thought this new style of politics would favor the more easy-going Libs over the uptight and repressed Conservatives.

    But once this looser kind of celeb-populist politics became the norm, it gave an opening to a ‘boor’ like Trump.

    Well, I guess if homos can come out of the closet, American nationalists are coming out of the closet too.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  7. Who does Paul Ryan really think he is? If he believes he is a leader he better take a look behind himself. What he will find is the establishment losers that can’t face the fact that their brand of Conservatism is being rejected by the voters. I have been a conservative for over 50 years and feel I have to qualify that by stating that I am a traditional conservative as opposed to being a “neocon”. Paul Ryan is a neocon phony like the Bush Crime Family and so many others. I will get my satisfaction by donating to Paul Nehlen who is opposing Ryan in the primary in August. Not being a Wisconsin resident it is my way of casting a vote.

    • Agree: artichoke
  8. @Renoman

    Ryan is being primaried. I intent to donate to the challenger.

  9. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:
    @WorkingClass

    Mitt Romney is Mormon…

    put that in the mix

    • Replies: @artichoke
    , @dr kill
  10. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:
    @Orville H. Larson

    Paul Ryan looks exactly like Eddie Munster… My good freind from Brooklyn Norman Goldman, said that too,he had a radio show, and a website… I really like that guy… Hey Norman !!

    • Replies: @Jeff Davis
  11. Numinous says:

    Donald Trump never built a thing either. He hires builders to do the building. His expertise lies in facilitation, negotiation, and often, bending the rules to get things done. Come to think of it, those are very useful skills for running a political campaign, and even being a successful politician.

    Scott Alexander wrote a blog post talking about Trump’s actual work here.

    • Replies: @artichoke
    , @rod1963
  12. Realist says:

    Ilana I agree with you about Ryan. But you should address the actions of Jewish pseudo-conservatives(the only true neoconservatives), such as Kristol, Krauthammer and others. It is apparent they are not for America First.

    What is your definition of neocon?

    • Replies: @artichoke
  13. Realist says:
    @John C

    Kemp was a dumb ass jock.

  14. Kiza says:

    The only thing that the Neoconservatives such as Paul Ryan conserve is the privilege of the chosen people (banksters, Zionists and similar).

    The US political system is made up of the same privileged people divided into two football teams, the Coca-Cola Party and the Pepsi-Cola Party, the Tweedledum Party and the Tweedledee Party. Trump may be trying to do the impossible – to create a distinction between the two parties.

    There are only two possibilities with Trump:
    1) Plata – he is just another faux agent-of-change just like Obama, o
    2) Plomo – he continues to challenge the privileged and gets assassinated (they killed Kennedy for much less).

    • Agree: geokat62, Sam Shama, edNels
    • Replies: @artichoke
    , @Sam Shama
  15. geokat62 says:
    @Priss Factor

    American nationalists

    Thanks, Priss. It has a much better ring to it than WN.

    Now, if we can only get Joe to start using this term.

  16. bondo says:

    ryan never built anything?
    checked his panama, nevada, delaware banks accounts

  17. Ryan is another RINO who talks conservative when campaigning among the unwashed savages in flyover country. But once he’s got power, he becomes another over-entitled, egotistical squatter on the squish left. He will probably retain his seat in Wisconsin… more’s the pity. He needs to be baptized in the waters of Eric Cantor to help him remember who works for whom.

  18. Clyde says:
    @John C

    Doesn’t getting coffee and writing papers for Jack Kemp count?

    Kemp was an open borders idiot with a very limited repertoire that came from his NFL days. Paul Ryan worked for Kemp at his DC think tank. Paul Ryan is also a student of Ayn Rand…at least in his mind he is. Details are on the internet….
    I hear Ryan’s wife comes from money so Ryan has options and offers of cushy lobbying jobs.

    • Agree: edNels
  19. Rehmat says:

    The so-called “neoconservatives” term is in fact a term to hide the Zionist Jewish lobbyists. In 2010, Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz claimed that more than 50% of these “neoconservatives” were Zionist Jews tied to AIPAC.

    A more appropriate term for these American traitors would be: ZIOCONSERVATIVES.

    Elliott Abrams, a senior adviser to GOP’s 2012 vice-president nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, is a convicted White House staffer. He is a ‘senior fellow’ at CFR, one of top pro-Israel think tank.

    On December 6, 2012, three wise Jews, who served as foreign policy advisers to the White House, met at a dinner party arranged in their honor in a New York hotel by the Washington-based Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a spin-off the powerful Jewish Israel Lobby (AIPAC). The three were Dennis Ross, senior adviser to Obama on Iran until last year, Elliot Abrams, convicted deputy national security adviser to president Dubya Bush and James F. Jeffrey, former US ambassador to Turkey and Iraq. Jeffrey joined WINEP a few months ago.

    The wise Jews told their Zionist Jew host, Robert Satloff, director WINEP that if Iran doesn’t stop its enrichment activities by the end of 2013 – United States will attack the Islamic Republic in 2014.

    “I think there is the stomach in this administration, and this President, that if diplomacy fails, force will be used,” said Dennis Ross.

    “I think if we don’t get a negotiated settlement, and these guys are actually on the threshold as Obama said during the campaign, then the president is going to take military action,” said Jeffrey. He also predicted the decision will come halfway through 2013.

    Elliott Abrams, as senior adviser to GOP’s vice-president nominee Rep. Paul Ryan argued in August 2012 that neither Zionist regime nor Iranian regime think the Obama administration is “serious” about attacking Iran and the only way to push Obama to do that would be having pro-Israel dominated Congress vote for war.

    Dennis Ross is a counselor at WINEP which produces most hawkish anti-Iran-Syria propaganda for Israeli interests in the region. For example, Patrick Clawson, director of research at WINEP, had suggested in September 2012 that United States should “manufacture a situation” that would require Washington to take military action against Iran. Interestingly, the group’s managing director is an Islamophobe Hindu, Michael singh. Dennis has been predicting American military attack on Iran since Obama entered the White House four years ago……

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/12/11/three-wise-jews-obama-to-attack-iran-in-2014/

  20. artichoke says:
    @Numinous

    He understands the job of pretty much all the people he hires, at least enough to evaluate its quality roughly over the long term. He has a reputation for quality that has helped build his brand. Apartment buyers in NYC will pay a significant premium per square foot to buy in a Trump building, because they know there will be no problems.

    This sounds like the right skillset for a president with an agenda of accomplishing some projects, especially in a world where a lot of people will be trying to screw up those projects.

  21. artichoke says:
    @Kiza

    Trump is trying to crack both parties along an axis that is generally perpendicular to that of the difference between them. Thus he gets some right wing Republicans and some Sanders Democrats. I would just call the difference corrupt vs. non-corrupt. The principle of putting your voters first is so fundamental, anything else is by definition corruption isn’t it?

    • Agree: Kiza
  22. artichoke says:
    @Realist

    I’d say Ryan is a much worse neocon than say Krauthammer. Krauthammer never appropriated a single dollar to Obama for his bad projects. The worst neocon is the one who actually hurts us, not the flapjaw.

  23. artichoke says:
    @edNels

    I don’t know how to put it in the mix properly. I don’t think all Mormons are corrupt like George and Mitt Romney. Is the Mormon leadership all corrupt like that?

    • Replies: @edNels
  24. Does it not shock us all that this country (USA) still has the lights on, given the full court press of attacks on its backbone by the scum pundit class and their whore politicians?

    From NRO to WaPo and on to HuffPo and Gannett, in lockstep with their brain-washing machine buddies in Hollywood, the number of people pulling in Big $$ selling insanity and lies while attacking the Geese that lay ALL the golden eggs is simply amazing.

    The shared insanity of these people is beyond that of Jim Jones’ Peoples Temple Cultists.

    Either they’re all aliens (Martian or simply AIPAC- and Fabian Society-related) seeking to destroy Earth before they take over, or they occupy the role of Jim Jones’ lieutenants who went around forcing the poison on reluctant members or outright shooting them and their children before killing themselves.

    I sincerely wish I could arrange to have all those people relocated to a large island where they would be surrounded by only those with whom they work and the millions of useless people who refuse to help themselves. They could make Krugman their Sec of Treasury, and appoint one or another Neocon-Trotskyist as king. Within 90 days the only ones left alive would be eating the rest.

  25. AmericanaCON [AKA "Monkeyman"] says:

    I think Trump strategy in the GOP race was to go as far as he could on all issues at hand. He raised the stakes and by doing he flattened the competition. It also made it possible for him to have a better position in the negotiations with the GOP leadership. Naturally, Trump is now backing down on several on his positions. He recently backed down on his Muslim ban. He said the following to Fox News;

    – “(TRUMP) Well I assume he denies there is Islamic terrorism. There is Islamic radical terrorism all over the world right now. It’s a disaster what’s going on. I assume he is denying that. I assume he is like our President that’s denying its taking place. We have a serious problem, it’s a temporary ban, it hasn’t been called for yet, nobody’s done it, this is just a suggestion until we find out what’s going on. We have radical Islamic terrorism all over the world, you can go to Paris, you can go to San Bernardino, all over the world, if they want to deny it, they can deny it, I don’t choose to deny it.”

    https://radio.foxnews.com/2016/05/11/kilmeades-wide-ranging-interview-w-donald-trump-on-his-vp-shortlist-joe-biden-newly-elected-london-mayor-megyn-kellys-special-more/

    Apparently, he has 7-8 people working on it including Rudy Giuliani. Most likely it will be buried in paper and forgotten. Trade, immigration, Wall and the Muslim ban (an insane position although tactical smart because it turn the discourse to the right) has been Trumps key issues which gave him the nomination. He has backed down on one of his key issues. Instead he claims he will not allow immigration from Syria which was more or less the same position which Ted Cruz held. Trump still believe illegal immigrants ought to be deported by he is open to let them in again. He has also flip-flopped back and forth on HB1 Visas which under a period made him less of an immigration patriot than Cruz. The coming months Trump will desert more of his key-positions.

    Lindsay Graham seems to move towards Trumps side. It would be my guess that Trump has adopted a few of neo-conservative positions. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump in the end of the summer will praise globalism. However, Trump will not be elected if he back down on the wall and trade. He still talks about trade but lesser about the wall. The wall is however very doable and it would bring temporary jobs. An increasing number of GOP elites seem to be okay with the wall. Donald Trump’s view on trade is much more disliked and much more dangerous for the elites. I think (Trump is a former member of Reform Party) that this is his most beloved issue just like Ross Perot. Trump continues to blast NAFTA and Obama trade. I think part people like Sean Hannity and the far-right within the party are worried. Hannity have even asked Trump to write his positions down. Why? Well, I think Hannity and the rest of them fear that Trump will just switch positions and then they will end up on the wrong side.

    What Trump has done is to push the discussion to the right. Naturally, people understand that globalization is beneficiary for the top twenty-five percent income earners (as new highly skilled jobs are created through specialization) but not for the working and middle class. The reason why so many people go to college and university is because the jobs in the middle are disappearing. The consequence (disregarding the lower quality of students and universities) is however dire as there is simply not enough highly skilled jobs to go around so a college degree is losing it value on the market just like high school since it became public. We are heading to a society you are either “on top” or on the “bottom” with an ever increasing group of young (mostly white) people who come from middle to upper-middle class families and today live in severe debt and poverty.

    Although the elites don’t care they have been forced to at least discuss the issue because of Donald Trump. Cutting a few taxes do not cut it as the unemployment and underunemployment it is primarily driven by outsourcing and in sourcing (immigration). Trump will not contribute to policy change but he will contribute to change in discourse. This is what he has contributed to public debate after this election.

    …..

    So what will happen if Trump wins? Well, Trump will do just like Ronald Reagan. He will flip-flop when in office. I think Trump may complete the already existing wall which GOP and DEM defunded but further than that I don’t think Trump will go. Donald has the GOP elites “balls” in his hand and he knows it. He could destroy the party. However, he also knows that the GOP elite could destroy him. It is basically about game theory now and of course playing chicken with Conservative Inc, GOP establishment and the donor class. In the end you cannot change anything if you don’t replace the elites and the only way of doing it if they are voted out of office. This will not happen in United States but it is happening in Europe and parts of Asia. The next president (although only a ceremonial position) may be Norbert Hofer, member of the nationalist Freedom Party of Austria. The EU referendum in UK will be very interesting. If the UK leave the European Union the ramifications would be enormous.

    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    , @tbraton
  26. Biff says:

    comment. (“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for [president Obama] no matter what … who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them.”)

    Ryan has been living off the government all his life, but I doubt he considers himself one of the 47%.

  27. MEDIA LIARS & TRAITORS
    Here is the full text of the Agreement between Trump and Ryan the Lying Media hides:
    Joint statement from House Speaker Paul Ryan and Donald J. Trump, May 12, 2016

    The United States cannot afford another four years of the Obama White House, which is what Hillary Clinton represents. That is why it’s critical that Republicans unite around our shared principles, advance a conservative agenda, and do all we can to win this fall.
    With that focus, we had a great conversation this morning. While we were honest about our few differences, we recognize that there are also many important areas of common ground. We will be having additional discussions, but remain confident there’s a great opportunity to unify our party and win this fall, and we are totally committed to working together to achieve that goal.

    We are extremely proud of the fact that many millions of new voters have entered the primary system, far more than ever before in the Republican Party’s history. This was our first meeting, but it was a very positive step toward unification.

    Not one of the major Media printed out this short text on their Internet sites, and not one major Media read this short statement to their listeners. And why? Because the statement signed by both parties shows a very positive side of the Republican Party getting itself together and it shows Trump is a good light as well. These are two things the major Media hates like poison, Trump and the GOP. They are all totally committed to Hillary and any, and everything that is labelled Democrat. Shun these lying traitorous Networks, and shun advertisers that advertise on them.

    • Replies: @edNels
  28. Sam Shama says:
    @Kiza

    Hey Kiza
    I have been saying this for a period of time [in my comments, many of them with Geo], that a strong POTUS can cut down to tolerable size, the influence of the neocons, including the Lobby. I think we might have one in Trump, but somewhat concerned re: what concessions he ends up offering; wait and see I suppose, don’t we? Assassination? Well I dearly hope not. Mainly, I am eager that his economic policies remain true to his promises and not disappoint with a change of course post election.

    btw, last night while surfing the channels I paused at Fox news, where Kristol’s sneering-and-smarmy head – I don’t know how he performs, this surely wearisome act – was on prominent display. My contempt for him touched a new high.

    • Agree: tbraton
    • Replies: @Jeff Davis
  29. Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    It’s interesting that Obama admin began with Malcolm Gladwell as the darling face of post-racial America but closes with Tahenisi Coates as the bitter face of return to blood.

    I guess even Libs realized that Gladwell’s was a fantasy blackness that ignored too many realities.

    Coates is full of shi* but he does get across the culture of rage and self-aggrandizement in the black community.

    Libs react to him like they did to DO THE RIGHT THING. He discusses stuff the Libs had been wishing away for so long but returned with riots and BLM.

    Libs are beginning to feel guilt about their post-racial fantasy that ignored too many dark truths about black America.

    • Replies: @artichoke
  30. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Trump has shown a lot of natural political instinct, something that can’t be acquired by reading a book or attending a seminar. This is probably why he’s been successful in his career. He has to be careful not to let himself be hamstrung by getting saddled with people from the party that he may not feel comfortable with for the sake of ‘unity’ or ‘reconciliation’. He should go with his gut.
    This campaign has highlighted the gaps between all the different schools of thought. Instead of this dogged attachment to an increasingly nonexistent ‘unity’ what the country needs is for the parties to split. A split in the Republican party is way overdue and would be a healthy development. People like Ryan represent no one and stand for nothing. What is this ‘conservatism’ that they all keep talking about and what is it that they’re claiming they want to conserve?

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  31. Sam Shama says:

    The People’s voice is not God’s voice—no libertarian worth his salt would countenance raw democracy, a dispensation in which majorities overrule the rights of individuals. But in the confrontation between Paul Ryan and Trump, the Force is with The Donald

    Ilana, once again, I find myself both agreeing and gainsaying with the contents of your article. The agreement, fortunately, has to do with the overall spirit of the essay, its rejection of the neocon doctrines, while embracing the unassailable fact of Mr. Trump’s sweep of votes, implying therefore, your acceptance of majoritarianism.

    You then perform a volte-face at the end, with the obligatory panegyric to libertarianism – and, from all I can discern, your particular variety is not simply a comforting appeal for reductions in intrusive state machinery in private affairs, but rather, the output of an excess of Rand. Ayn that is.

    Barry Goldwater’s conservative coalition and the credit it afforded the libertarian movement, came after a prolonged period of the country, indeed the globe, first benefiting, and then overdosing on the New Deal.

    Things go in cycles, I need hardly point out. We have now on our hands, the pernicious effects of the political duopoly imposing decades of regulatory capture by the John Galts – you know the “job creators” who enjoy the preferential capital gains taxation – and, simply put, we need to change that calculus; where Trump’s proposals are classic Keynesian, which, if he holds steady sails on, will force Ryan & Co. to recant then embrace, very much like Gilder circa 1980. (http://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/trump-or-ryan-who-speaks-for-gop/%5D

    A writer of your calibre, I expect to do so.

  32. Astorian says:

    Ha! You got me, Ilana. I never built a huge successful casino like the Taj Mahal.

    I never built a huge, successful airline like Trump Airlines.

    I never built a huge, successful venture like Trump Steaks or Trump Water.

    I didn’t start with nothing like Donald Trump, who grew up dirt poor and made a fortune ALL BY HIMSELF!!!!

    Donald Trump is the kind of man who creates wealth- NOT the kind of guy who started with $300 million of his Dad’s money, ran dozens of businesses into the ground, then declared bankruptcy and left someone else holding the bag.

    If only I were a real man like Donald (sob).

    • Replies: @Druid
    , @Herman Stottman
  33. @Kyle a

    So HE’s a “dolt” for not having an associate’s degree, but you can’t spell the word “were”, don’t know that “two-year” needs a hyphen, don’t know that the possessive “Wisconsin’s” needs an apostrophe, and refer to a moronic TV show. Yeah, he’s the uneducated and unintelligent one.

    Anyway, what kind of arrogant elitist bullshit is it that you want us to look down on a man because he doesn’t have an associate’s degree or bachelor’s degree? For example, my father has neither, yet clearly he can spell and reason better than you.

    Having said that, I’m not a fan of Scott Walker or Paul Ryan, either, and I hope Trump attacks Ryan as the dishonest, untrustworthy, big-government, open-borders tool that he is.

    • Replies: @dahoit
  34. Priss Factor [AKA "Dominique Francon Society"] says: • Website

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Rise_(film)

    High-topia or Hitopia into dystopia.

  35. @anonymous

    Yes, you’re right, the old parties need to split and perhaps go out of their sordid “business” entirely.

    We need more “major” parties representing more shades of opinion and different interests. For example, the electorate would benefit from greater exposure and a fairer chance for the Green Party on the Left, the Libertarian Party, and a nationalist and/or European-American party on the right.

    Every general-election debate should include the nominees of the FOUR or FIVE parties that won the largest number of popular votes in the previous presidential election.

    Ballot-access laws need to be made less restrictive. The top five vote-getters in a State from the previous election for an office should automatically have their parties on the ballot in that State for that office the next time around — no need to hire people to collect signatures to get on, or back on, the ballot.

    And personally, I recommend a strong if rebuttable presumption against voting for any current incumbent (in primary and general election) and against voting for anyone who has ever “served” in office as a Republican or Democrat.

  36. @WorkingClass

    Agree with much of what you said, and how you feel as well.

    But don’t you see a difference between Social Security and Medicare, as opposed to Medicaid and food stamps?

    Wouldn’t Romney’s comment be both fair and largely accurate when applied to Medicaid and food-stamp recipients, at least long-term recipients?

    Doesn’t it make sense that many of us (including lifelong Republicans) resent being taxed for Medicaid and food stamps, but on balance don’t mind paying for SocSec and Medicare?

    SocSec and Medicare most commonly benefit normal, patriotic, civilized Americans who worked their whole lives and paid substantial taxes to the fed gov — and right now and in the near future, that age cohort is overwhelmingly white European-Americans, as well.

    By contrast, Medicaid and food stamps help some good people who are trying their best, but commonly benefit people who have done little to no productive work for years or for their entire lives.

    Romney’s comment was ill-advised in a political campaign for a national audience, and it overstated the reality. But there’s a large, large grain of truth in the 47% comment, too.

    Maybe the number should have been 27% or 37% instead. That would better capture the vast, growing number of long-term slothful Medicaid and food stamp recipients, rather than people going through a hard time or receiving benefits in their old age that they paid a lot for, but he was more right than wrong.

    A large and growing chunk of the American population and electorate have no intention of ever working hard to support themselves and their multiple illegitimate children, since we are apparently going to put up with their lazy asses forever. Accordingly they will not even consider voting for a conservative, libertarian, or otherwise limited-government / greater-individual-responsibility party.

    • Replies: @Tani J
    , @bluedog
    , @WorkingClass
  37. edNels says:
    @FounderChurch

    Donald Trump is some what of a maverick, and that’s to his credit, but will he be able to build any kind of decent team? He shouldn’t be getting too cozy with Eddie Munster look alike Ryan, and that guy raised on food stamps and on the dole all his life, and straight to DC for more tapping the public troff. But Austerity for everybody else!!

    He would love to take your nice pension away Founder S. Oh, have you been donating your SS to charity? All that Austerity, how about a portion of the bailout/bailin, to the paupers, so they can support retail sails on Mainstreet… ?

  38. Tani J says:
    @Renoman

    Neocons are a bonafide 5th column in the USA – check out anything Sniegosky has to say or read his “the Transparent Kabal” book. They are NOT conservatives at all – and they behave like Trotskyites. they pushed GW Bush into the Iraq war catastrophe that has fast forwarded the end of western civilization and the people that created it. THAT is what GW Bush did, with Obama and Hillary finishing it.

    PERHAPS Trump can fix this – but he’d have to say good bye to the EU and their NATO bs, maybe get out of the UN and start to fight wars like we did in WW2 – BEFORE the Geneva convention was invented to tie our hands against people that kill anyone they want.

    Terrorists hide among civilians – and the civililians KNOW who they are and help to hide them. That makes them combatants, not civilians. Think of what the US and UK did to Dresden and go from there. We need to win win. Not lose lose.

    And as far as those “pigs in blanket fry them like bacon” terrorists go – the police should be ordered to NOT GO into those areas no matter what happens – let the BLM morons kill each other and DO NOT respond to any calls for police. Cordon the areas off. BLM is a terrorist group that wants to kill our police. Police therefore, should be ordered to NOT RESPOND to anything in areas where those people live. THAT would be real. and announce it, state it.

    “You want to fry our police like bacon, therefore, you are ON YOUR OWN.”

  39. Tani J says:
    @RadicalCenter

    They should get into the issue of welfare – promiscuous women with tons of kids that get big checks. Welfare was never intended for them – but Johnson changed all that with his insanity.

    If anything, Welfare should be TAXED, including social security taxes. MANY of us seniors are LIVING on a meager social security check of 800 or so a month and due to having some savings, do not qualify for food stamps or medicaid. When a car needs repair, then what? We are screwed, that’s what.

    Since LBJ the quality of life and the cost of living have gone to hell. America, imo, is finished.

  40. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:
    @artichoke

    No of course not, not any large group of people are all anything, but, one thing that I have witnessed when folks are zeolots, look out, there something hiding behind the hipocricy, something, somewhere, and I don’t go for self described ”Chosen people” no way, and the Jewish, and the Mormans, do that some often enough, as well as like this guy I used to know, calls himself ”Saved by Christ” tried to convince me to go down to the nearest born again evangelical establishment and ” get yerseff saved, cause then you don’t have to go around feelin guilty no more, ’cause you is saved!

    I’t was just a free ticket to ride, since we know we are sinners, anyway, (original sin at that, to boot.)

    Incidentally some of these religeons are major players internationally and politically… so just careful, about locking any horns with those guys, nope, no problem.

    • Replies: @Stonehands
  41. bluedog says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Why they voted for one in 2000 and again in 2004, where have you been, and by the time he got done he had gutted the Constitution and run up a $3 trillion dollar tab that’s why I stay as far from a so called conservative as I can get.Reminds me of the old saying a good conservative goes to church every Sunday to show the town what a good Christian he is, then steals the collection plate on his way out,to pay for his time and that’s says it all.!!!

  42. artichoke says:
    @Priss Factor

    It’s his final 2 years, he has no more elections left and so it’s time to get in his final licks, and perhaps build his creds with the people who support him (next stop: UN Secretary General? or something else?) , while leaving the blowback to the next administration.

  43. Druid says:
    @Astorian

    If that’s really you, the real Paul Ryan, you’re an arsehole!

  44. dr kill says:
    @edNels

    I feel that believing in Mormonism is a BFD. Anyone who really believes that stuff is not smart enough to be my President. My mechanic, fine. School bus driver, fine. But not President.

    • Replies: @edNels
    , @edNels
  45. @Astorian

    Hey Paul Ryan, We all know you became wealthy the old fashion way. You married it. If it weren’t for your wife’s inheritance you would just be a failed carpenter feeding at the public trough all these years. Maybe you should try the private sector, other than a lobbyist and see if you can come close to Trump. You are a loser.

  46. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:
    @dr kill

    well yeah, but realisie these guys are on the handles… these guys are the guys, who make the moves… and we are down stream and we are recipient… we etc. etc.

  47. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:
    @dr kill

    ok, but it isn’about smart per se… see, the bastards are quite smart…. and they are organized!

    So they are smart, but they aren’t very moral… no, just smart, clever, devious, etc.etc.!

  48. @edNels

    “…..as well as like this guy I used to know, calls himself ”Saved by Christ” tried to convince me to go down to the nearest born again evangelical establishment and ” get yerseff saved, cause then you don’t have to go around feelin guilty no more, ’cause you is saved!I’t was just a free ticket to ride…”

    Mans schemes for self- rule are coming to an ignominious ending. As we careen towards one world government, and the Vatican corrals its victims into one world religion, and the debt- leveraged economy leads us into a cashless society- ask yourself one honest question:
    Was this man Jesus, who he claimed to be? Consider letting go of your pride… Salvation is a free gift, if you will humble yourself and honestly repent of the ways of the world, then you will be counted among the saved!

    • Agree: edNels
  49. @AmericanaCON

    You can see which way the Trump wind blows by his choice for VP.

  50. Mark F. says:

    Ms. Mercer has gone stark raving bananas over Trump. Yes, we know Paul Ryan and the “establishment” stink. But Trump isn’t anything close to a libertarian or a classical liberal. He’s taken many awful positions, and is a liar and a con artist. He’s coarse, rude and a megalomaniac with an ego the size of New York. Woman, come to your senses!

  51. […] just read Ilana Mercer’s blistering attack on the pseudo-conservative credentials of Donald Trump’s “conservative” […]

  52. […] just read Ilana Mercer’s blistering attack on the pseudo-conservative credentials of Donald Trump’s “conservative” […]

  53. @Mark F.

    Someday, when Ilana Mercer “comes to her senses,” she will realize that she doesn’t really want to be a libertarian or a classical liberal either.

  54. tbraton says:
    @AmericanaCON

    Since this is your first post on unz.com, I assume you are posting just to undercut Trump and sow some doubts among prospective voters. I notice that you make no reference to Trump’s foreign policy positions which have been relatively consistent and in total opposition to the foreign policy positions of Hillary Clinton, who voted for the Iraq War as Senator, pushed the illegal war against Libya and Qaddafi as SOS, and has argued as a 2016 candidate for illegal “no-fly zones” in Syria, which would be like flirting with WWIII. Trump has opposed the Iraq War, the Libyan War and no-fly zones over Syria. He also opposes involvement in Ukraine, which Hillary supports. As President, he would not be as dependent on Congress in the foreign policy area as he will be in the areas of immigration that you cite.

    • Replies: @Mark F.
    , @rod1963
  55. @edNels

    I thought the same thing. On account of which I have never been able to take him seriously. I figured he was the illegitimate spawn of Eddie Munster and Minnie Mouse.

  56. @Sam Shama

    “How do we account for the fact that the pundits and media outlets who have been wrong about everything are still considered reliably “mainstream” – and still get to determine the parameters of allowable debate?

    Let’s take the most egregious case imaginable – Bill Kristol. Here is someone who has been wrong about absolutely everything for as long as anyone can remember. On the foreign policy front, he wasn’t just on the wrong side of the barricades, he was wrong about the outcomes of our disastrous interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya. Iraq would be a “two month” war, and in Afghanistan we would be welcomed as “liberators” (just like in Iraq!). “If we prevail in Libya,” he averred, “the victory will be America’s.” We did indeed succeed in overthrowing Gaddafi: and shortly afterwards, a US ambassador was dead and terrorists were cavorting in the swimming pool of our former embassy.

    When it comes to the domestic front, his record is even more dismal: he predicted Mitt Romney would be a strong GOP candidate for President, he said Barack Obama wouldn’t beat Hillary in a single primary, and he continually presaged the downfall of Donald Trump in the Republican primaries.

    It’s become something of a standing joke that the “Kristol ball” is a nearly infallible indicator of what isn’t going to happen. …”

    Excerpt from: http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2016/05/12/toldja-right-count-anymore/

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  57. Mark F. says:
    @tbraton

    He has taken a few good foreign policy positions. And he has taken many awful ones, like approving of torture and deliberately killing innocent people, and blocking most Muslims from entering the country.

    At any rate, he has lied so much I fail to see how you can trust anything he says.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  58. rod1963 says:
    @Numinous

    Not only did Ryan never build anything but he never held a job outside of government. A complete parasite. As for his wealth – he married the daughter from a wealthy Democratic family, who now BTW is a well known Democratic lobbyist herself.

    You can’t get any lower than a loser and traitor like Ryan.

    As for Trump, he has other people build HIS projects. That’s what developers do and he’s a pretty successful. It’s clear he also takes pride in his projects unlike other developers such as Kaufman and Broad(now KB Homes) who were notorious for slip shop construction practices that resulted in entire tracts having problems.

  59. rod1963 says:
    @Mark F.

    Trump is head and shoulders above those who competed against him including the very obnoxious and very junior senator Rand Paul. Now there is a egomaniac. He had no track record, just his fathers last name to carry him.

    People know Trump is not perfect, but he’s the only one who articulated a pro-American agenda instead of Globalist/Neoliberal agenda that has been typical of Republicans and Libertarians.

    Ilana can support whom she wants, she’s smart enough not be bound by ideological blinders. She knows what is at stake and will support anyone which hopefully can stem the tide of destruction that is facing the West and in this case means Trump.

  60. rod1963 says:
    @tbraton

    What Monkeyman fails to state is that Trump is not beholden to Congress for much of anything on immigration.

    This includes the Wall( legislation has already been passed approving it), in terms of enforcement he just has to order the ICE to enforce ALL the laws on the books which haven’t been done in decades. This is a enforcement issue, not a legislative one.

    He can also cancel out Obama’s EO’s, signing statements and PDD’s on immigration and other issues.

    Congress can impede him on tripling the size of ICE. Though it will be political suicide for any GOP hack to oppose him on this. Remember he squashed the Bush family(which was the most powerful family in the GOP like bugs).

    Cutting federal funds to sanctuary cities is however a legislative issue. Though I suspect he can simply tell the various sugar daddy agencies to cut off funds. This is how Obama is threatening schools to make room for transexuals in girls bathrooms. Cut off NEA funds.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  61. tbraton says:
    @Mark F.

    “He has taken a few good foreign policy positions. And he has taken many awful ones, like approving of torture and deliberately killing innocent people, and blocking most Muslims from entering the country.”

    I find it curious that you responded on behalf of “monkeyman,” who, as I pointed out, posted his very first message on unz.com to attack Donald Trump. Is there a connection between you and “monkeyman” by any chance? Anyway, I find your moral calculus a bit out of skew. You somehow equate Trump’s generally articulated policy of nonintervention in foreign conflicts (Iraq, Libya, and Syria) with his policy of favoring water-boarding to captured Islamic terrorists. Do you really think that administering water-boarding (even if one considers it torture) to a relatively small, handful of men that virtually everybody survives amounts to the same thing on the moral scale as saving lives of American soldiers and the foreign civilians that are lost as a result of our foreign interventions?

    As far as blocking Muslims from entering the U.S., how many should we admit? Would you be happy if the U.S. became a Muslim majority country? If not, where exactly would you draw the line? I find it amazing that Americans favor the admission of Muslims into what were once Christian countries that Muslims contributed nothing to creating. What’s wrong with keeping Muslims in the overwhelmingly Muslim countries they come from or allow them to emigrate just to other Muslim countries? There are plenty around the world. By keeping the Muslims at home, perhaps they can contribute to making their home countries better places to live. Just think of the superior material they have to work with, i.e., other Muslims. While we are still fighting in Afghanistan to make that eternally backward country a safer place for Muslim women and girls and losing American lives in the process fighting what is essentially a civil war, I notice that many Afghan men are fleeing to Germany in order to escape the chaos of Muslim Afghanistan. Notice that they don’t flee to other Muslim countries but go half way around the world seeking a better life among predominant Christians. What a truly sad indictment of the Muslim world by the Muslims themselves. Personally, I would feel much safer if we admitted no Muslims into the U.S. What exactly are we losing by keeping Muslims out?

    “At any rate, he has lied so much I fail to see how you can trust anything he says.”

    I guess we have no choice but to vote for “Honest Hillary,” who has never told a lie in her life. At least, we won’t be deceived by her foreign policy in that she voted for the Iraq War as a U.S. Senator, pushed for the Libyan War as SOS under Obama, has urged the creation of illegal “no-fly zones” over Syria, and has pushed for intervention in Ukraine, all positions opposed during the campaign by Donald Trump. Yikes. You are uneasy about Trump’s foreign policy but comfortable with Hillary Clinton’s? I guess you are just a liberal war monger or too dim to think these relatively simple problems through on your own.

    • Agree: Sam Shama
    • Replies: @anonymous
  62. tbraton says:
    @rod1963

    While I agree there is much Trump can do about immigration on his own, he would be much more constricted in that field than he would be in the area of foreign policy, where Congress has pretty much abdicated its Constitutional role. Why are we waging war in Syria (with boots on the ground and planes in the air) without any Congressional authorization or even U.N. Security Council authorization? As far as the Wall is concerned, Congress may have authorized such a thing, but I don’t think it has appropriated funds to build such a Wall. I’m not sure what he could do about Birthright Citizenship without legislation by Congress declaring its interpretation of the 14th Amendment. If he plans to do major things in the immigration area, there is a more compelling need for Congressional action.

    • Replies: @woodNfish
  63. Sam Shama says:
    @Jeff Davis

    All too true. Its been depressingly apparent for the past decade; substantive, independent, insightful and humorous political opinion making has totally disappeared. What we have instead, is a ‘pre-paid’ canvas of cheap colours, barely differentiated in tone, equally uninformed to the man, woman and transgender. Krugman, with whom I see eye to eye only on that rare occasion, recently made an observation similar to your joke: Larry Kudlow is to economics what Kristol is to political strategy: if they say it, you know it is reliably wrong.

  64. […] just read Ilana Mercer’s blistering attack on the pseudo-conservative credentials of Donald Trump’s “conservative” opponents, I sent her […]

  65. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @tbraton

    Why on this website are those of us who dare to question the bona fides of Mr. Trump so often attacked by other commenters with respect to our integrity?

    Last summer, I was accused of being a secret agent for candidate Jeb Bush. Now, “tbraton” suggests that “Mark F.” may be a collaborator or the same person as “monkeyman,” who is going to all this effort to, somehow, further the election of Mrs. Clinton.

    I expect a declining level of discourse at UR until this latest farcical, ultimately meaningless election is over.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  66. It doesn’t bother Ilana, a Zionist, but it should bother most readers: Trump’s new owner is Adelson. Have y’all heard?

  67. tbraton says:
    @anonymous

    Well, I responded to the post of “monkeyman” by legitimately pointing out that his post was his first on unz.com. Are you challenging my claim? Instead of “monkeyman” replying to my response, I got instead a reply from “Mark F.” I made a detailed response to Mark F.’s post, but, instead of getting a response from Mark F., I instead got a response from you, but I notice that you didn’t even bother to comment on the specifics of my remarks. Therefore, it seems to me that, if anyone has a right to complain about the quality of the commentary here at unz.com, it is I. I would point out that you are being so foolish as to impliedly criticize the quality of my posts, but I would refer you to some pretty astute posts I made on Mr. Derbyshire’s blog starting on April 13 analyzing the forthcoming 16 Republican primaries, starting with New York on April 19, in which I seriously tarnished the sterling reputation of that hotshot prognosticator Nate Silver. See http://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/demography-is-electoral-destiny-will-midwest-niceness-be-a-problem-for-trump/#comment-1385822 and http://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/demography-is-electoral-destiny-will-midwest-niceness-be-a-problem-for-trump/#comment-1387552 plus all my related posts on that thread.

    I notice that you post under the screen name “anonymous.” I believe there may be several others who use the same name. As a result, it is impossible to track your past posts on unz.com the same way you can do with “tbraton” or “Rurik” or “Avery” or many others who post here. So here is the bill of complaint I have against “anonymous”: (1) you offer no specific criticisms of my post other than the fact that I attacked “Mark F.” because he dared to criticize Trump, (2) you post under the “anonymous” screen name which does not allow anyone else to track your posting history, and (3) it is impossible to ascertain whether you have been consistent in your criticisms of Trump. So, in effect, I am forced to shadow-box with a ghost.

    “I expect a declining level of discourse at UR until this latest farcical, ultimately meaningless election is over.”

    I think you tipped your hand there, anonymous. You’ve made your distaste for Trump pretty clear, but I consider this election to be the most momentous in my lifetime (and I have been following elections since Kennedy-Nixon in 1960). The choice is not Trump vs. No Trump, but Trump vs. Hillary Clinton, and the policy choices couldn’t be more stark, whether it is immigration, trade, foreign interventions or Supreme Court nominees. You vote for Clinton, and you are pretty sure to get one thing. You vote for Trump, and you are pretty sure to get something else. The fact that some posters somehow thought last summer that you were a Jeb!!! Bush supporter leads me to think that you might have favored Jeb!!!’s foreign policy positions. In other words, I strongly suspect that you have neocon leanings in your political makeup, and that may be why you dislike Trump so much.

  68. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @tbraton

    Correct writing is ¡ Jeb ! , or ¡Jeb!

    • Replies: @tbraton
  69. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @tbraton

    You’re quite wrong about my views. It sounds as though we agree on a lot, at least the wars. I supported Ron Paul through and including 2012, and have voted neither R nor D in a presidential election since 1976. I’m not voting at all this year, but if forced to choose between the two (i.e., denied a write-in or third party candidate) would take Mr. Trump over Mrs. Clinton.

    But neither that, nor your views, was the subject of my comment. Rather, it was to note the clear pattern among Trump supporters here to deflect questions and criticism of their candidate with the weird obsession over the identity and consistency of commenters. (If any of us were that important, Mr. Unz would add us to his roster of columnists, wouldn’t he?) I have come to believe it is a way that some here deal with the understandable frustration and anxiety over what may next come out of Mr. Trump’s mouth.

  70. […] just read Ilana Mercer’s blistering attack on the pseudo-conservative credentials of Donald Trump’s “conservative” opponents, I sent her […]

  71. dahoit says:
    @WorkingClass

    I’m with you.
    Yes there are many dependent on the govt for dough,but it is the business and bankster sector which rob it blind.
    Screw Romney and stupid ideologues.
    Giving the finger to 47% of the electorate is not a winning strategy.Morons.
    And as Trump says,wdf is Ryan?
    Trump has blown up the rethugs,and I’m happy as a clam.Maybe they’ll return to be patriots instead of Ziowhores,the scum.

  72. dahoit says:
    @RadicalCenter

    In addition to that elitist Horse S,remember every one of our f*ckup POTUSES since Truman?Carter?,have gone to the poison ivy league,that bastion of higher? intelligence.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  73. tbraton says:
    @Immigrant from former USSR

    Well, last August I posted something from a column of the great humorist for the Miami Herald, Dave Barry, who suggested one way Jeb Bush could energize his floundering campaign was by adding another ! to his name, thus becoming Jeb!! instead of Jeb! I called Mr. Barry’s raise and raised him a !, thus transforming Jeb Bush into Jeb!!!, a name that just bursts with energy. You may refer to him any way you want; it’s still a free country, after all. But I will stick to my Jeb!!!

  74. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @tbraton

    Thanks for your reaction.
    I borrowed ¡Jeb! from Steve Sailer, who emphasized Jeb’s Mexican connection by using ¡ .
    It took me some time to find *¡* among the symbols of MS Word.

  75. tbraton says:
    @dahoit

    Eisenhower didn’t. LBJ didn’t. Nixon didn’t. Reagan didn’t. I think LBJ and Nixon proved that you didn’t need an Ivy League degree to be a horrible President.

  76. woodNfish says:
    @WorkingClass

    SS and Medicare are NOT entitlement programs. They have been paid for by the your payroll taxes. I don’t think even a moron like Romney was talking about people who worked all their lives to earn their retirtrement benefits. It is not the retirees fault that SS and Medicare are government ponzi schemes that have been looted for profit by the oligarchy.

    But you are right, it is visceral and it is personal.

  77. woodNfish says:
    @tbraton

    Trump can use the EPA budget to build the wall and claim it is too keep out pollution form Mexico. I’d be fine with declaring war on Mexico for invading us and the criminal actions of the Mexican government in orchestrating and supporting the invasion.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  78. tbraton says:
    @woodNfish

    It looks like you’re lobbying for a job in the Trump Administration. But here’s a hint. Whether it is the Wall or a war with Mexico, be sure to add a line about how we are going to make Mexico pay for it. 😉

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  79. Sam Shama says:
    @tbraton

    Excellent question on how to finance the Wall 🙂 . According to certain estimates, the total cost is somewhere around $10b. As of the last customs accounting, it appears to me that the ‘average’ monthly deficit due to trade with Mexico is [rounding numbers], around $5b

    Here is the Import series:
    https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/IMPMX

    And here are exports:
    https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/EXPMX

    On a ten year basis [given where the US 10-year bond trades now] the annual interest on $10b is:
    $10 b x 1.74%

    Which leads to the easy calculation for a tariff on net exports as:

    tariff rate = {0.0174 x$10b}/{$5b x 12} = 0.0029 or 0.29% per annum

    Suppose we apply that 29 bps tariff, better yet a 1% tariff on Mexican net exports, I cannot see any immediate problems at all, rather, a net source of revenue and more incentives for re-shoring jobs. We will of course see the President of Mexico fuming on television quite regularly – an added benefit one might add.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  80. @RadicalCenter

    “But don’t you see a difference between Social Security and Medicare, as opposed to Medicaid and food stamps?”

    Yeah. I see the difference. But I’m not at all sure Romney does. He was talking about everybody that does not pay income tax saying they are ALL moochers and his job is NOT TO WORRY about them. This is a common meme when pandering to the well off. The idea is to create indignation against people who pay no tax. As if there was no FICA tax, sales tax, property tax or excise taxes. Romney was born with a silver spoon. What does he really know about 47% of Americans? Is Romney an ass hole or merely ignorant? A legitimate question I suppose. I would answer yes to both.

  81. You’re right, Romney fails or refuses to see the difference between Medicaid and food stamps on one hand, and Social Security and Medicare on the other. You and I agree on the general way to view those programs for the typical or average recipients.

    You’re also right that Romney appears to be a heartless ass—-.

    To those of us who pay a lot of income tax, though, it is not real comforting to hear that, well, tens of millions of people pay zero federal income tax but at least they pay excise and sales taxes.

    For one thing, there is no federal sales tax. So the states and local sales taxes that are paid by people who don’t Pay fed income tax, do nothing to share our burden in defraying the cost of the fed gov.

    Second, unlike the fed income tax, which my wife and i cannot avoid on our salaries, most fed excise taxes are easily avoided — by simply not drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes or marijuana (yes, a couple states levy an excise tax on marijuana now), for example.

    Third, as to the fed gasoline excise tax, the people who pay it are merely covering some of the their share of the cost of our interstate highways etc. Great that this tax actually gets paid by just about everyone; let’s do that with the fed income tax or get rid of it.

    So the fact remains that those of us who pay fed income tax, are right to feel that many other people are not paying their fair share, even given their often low income, meager assets, and/or limited job prospects. ZERO fed income tax can’t be the fair rate for such a large group of people, not when it directly causes the tax burden to go up for the rest of us.

    Having said that, the Hell with Romney.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
  82. @Sam Shama

    We should also calculate the cost of providing medical care, emergency or otherwise, to noncitizens — legal and illegal aliens alike — who hail from Mexico.

    How about the cost to the fed taxpayer of providing food stamps to Mexicans? Many noncitizens are eligible and most noncitizens living in the USA are Mexican.

    https://eligibility.com/food-stamps/what-rules-apply-to-non-citizens-for-eligibility

    How about the cost of prosecuting and incarcerating Mexican nationals for crimes they commit here in the USA? Whether legal alien or illegal, these people are noncitizens and imposing huge financial costs on us.

    The tariff on goods from Mexico, and/or tax on remittances to there, should be set high enough to cover all those costs, too. Mexico should reimburse us for those, at long last. They are susceptible of reasonable estimation.

    If that makes Mexicans not want to come here, that’s a feature, not a bug, as they say.

    Likewise, if the tax on remittances makes some Mexicans feel like it’s no longer worthwhile working here to send money home, that’s a bonus as well.

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  83. Sam Shama says:
    @RadicalCenter

    🙂 The possibilities are many and benefits commensurate.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?