The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Douthat: "Why Isn't Marco Rubio Winning?"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Ross Douthat writes in the NYT:

Why Isn’t Marco Rubio Winning?
Ross Douthat JAN. 28, 2016 501 COMMENTS

… In the month after that confrontation, Bush’s national numbers slipped into the lower single digits, while Rubio’s climbed steadily. In early December, he and Ted Cruz both had about 15 percent support in the national polls, below Donald Trump but well above all the other professional politicians in the race. It seemed as if they were rising in tandem, and that Rubio was destined to be the establishment’s preferred candidate in a three-man race with Cruz and Trump — and based on past results, the likely nominee.

But instead, Rubio hit a ceiling, while Cruz continued to climb. And despite a long series of “moments” when he was supposed to consolidate his position, the Florida senator is still basically stuck. He’s hovering just above 10 percent in national polls and in New Hampshire, trailing Cruz and Trump by a clear margin in Iowa, and still lagging Jeb in the endorsement primary.

Nobody’s sure why. …

Here are some possible explanations:

It’s all about immigration. In a race dominated by Trumpian nationalism, and with immigration restriction increasingly a litmus test for many conservative voters, Rubio’s role in the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill is plainly a liability. Possibly enough of a liability, in fact, to deny him the nomination.

At the same time, though, there are still lots of Republican voters who don’t consider the immigration issue a top priority, and lots of Republican donors and elected officials for whom Rubio’s “Gang of Eight” support is probably an asset. So immigration might explain why he trails Trump and Cruz in Iowa, but not why he can’t put away Jeb, Chris Christie and John Kasich.

It’s all Jeb’s fault. …

Rubio’s a little too conservative. …

Then there also might be a more personal element as well …

Rubio seems a little too ambitious.

Here’s another idea: Rubio is the human epitomization of the Republican billionaire class’s evident desire to turn the United States into Latin America Norte, with its vast inequalities of wealth, rigged social systems, and fragile rule of law. This urge isn’t as annoying in Rubio as it is in the perversely anti-American ¡Jeb¡ because Rubio’s loyalty to the Latin American way of doing things is understandably natural and personally conservative (in the sense of Rubio having concentric loyalties that start with the Miami Cuban community).

But Americans have very good reasons for not wanting their country to turn further into an outpost of Latin America. In retrospect, Rubio was well-positioned by ethnicity to instead lead resistance to the billionaires’ hopes to worsen the Latinization of our country (on the Nixon-goes-to-China principle of politics).

Whether Rubio ever had the imagination to have seized that opportunity is unknown. But, as far as I can tell, it never even occurred to anybody important whom Rubio talks to. Instead the Republican Brain Trust decided it was a brilliant idea for Rubio, being Latino, to lead the amnesty / guest worker push to Latinize the country, kind of like, if you wanted detente with Russia and China in 1968, you’d have drafted Alger Hiss to run for President.

 
Hide 248 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. 24 years of callowness in the White House is enough.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - Sadly, had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct. Rem acu tetigisteritis.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "24 years of callowness in the White House is enough."

    Wow, that really says a mouthful. No more man-children for President! Its time for a grown-up President. Its time for a man in the White House.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/douthat-why-isnt-marco-rubio-winning/#comment-1310739
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. I’m not one prone to diatribes about conspiracies, shady deals in smoke-filled back rooms, and the nefarious maneuvering and machinations of the wealthy and powerful but for pete’s sake, you can practically see the puppet strings attached to Rubio’s limbs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Yes, and Rubio would be doing so much better if he had been clever and hidden them by fighting the Gang of 7....Steve's analysis is 100% on target.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Contra the day by day more insightful Mr Douthat, I am sure about one reason why young Mr Rubio is not winning. Right now, he looks like an eternal sophomore who forgot to show up on the first day of school when the sophomores became juniors. It is simple as that. Rick Santorum, Pat Buchanan, even Ted Cruz could have told him what he needed to do to look enough like a leader to win an election outside of his own state, but he may not have listened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alice
    He reminds me of the episode of Seinfeld where Jerry gets his haircut, and it looks like he's 7 when it is finished. I can't stop seeing Rubio as an overly earnest child.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Wilkey says:

    The issue goes beyond immigration. It goes to matters of trust. Republican voters, whether they care about immigration or not, are largely tired of being betrayed on any number of issues that are completely unrelated to immigration. Rubio epitomizes the Republican politicians who constantly betray their constituents. Ted Cruz does not. Ted Cruz is also clearly a lot smarter than Rubio, who comes across as a lightweight and a [insert gay euphemism here].

    Also I think that Rubio’s fortunes sink, ironically, as he increasingly becomes seen as the establishment candidate in the mix. When Bush, Kasich, and Christie were still serious possibilities there were candidates to Rubio’s left. Now there are none. He’s the candidate on the left, and a flagrantly dishonest one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. MEH 0910 says:

    Because Rubio doesn’t have tiger blood?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more.

    I have been hoping that Rubio would give a long, thoughtful speech about participating in the Gang of Eight like Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech about attending Jeremiah Wright’s church. It’s still not too late for Rubio to do so.

    Instead, Rubio’s statements on the subject have been canned and glib.

    It’s not so much that I want him to repent. I want him to explain in much more detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and what decisions and agreements he made during the process. I want to know the lessons he learned.

    The most important thing that Rubio needs to do in this campaign is to deal effectively with the immigration issue. He is squandering his opportunity to become the US President.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more."

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions. I think Cruz got his opportunity tonight to be the lead dog, and imo he blew it. I think anybody watching tonight's debate would be extremely uncomfortable with Ted Cruz. I think Rand Paul nailed it with his characterization of Cruz. Rubio is a complete lightweight liar with a penchant to wage endless wars, in accordance with the desires of his wealthy backers who are clearly pulling his strings.
    , @CAL
    His chance to do that died when he supported the recent CASA bill which would legalize the patently un-Constitutional star chamber trials of men on college campuses.

    I don't think he is that bright in the political sense. He's easily manipulated and doesn't seem to have a rudder of his own.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    He looks like a boy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous-antimarxist

    He looks like a boy.
     
    To be more precise, Rubio looks like a "rent boy".

    Here are pictures of a young Marco Rubio and his rent boy gone mad spree killing doppleganger Andrew Cunanan who was notorious for murdering in Miami the gay icon the fashion designer Gianni Versace back in 1998.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=pictures+of+Marco+rubio+as+a+young+man&espv=2&biw=824&bih=407&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJz-
    PBu8_KAhXlloMKHYdmCkUQ7AkIPw

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan

    It's Marco Rubio's lack of “Quien Es Mas Macho?” that creeps lots of people out, especially Latinos outside of his base South Florida Cuban constituency. The idea that macho obsessed mestizo Mexicans
    and Central Americans would ever vote for Rubio is pure plutocrat billionaire self deception. Of course the idea that Rubio's politics just like his dubious sexuality might be for rent is exactly what the billionaires like about him.

    The various rumors and not to mention legitimate questions about Rubio's past arrest history and fashion choices don't help.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    He looks like a boy.
     
    In a boy band.

    Sadly for him, 14-year-old girls can't vote.
    , @Penguinchip
    He looks like a waiter on The Love Boat. Exciting and new, perhaps, but not presidential timber.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Hepp says:

    He looks like a little kid and people can sense he’s not very smart. You can tell that he’s like a wind up doll with all the right answers that he memorized.

    Read More
    • Replies: @e
    Cruz is VERY smart and very Joe Isuzu-ish. He's verbally fluent and yeah, a master debater, but you can see him plan every_damn_pause, just like a Mike Huckabee, who practiced his deliveries for years from the pulpit.

    Cruz=smarmy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. newrouter says:

    ” In retrospect, Rubio was well-positioned by ethnicity to instead lead resistance to the billionaires’ hopes ”

    it is a tough club to join going that way:

    >In a never-before-reported meeting in Bush’s Dallas office, Cruz began to outline his 2012 campaign playbook for the former president, according to people familiar with the conversation. Cruz explained how he would consolidate conservatives yearning for a political outsider, how he would outflank the front-runner on the right, how he would proudly carry the mantle of the ascendant tea party to victory over entrenched elites.

    It was impressive foreshadowing. But Bush cut Cruz off before he could finish.

    “I guess you don’t want my support,” Bush interrupted. “Ted, what the hell do you think I am?”<

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/ted-cruz-2016-establishment-george-bush-213561#ixzz3yb6pqpn9

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Jeb isn’t anti-American. He is neo-American.

    He sees America as Canada-US-Mexico.

    And even though Mexican masses do pour into the US, Jeb knows that the closer Canada-US-Mexico becomes, US will dominate at the elite level.

    As Jeb belongs to the elite class that will dominate all of neo-America, he sees it as something positive.

    As US-Mexico merge closer, US will gain elite control over Mexico. Globalism destroyed mass power. So, even though Mexers will pour in the US, they won’t rule. Look at CA. Totally ruled by Jews and whites with Asians as middle managers. Mexers are just lettuce pickers and busboys.

    At the mass level, it is true enough that US in being invaded by masses of foreigners. But at the elite level, it means US is taking over the world.
    Look at the Middle East. US takes in immigrants but has used might, money, and diplomacy to totally remake the place.

    At mass level, Americans lose to the world. At the elite level, the world loses to America. US elites rule all. “We take your people, you give up your sovereignty.”
    And US elites care about their own power, not about the American people.

    Also, Jewish elites have another ‘nation’ in their mind. It is Kosheria, and it stretches from NY to Chicago to LA to Tel Aviv to Paris to London to Warsaw and etc to etc wherever there are agents and operative of Kosheria. To people like Soros, even the US is must a colony in the larger Kosheria or Koshmir.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Jeb isn’t anti-American. He is neo-American.
     
    He's not anti-American; he's anti-Anglo-American.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. syonredux says:

    This urge isn’t as annoying in Rubio as it is in the perversely anti-American ¡Jeb¡ because Rubio’s loyalty to the Latin American way of doing things is understandably natural and personally conservative (in the sense of Rubio having concentric loyalties that start with the Miami Cuban community).

    Rubio is loyal to Latin America; Jeb Bush is a traitor to Anglo-America.’Nuff said.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Rubio is loyal to Latin America; Jeb Bush is a traitor to Anglo-America.’Nuff said.
     
    "Anglo-America" existed in the 19th century. I think you mean "White America" or "European America", which replaced "Anglo-America" in the 20th century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Anonym says:

    I hate this “only Nixon can go to China” BS. I am seeing Michelle Malkin article on Breitbart, along with some Raheem Kasssam. Why can’t I get my fix of nativist news and opinion from genuine actual white people? Because someone will think I’m racist? Who cares? I certainly don’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Although genes do matter, culture plays a significant if not overwhelming role in these matters. I'd accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every "genuine actual white person" who pushes an anti-white agenda.
    , @SFG
    Go to Taki's, Chateau Heartiste, or rightstuff.biz, or countless others I can't even think of. There are lots of places now.

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)
    , @Anonymous
    Yeah, VDare runs Malkin's articles for the same reason, and it's completely phony. I mean their logo is a white doe, they're named after the first white child born in North America, and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin's articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear "diverse". What's the point? Who cares at that point?
    , @shrinker
    Yeah, reality bugs me too... Once you grow up you'll realize that someone perceived to be speaking against interest (Malkin, Kassam) nabs more attention over the garden-variety bitter clinger. This is the way of the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Hepp says:

    They just asked Bush about Puerto Rican statehood, and pointed out that only 25% of the island is employed. This guy….

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Good to know at least one person is watching the debate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    His sordid past certainly doesn’t help, assuming that it is now, um, behind him and that he’s not currently practicing:

    http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/marco-rubios-childhood-friend-tied-to-miamis-most-infamous-gay-porn-case-8203133

    Barrios suddenly found his long-forgotten after-hours police stop in a Brickell park thrust into national headlines last week, when the Washington Post dredged up the 1990 incident. But the Post missed the crime’s most eye-opening tie to Florida’s junior senator.

    Decades after his legal run-in with Rubio, Barrios was associated with perhaps the most notorious gay porn ring in Miami history …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. AndrewR says:

    I don’t spend much time thinking about why who is beating whom when where in which polls etc. I’m sure there’s some science to it but the vast majority is just random guessing. Maybe Rush has been extra hard on Rube-io.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. countenance says: • Website

    The non-Trumps are behaving like crabs in a bucket. As one rises up to be the clear second place runner, the others pull him back down because they want to be in second place. Guess who all this helps.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. Glossy says: • Website

    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered. After that old Communists started calling themselves anti-Communists. They started the Cold War to recapture Russia. Which they did in the 1990s.

    Nixon was smart enough to undertand most of that. He hated original Communists, who became anti-Communists after Stalin came to power. Hating old Communists and getting along with the post-WWII USSR was a consistent position. No turnaround was needed. No change of worldview. Nor did he have to be forced into this by anything.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals – no filth in TV, etc.

    So he did understand this whole thing. I don’t think you do. It’s the main plotline of global politics of the last century. In short, the Cold War was not about what you think it was about.

    Read More
    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Chase
    Interesting. Can you elaborate or point towards a further discussion on this?
    , @Anonymous

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals – no filth in TV, etc.
     
    You're thinking of one of the NIxon tapes in which Nixon discusses Archie Bunker, homosexuality, Bohemian Grove, amongst other things:

    NIXON: You know what happened to the Greeks! Homosexuality destroyed them. Sure, Aristotle was a homo. We all know that. So was Socrates.

    EHRLICHMAN: But he never had the influence television had.

    NIXON: You know what happened to the Romans? The last six Roman emperors were fags. The last six. Nero had a public wedding to a boy. You know what happened to the popes? They were layin' the nuns; that's been goin' on for years, centuries. But the Catholic Church went to hell three or four centuries ago. It was homosexual, and it had to be cleaned out. That's what's happened to Britain. It happened earlier to France.

    Let's look at the strong societies. The Russians. Goddamn, they root 'em out. They don't let 'em around at all. I don't know what they do with them. Look at this country. You think the Russians allow dope? Homosexuality, dope, immorality, are the enemies of strong societies.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=TivVcfSBVSM#t=339
    , @middle aged vet
    Glossy - Paragraph one: Stalin was pro-choice and pro-murder. Two strikes against the conservative view point. Paragraph Two: Nixon was effectively pro-choice, and, yes, he understood the similarly pro-choice Brezhnev in a way that almost nobody on the internets understands. That is not all that much to Nixon's credit - what is to his credit is his refusal to allow, in the goodness of his heart, little countries be demolished and enslaved. He was, from that point of view, the greatest peacemaker of his times. Third paragraph: Nixon dated and married a Hollywood star. He was a coddled Navy officer. It is not his fault he did not understand public morals. Fourth paragraph: The Cold War is easy to understand. Everybody was more or less bad, but once in a while some of the more or less bad people (Roy Cohn, for an example that will gladden the hearts of those who love to hate on their fellow Americans) realized that other bad people (Hiss) were really really bad, and had the courage to do something about it. Or maybe that Powers guy was the only one who was right.
    , @syonredux

    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered.
     
    So, following your theory, Leftists are off the hook for:

    1932-33 Famine: Approx 6 million dead, 3 million in Ukraine alone

    GULAG Deaths, 1929-53: 1,053,829 official deaths for 1934-53. Of course, those figures don't include people who died during the period 1929-33. And they don't include people who died en route to the GULAG, or shortly after release, or while in custody awaiting transport, etc. Factoring in estimates for those deaths, and a conservative estimate for 1929-53 GULAG deaths would be approx 1.6 million

    Executions during the 1937-38 Great Terror: 682,691 official executions. 247,157 of these executions occurred during "ethnic operations." Cf the Polish Action, during which 111,091 ethnic Poles were killed (in some cases, the execution quotas were met by selecting people with Polish names out of the phone book).

    Ethnic Cleansing Operations during WW2 (Chechens, etc): 231,000 official deaths

    Baltic operations:

    Kenneth Christie, Historical Injustice and Democratic Transition in Eastern Asia and Northern Europe: Ghosts at the Table of Democracy (2002)
    Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonians (1940-41): 85,000 deported, of which 55,000 killed or died
    Baltics executed during reconquest (1944-45): 30,000
    Postwar partisan war
    Lithuanians: 40-50,000 k.
    Latvian: 25,000
    Estonians: 15,000

    Massacres of Poles:

    21,892 Polish citizens shot by the Soviet NKVD in the Katyn* massacres of spring 1940 and 9,817 Polish citizens shot in June 1941

    etc, etc,


    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals – no filth in TV, etc.
     
    Well, he certainly wasn't talking about any other kind...

    They started the Cold War to recapture Russia.
     
    Dunno; one tends to assume that Stalin's acquisition of an empire extending well into Central Europe had something to do with it...


    *


    Vasily Mikhailovich Blokhin (Russian: Васи́лий Миха́йлович Блохи́н, 7 January 1895 – 3 February 1955) was a Soviet Russian Major-General who served as the chief executioner of the Stalinist NKVD under the administrations of Genrikh Yagoda, Nikolai Yezhov, and Lavrentiy Beria.

    Hand-picked for the position by Joseph Stalin in 1926, Blokhin led a company of executioners that performed and supervised numerous mass executions during Stalin's reign, mostly during the Great Purge and World War II.[2] He is recorded as having executed tens of thousands of prisoners by his own hand, including his killing of about 7,000 Polish prisoners of war during the Katyn massacre in spring 1940,[2][3] making him the most prolific official executioner and mass murderer in recorded world history
     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Blokhin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Desiderius
    24 years of callowness in the White House is enough.

    Desiderius – Sadly, had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct. Rem acu tetigisteritis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct.
     
    Perhaps I was too callow myself at the time to remember accurately, but I got the sense that the HW White House wasn't so bad, as opposed to it's head, where you're sadly correct.

    The Myers/McClellan/Earnest brigade came in in 1992.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1fTkvlvkpU
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. AndrewR says:
    @Anonym
    I hate this "only Nixon can go to China" BS. I am seeing Michelle Malkin article on Breitbart, along with some Raheem Kasssam. Why can't I get my fix of nativist news and opinion from genuine actual white people? Because someone will think I'm racist? Who cares? I certainly don't.

    Although genes do matter, culture plays a significant if not overwhelming role in these matters. I’d accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every “genuine actual white person” who pushes an anti-white agenda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX

    I’d accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every “genuine actual white person” who pushes an anti-white agenda.
     
    That's futile. If whites don't survive as a majority population in their own countries, taking in other races who express pro-white views is no substitute. And in the long run, the majority of non-whites will always look out for their own racial interests.

    I don't know of Kassam, but Malkin seems more of a neocon anyhow.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I think you should revisit Aesop's fables.

    Fundamentally, all non-European immigration is problematic. Even the idea of letting in only the genious class from other countries would only result in creating a brown elite in the US. It's either a Trojan Horse or a recipe for an inverted Brazil.


    BTW, I think Snori Thorfinnson predated Virginia Dare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Danindc says:

    Boom. Sailer lays bare the motivations of all the Rubio cucks. In fairness, Douthat does have the more important looking goatee.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. SFG says:
    @Anonym
    I hate this "only Nixon can go to China" BS. I am seeing Michelle Malkin article on Breitbart, along with some Raheem Kasssam. Why can't I get my fix of nativist news and opinion from genuine actual white people? Because someone will think I'm racist? Who cares? I certainly don't.

    Go to Taki’s, Chateau Heartiste, or rightstuff.biz, or countless others I can’t even think of. There are lots of places now.

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Breitbart is mostly pretty good. But I take your point, there may be others that provide the same sort of thing.
    , @shrinker
    Uh, Andrew was adopted. There's a video of him speaking to a pro-life meeting at CPAC about it.

    He is only "half-Jewish" in the strained sense of having had a convert adoptive mother. He said his upbringing was secular Jewish.
    , @Bill P

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)
     
    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Chase says:
    @Glossy
    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered. After that old Communists started calling themselves anti-Communists. They started the Cold War to recapture Russia. Which they did in the 1990s.

    Nixon was smart enough to undertand most of that. He hated original Communists, who became anti-Communists after Stalin came to power. Hating old Communists and getting along with the post-WWII USSR was a consistent position. No turnaround was needed. No change of worldview. Nor did he have to be forced into this by anything.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals - no filth in TV, etc.

    So he did understand this whole thing. I don't think you do. It's the main plotline of global politics of the last century. In short, the Cold War was not about what you think it was about.

    Interesting. Can you elaborate or point towards a further discussion on this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    It's a bizarre and twisted theory. At the heart of it, glossy mistakes stability for conservatism and ignores a lot of "inconvenient" details. He thinks Stalin didn't have total power over the country in the early thirties when collectivization killed millions of peasants and completely transformed the Soviet countryside ("conservative?") while consolidating Soviet rule. He conveniently ignores that Stalin executed an estimated 100,000 Russian Orthodox priests who weren't willing to totally subordinate themselves to the Soviet state, and that Stalin finished off most of what was left of the old Russian aristocracy (an excellent and heartbreaking book - Former People by Douglas Smith - describes this). He forgets that those parts of the Slavic world that were least exposed to Stalinism remain most traditional in their lifestyles and morality. But for glossy, because Stalin made the Soviet state stable he was a conservative. For this reason, glossy maintains that North Korea is a very conservative state also.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Anonym says:
    @SFG
    Go to Taki's, Chateau Heartiste, or rightstuff.biz, or countless others I can't even think of. There are lots of places now.

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)

    Breitbart is mostly pretty good. But I take your point, there may be others that provide the same sort of thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. AKAHorace says:

    This is a bid odd, and does not fit the topic of discussion at all, but you don’t have an open thread so I have no option but to post this here. Sorry if this is me, misunderstanding the Internet once again.

    When I went back to one of your first postings and clicked to see your review of “Monster’s Ball” I got the message:

    NOTICE OF HACKING
    The link which forwarded your browser to this webpage may have come from a website which has was hacked for the purpose of redirecting consumers to websites selling counterfeit products. Accordingly, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has ordered that the intermediary domain names which control traffic from potentially hacked websites be taken into the custody of the court and redirected to this webpage. Unfortunately, taking control of these domains does not undo the hacking of the original legitimate website, so the website may still be at risk.

    If you believe your website may have been compromised, please contact your host or webmaster for information on how to fix the problem and secure your website. Online resources such as StopBadware.org can provide you with more information.

    More information about the Federal Lawsuit which resulted in the creation of this webpage can be found at: http://servingnotice.com/Lmf4ry-Kxd6us/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonym
    I hate this "only Nixon can go to China" BS. I am seeing Michelle Malkin article on Breitbart, along with some Raheem Kasssam. Why can't I get my fix of nativist news and opinion from genuine actual white people? Because someone will think I'm racist? Who cares? I certainly don't.

    Yeah, VDare runs Malkin’s articles for the same reason, and it’s completely phony. I mean their logo is a white doe, they’re named after the first white child born in North America, and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”. What’s the point? Who cares at that point?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    they’re named after the first white child born in North America
     
    No, they're not. Virginia Dare was the first English child born in North America. She's not even the first white child born in what's the modern US. This kid is:

    http://hispanememento.blogspot.com/2012/02/martin-de-arguelles-primer-nino-blanco.html

    ...and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”.

     

    Horse manure. She does quite good work on illegal immigration, including a best-selling book, and is tough on Islam and other bêtes-noires of theirs. She's not there because they have a thing for Flips.

    Their policy has always been, explicitly, that if they pay for a columnist, they post everything. They did the same for Paul Craig Roberts, who makes Mrs Malkin look calm and reasonable by comparison.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. I remember reading somewhere that President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines was not smart but that he was like a monkey, that is, very clever at imitation, in particular at imitations of smart people (personally, I doubt this). These words seem more applicable to Rubio. Moreover, if anything, he sorta projects the vibe of a guy who left his balls at home.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Glossy
    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered. After that old Communists started calling themselves anti-Communists. They started the Cold War to recapture Russia. Which they did in the 1990s.

    Nixon was smart enough to undertand most of that. He hated original Communists, who became anti-Communists after Stalin came to power. Hating old Communists and getting along with the post-WWII USSR was a consistent position. No turnaround was needed. No change of worldview. Nor did he have to be forced into this by anything.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals - no filth in TV, etc.

    So he did understand this whole thing. I don't think you do. It's the main plotline of global politics of the last century. In short, the Cold War was not about what you think it was about.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals – no filth in TV, etc.

    You’re thinking of one of the NIxon tapes in which Nixon discusses Archie Bunker, homosexuality, Bohemian Grove, amongst other things:

    NIXON: You know what happened to the Greeks! Homosexuality destroyed them. Sure, Aristotle was a homo. We all know that. So was Socrates.

    EHRLICHMAN: But he never had the influence television had.

    NIXON: You know what happened to the Romans? The last six Roman emperors were fags. The last six. Nero had a public wedding to a boy. You know what happened to the popes? They were layin’ the nuns; that’s been goin’ on for years, centuries. But the Catholic Church went to hell three or four centuries ago. It was homosexual, and it had to be cleaned out. That’s what’s happened to Britain. It happened earlier to France.

    Let’s look at the strong societies. The Russians. Goddamn, they root ‘em out. They don’t let ‘em around at all. I don’t know what they do with them. Look at this country. You think the Russians allow dope? Homosexuality, dope, immorality, are the enemies of strong societies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Donald Trump dominated the debate without even attending it. He smoked everyone with his veterans’ rally, which looked like a lot of fun and raised over six million dollars. Opposite him over at FOX, the two Cubans and the special-needs adult were arguing with each other over who was the bigger Latin lover.

    And Ross Douthat looks for reasons?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. @Glossy
    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered. After that old Communists started calling themselves anti-Communists. They started the Cold War to recapture Russia. Which they did in the 1990s.

    Nixon was smart enough to undertand most of that. He hated original Communists, who became anti-Communists after Stalin came to power. Hating old Communists and getting along with the post-WWII USSR was a consistent position. No turnaround was needed. No change of worldview. Nor did he have to be forced into this by anything.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals - no filth in TV, etc.

    So he did understand this whole thing. I don't think you do. It's the main plotline of global politics of the last century. In short, the Cold War was not about what you think it was about.

    Glossy – Paragraph one: Stalin was pro-choice and pro-murder. Two strikes against the conservative view point. Paragraph Two: Nixon was effectively pro-choice, and, yes, he understood the similarly pro-choice Brezhnev in a way that almost nobody on the internets understands. That is not all that much to Nixon’s credit – what is to his credit is his refusal to allow, in the goodness of his heart, little countries be demolished and enslaved. He was, from that point of view, the greatest peacemaker of his times. Third paragraph: Nixon dated and married a Hollywood star. He was a coddled Navy officer. It is not his fault he did not understand public morals. Fourth paragraph: The Cold War is easy to understand. Everybody was more or less bad, but once in a while some of the more or less bad people (Roy Cohn, for an example that will gladden the hearts of those who love to hate on their fellow Americans) realized that other bad people (Hiss) were really really bad, and had the courage to do something about it. Or maybe that Powers guy was the only one who was right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Taco
    Pat Nixon appeared in 4 films, each time as an uncredited extra.

    http://m.imdb.com/name/nm0633268/filmotype/actress?ref_=m_nmfm_1

    Your claims about Richatd Nixon being coddled and not understanding public morals are equalLuna's absurd as your claim that Pat Nixon was a "movie star"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Question: Does anyone know how to make those inverted question marks and exclamation points?

    It’s like, man! Jeb! is good but that added extra something behind it really gives it a kick and makes the point. Would be a helluva campaign ad as in: “Jeb! (with the upside side exclamation) is he really for America?”

    Darn it. Is it a special keyboard or how do you type those anyway?

    PS: Trump’s event tonight was awesome. Really a strong home run, ad not a bad speaker to boot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew Jackson
    There's probably an easier trick. But google upside down exclamation mark and then copy and paste. Or just copy and paste someone else's.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Does anyone know how to make those inverted question marks and exclamation points?
     
    On stone age PCs, Alt 173 makes ¡ and Alt 168 makes ¿. There's a bunch more here you can print off.

    On an iPhone or iPad, just keep your finger on the right-side up character, and the upside-down one will appear right above it. Then draw your pinky, stylus, or other protuberance up to it.

    Other systems and devices may vary.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. WGG [AKA "World's Greatest Grandson"] says:

    Rubio has gay-face. And most likely gay proclivities. Angel Barrios.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. shrinker says:
    @SFG
    Go to Taki's, Chateau Heartiste, or rightstuff.biz, or countless others I can't even think of. There are lots of places now.

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)

    Uh, Andrew was adopted. There’s a video of him speaking to a pro-life meeting at CPAC about it.

    He is only “half-Jewish” in the strained sense of having had a convert adoptive mother. He said his upbringing was secular Jewish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. shrinker says:
    @Anonym
    I hate this "only Nixon can go to China" BS. I am seeing Michelle Malkin article on Breitbart, along with some Raheem Kasssam. Why can't I get my fix of nativist news and opinion from genuine actual white people? Because someone will think I'm racist? Who cares? I certainly don't.

    Yeah, reality bugs me too… Once you grow up you’ll realize that someone perceived to be speaking against interest (Malkin, Kassam) nabs more attention over the garden-variety bitter clinger. This is the way of the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. syonredux says:
    @Glossy
    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered. After that old Communists started calling themselves anti-Communists. They started the Cold War to recapture Russia. Which they did in the 1990s.

    Nixon was smart enough to undertand most of that. He hated original Communists, who became anti-Communists after Stalin came to power. Hating old Communists and getting along with the post-WWII USSR was a consistent position. No turnaround was needed. No change of worldview. Nor did he have to be forced into this by anything.

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals - no filth in TV, etc.

    So he did understand this whole thing. I don't think you do. It's the main plotline of global politics of the last century. In short, the Cold War was not about what you think it was about.

    Steve, you completely misundertand Nixon and detente. Early Bolshevism in Russia was leftist, but it was destroyed by Stalin, who was conservative in every way that mattered.

    So, following your theory, Leftists are off the hook for:

    1932-33 Famine: Approx 6 million dead, 3 million in Ukraine alone

    GULAG Deaths, 1929-53: 1,053,829 official deaths for 1934-53. Of course, those figures don’t include people who died during the period 1929-33. And they don’t include people who died en route to the GULAG, or shortly after release, or while in custody awaiting transport, etc. Factoring in estimates for those deaths, and a conservative estimate for 1929-53 GULAG deaths would be approx 1.6 million

    Executions during the 1937-38 Great Terror: 682,691 official executions. 247,157 of these executions occurred during “ethnic operations.” Cf the Polish Action, during which 111,091 ethnic Poles were killed (in some cases, the execution quotas were met by selecting people with Polish names out of the phone book).

    Ethnic Cleansing Operations during WW2 (Chechens, etc): 231,000 official deaths

    Baltic operations:

    Kenneth Christie, Historical Injustice and Democratic Transition in Eastern Asia and Northern Europe: Ghosts at the Table of Democracy (2002)
    Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonians (1940-41): 85,000 deported, of which 55,000 killed or died
    Baltics executed during reconquest (1944-45): 30,000
    Postwar partisan war
    Lithuanians: 40-50,000 k.
    Latvian: 25,000
    Estonians: 15,000

    Massacres of Poles:

    21,892 Polish citizens shot by the Soviet NKVD in the Katyn* massacres of spring 1940 and 9,817 Polish citizens shot in June 1941

    etc, etc,

    I remember reading somewhere about Nixon, as president, remarking to someone that the USSR was morally pure (or innocent or some such adjective). He meant public morals – no filth in TV, etc.

    Well, he certainly wasn’t talking about any other kind…

    They started the Cold War to recapture Russia.

    Dunno; one tends to assume that Stalin’s acquisition of an empire extending well into Central Europe had something to do with it…

    *

    Vasily Mikhailovich Blokhin (Russian: Васи́лий Миха́йлович Блохи́н, 7 January 1895 – 3 February 1955) was a Soviet Russian Major-General who served as the chief executioner of the Stalinist NKVD under the administrations of Genrikh Yagoda, Nikolai Yezhov, and Lavrentiy Beria.

    Hand-picked for the position by Joseph Stalin in 1926, Blokhin led a company of executioners that performed and supervised numerous mass executions during Stalin’s reign, mostly during the Great Purge and World War II.[2] He is recorded as having executed tens of thousands of prisoners by his own hand, including his killing of about 7,000 Polish prisoners of war during the Katyn massacre in spring 1940,[2][3] making him the most prolific official executioner and mass murderer in recorded world history

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasily_Blokhin

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. AP says:
    @Chase
    Interesting. Can you elaborate or point towards a further discussion on this?

    It’s a bizarre and twisted theory. At the heart of it, glossy mistakes stability for conservatism and ignores a lot of “inconvenient” details. He thinks Stalin didn’t have total power over the country in the early thirties when collectivization killed millions of peasants and completely transformed the Soviet countryside (“conservative?”) while consolidating Soviet rule. He conveniently ignores that Stalin executed an estimated 100,000 Russian Orthodox priests who weren’t willing to totally subordinate themselves to the Soviet state, and that Stalin finished off most of what was left of the old Russian aristocracy (an excellent and heartbreaking book – Former People by Douglas Smith – describes this). He forgets that those parts of the Slavic world that were least exposed to Stalinism remain most traditional in their lifestyles and morality. But for glossy, because Stalin made the Soviet state stable he was a conservative. For this reason, glossy maintains that North Korea is a very conservative state also.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Rob McX says:
    @AndrewR
    Although genes do matter, culture plays a significant if not overwhelming role in these matters. I'd accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every "genuine actual white person" who pushes an anti-white agenda.

    I’d accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every “genuine actual white person” who pushes an anti-white agenda.

    That’s futile. If whites don’t survive as a majority population in their own countries, taking in other races who express pro-white views is no substitute. And in the long run, the majority of non-whites will always look out for their own racial interests.

    I don’t know of Kassam, but Malkin seems more of a neocon anyhow.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. tbraton says:
    @Mike Sylwester
    I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more.

    I have been hoping that Rubio would give a long, thoughtful speech about participating in the Gang of Eight like Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech about attending Jeremiah Wright's church. It's still not too late for Rubio to do so.

    Instead, Rubio's statements on the subject have been canned and glib.

    It's not so much that I want him to repent. I want him to explain in much more detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and what decisions and agreements he made during the process. I want to know the lessons he learned.

    The most important thing that Rubio needs to do in this campaign is to deal effectively with the immigration issue. He is squandering his opportunity to become the US President.

    “I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more.”

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions. I think Cruz got his opportunity tonight to be the lead dog, and imo he blew it. I think anybody watching tonight’s debate would be extremely uncomfortable with Ted Cruz. I think Rand Paul nailed it with his characterization of Cruz. Rubio is a complete lightweight liar with a penchant to wage endless wars, in accordance with the desires of his wealthy backers who are clearly pulling his strings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    https://twitter.com/slate/status/692924229017309184
    , @Mike Sylwester

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions.
     
    Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Bill P says:
    @SFG
    Go to Taki's, Chateau Heartiste, or rightstuff.biz, or countless others I can't even think of. There are lots of places now.

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)

    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes he looked very Irish. I always just assumed he was Irish. He looked like the Irish actor Colm Meaney:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colm_Meaney
    , @Clyde

    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.
     
    Andrew Breitbart was born to non-Jews and was adopted by a Jewish couple. He grew up culturally Jewish and he started Breitbart. com with a childhood Jewish friend. Larry Solov who owns and runs Breitbart with one or two other men
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/11/17/breitbart-news-network-born-in-the-usa-conceived-in-israel/

    Breitbart. com is a tremendous operation these days. They get an astounding number of comments which must translate into web traffic plus the owners have other projects going on designed to influence public opinion. They are firmly in the Trump and Cruz camps. They are not cucks. They throw Rand Paul a bone from time to time.
    , @SFG
    I stand corrected.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Nobody’s sure why. …

    I haven’t looked closely at all the Republicans, but Cruz appears to be the smartest of the top four Republican candidates. And he seems smarter than the two Democrats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kevin O'Keeffe
    "I haven’t looked closely at all the Republicans, but Cruz appears to be the smartest of the top four Republican candidates."

    He may well have a measurably higher I.Q. (or possibly just more formal education) than Trump...but I'm not sure I'd really characterize him as "smarter," based on actual performance. Maybe Cruz has a greater propensity for understanding higher mathematical functions than Trump, but I doubt he'd make a more effective national leader.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. e says:
    @Hepp
    He looks like a little kid and people can sense he's not very smart. You can tell that he's like a wind up doll with all the right answers that he memorized.

    Cruz is VERY smart and very Joe Isuzu-ish. He’s verbally fluent and yeah, a master debater, but you can see him plan every_damn_pause, just like a Mike Huckabee, who practiced his deliveries for years from the pulpit.

    Cruz=smarmy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I can never understand why they don't recruit actors to be politicians, or at least try to turn politicians into actors. Reagan played that Old Uncle Ronnie character perfectly. Cruz lacks chops. Everybody else does, too, mostly, wich is why mediocrities like Clinton get hailed as the great orators of the age.

    We were promised better by science fiction and a million predictions about the sinister machinations of hidden persuaders. Wait a minute. Maybe they make politicians boring on purpose, to throw us off the scent!

    By the way, could politicians act they'd probably go make an easier and less demeaning living.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. AnonAnon says:

    - Rubio very much comes across as another slick lying politician who will say whatever he needs to to get elected – been there, done that.

    - He one of the least intelligent candidates, down there with Jeb. Most of the people running are very intelligent, he is not.

    - He married a Dolphins cheerleader who didn’t graduate her crummy college. I can’t respect a man who doesn’t choose his spouse with better care – one giant reason I can’t stand Jeb Bush.

    - I don’t want a Hispanic in the White House – the beat down on whites will continue on as Hispanic Lives Matter.

    - Lots of whispers of impropriety about him from financial to marital issues.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Rubio sounds like he's on meth or maybe a similar prescription drug.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - Sadly, had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct. Rem acu tetigisteritis.

    had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct.

    Perhaps I was too callow myself at the time to remember accurately, but I got the sense that the HW White House wasn’t so bad, as opposed to it’s head, where you’re sadly correct.

    The Myers/McClellan/Earnest brigade came in in 1992.

    Read More
    • Replies: @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).
    , @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. pyrrhus says:
    @blah blah blah
    I'm not one prone to diatribes about conspiracies, shady deals in smoke-filled back rooms, and the nefarious maneuvering and machinations of the wealthy and powerful but for pete's sake, you can practically see the puppet strings attached to Rubio's limbs.

    Yes, and Rubio would be doing so much better if he had been clever and hidden them by fighting the Gang of 7….Steve’s analysis is 100% on target.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde

    Steve’s analysis is 100% on target.
     
    Yup. 100% perceptive and getting down to the real motivations of open borders billionaires and Marco Rubio. Marco is auditioning for his next job. He is leaving The Senate and taking his Rolodex with him. Marco is in it for the money, not the ideology. Marco is copying former Senator Mel Martinez (born in Cuba) of Florida who left the Senate in 2009 to become a DC lobbyist. He resigned from the Senate after just four years. So Mel was able to get very well connected in four years to where he could "graduate" and make the big Washingtoon DC money.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Bill P

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)
     
    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.

    Yes he looked very Irish. I always just assumed he was Irish. He looked like the Irish actor Colm Meaney:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colm_Meaney

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Meaney was great as the only NCO or warrant officer or whatever he was supposed to be on the Enterprise on Star Trek: TNG.
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    My professor of British literature was 150% Irish, and he was the spitting image of Andrew Breitbart.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. tbraton says:

    The other day I posted a message comparing the Reuters polls of August 2015 and the Reuters polls of January 2016. http://www.unz.com/isteve/trump-is-essentially-the-republican-partys-bill-clinton/#comment-1308970

    The most interesting thing to me is that Trump has gone from 17.8% in August to 41.6% in January while Jeb!!! has dropped from 15.8% to 8%. Nevertheless, Rubio has only gone from 7% to 7.9%. That would appear to give the lie to the argument that support for some of the “establishment” candidates will migrate to other “establishment” candidates if they drop out. The figures show that Trump has picked up most of the support that used to go to Jeb!!! and not Rubio.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Question: Does anyone know how to make those inverted question marks and exclamation points?

    It's like, man! Jeb! is good but that added extra something behind it really gives it a kick and makes the point. Would be a helluva campaign ad as in: "Jeb! (with the upside side exclamation) is he really for America?"

    Darn it. Is it a special keyboard or how do you type those anyway?

    PS: Trump's event tonight was awesome. Really a strong home run, ad not a bad speaker to boot.

    There’s probably an easier trick. But google upside down exclamation mark and then copy and paste. Or just copy and paste someone else’s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Go to any decent Word type software and you'll find the upside down characters under the special characters, or Symbols tabs.
    My copy of Orafice is screwed at the moment but I had one of these lying around and much prefer it.

    ¿Jeb?


    feel free to cut and paste.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Curle says:

    Speaking of the RNC braintrust, anyone see this article? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/republicans-point-fingers-who-let-trump-get-this-far-218260

    This is what passes for brains in the Republican Party:

    “Sally Bradshaw, a longtime top Bush adviser who helped write the report, blamed a “lack of courage in our party” for the failure to take on Trump, as Bush has. She called Trump a “bigot” and said he “couldn’t unite our party and bring women, Hispanics and independent voters into the fold.”

    The stupid truly runs deep. But at least one guy has part of it figured out. From Curt Anderson, a former Republican National Committee political director and veteran operative:

    ““If you want to know how to lose elections, the first people who you should talk to are the Republican Party’s major donors.”

    Ya think? You mean the folks who thought running a corporate raider in the middle of a middle class busting recession would be a good idea?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Trump could easily do 5 points better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney in the general election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Desiderius

    had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct.
     
    Perhaps I was too callow myself at the time to remember accurately, but I got the sense that the HW White House wasn't so bad, as opposed to it's head, where you're sadly correct.

    The Myers/McClellan/Earnest brigade came in in 1992.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1fTkvlvkpU

    Desiderius – In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    Roger Stone characterised Bush senior as a fiercely competitive and ruthless technocrat who gave the impression of a likeable upper class wasp gentleman. Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don't underestimate him. He did alright, could have been an American Putin though. Unlucky to face Perot and Clinton too.
    , @Ace
    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent, I believe. John Podhoretz's book about his presidency, Hell of a Ride is a brilliant portrait of a man with no clue about the political issues of his time. Good luck finding out what he actually did as ambassador to China, ambassador to the U.N., or DCI. He warmed the chair is all I can tell but I've not studied his life. The most important job Bush held was chairman of the RNC where he did well at raising money for Republicans. His run for the presidency was greatly fueled by calling in chits for his help to fellow Republicans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Desiderius

    had you said 28 years you would have been even more correct.
     
    Perhaps I was too callow myself at the time to remember accurately, but I got the sense that the HW White House wasn't so bad, as opposed to it's head, where you're sadly correct.

    The Myers/McClellan/Earnest brigade came in in 1992.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1fTkvlvkpU

    Desiderius – In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Question: Does anyone know how to make those inverted question marks and exclamation points?

    It's like, man! Jeb! is good but that added extra something behind it really gives it a kick and makes the point. Would be a helluva campaign ad as in: "Jeb! (with the upside side exclamation) is he really for America?"

    Darn it. Is it a special keyboard or how do you type those anyway?

    PS: Trump's event tonight was awesome. Really a strong home run, ad not a bad speaker to boot.

    Does anyone know how to make those inverted question marks and exclamation points?

    On stone age PCs, Alt 173 makes ¡ and Alt 168 makes ¿. There’s a bunch more here you can print off.

    On an iPhone or iPad, just keep your finger on the right-side up character, and the upside-down one will appear right above it. Then draw your pinky, stylus, or other protuberance up to it.

    Other systems and devices may vary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Taco says:
    @middle aged vet
    Glossy - Paragraph one: Stalin was pro-choice and pro-murder. Two strikes against the conservative view point. Paragraph Two: Nixon was effectively pro-choice, and, yes, he understood the similarly pro-choice Brezhnev in a way that almost nobody on the internets understands. That is not all that much to Nixon's credit - what is to his credit is his refusal to allow, in the goodness of his heart, little countries be demolished and enslaved. He was, from that point of view, the greatest peacemaker of his times. Third paragraph: Nixon dated and married a Hollywood star. He was a coddled Navy officer. It is not his fault he did not understand public morals. Fourth paragraph: The Cold War is easy to understand. Everybody was more or less bad, but once in a while some of the more or less bad people (Roy Cohn, for an example that will gladden the hearts of those who love to hate on their fellow Americans) realized that other bad people (Hiss) were really really bad, and had the courage to do something about it. Or maybe that Powers guy was the only one who was right.

    Pat Nixon appeared in 4 films, each time as an uncredited extra.

    http://m.imdb.com/name/nm0633268/filmotype/actress?ref_=m_nmfm_1

    Your claims about Richatd Nixon being coddled and not understanding public morals are equalLuna’s absurd as your claim that Pat Nixon was a “movie star”

    Read More
    • Replies: @middle aged vet
    Taco - you make good points but I think you misread my words. Of course Pat Nixon was not a "movie star". In traditional American speech "Hollywood star" and "movie star" meant different things. "Movie stars" were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and "Hollywood stars" were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies. As to coddled, Nixon's Navy service was not coddled in general, and only a very ignorant person would say that: I meant that his status as an officer protected him from learning many of the life lessons in morality that ordinary men in the Navy at that time probably learned. He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School and in corporate law and, maybe, even in Congress; with the exception of his 14 or so years in the White House, he had more in common with sheltered and privileged academics than regular Americans; and privileged academics are notorious for absurd and uninformed theories about the morals of those they think of as the "common people".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Taco says:

    For some reason I can’t edit my previous post.

    Should say “Richard” and “equally absurd”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. @Anonymous
    Yeah, VDare runs Malkin's articles for the same reason, and it's completely phony. I mean their logo is a white doe, they're named after the first white child born in North America, and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin's articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear "diverse". What's the point? Who cares at that point?

    they’re named after the first white child born in North America

    No, they’re not. Virginia Dare was the first English child born in North America. She’s not even the first white child born in what’s the modern US. This kid is:

    http://hispanememento.blogspot.com/2012/02/martin-de-arguelles-primer-nino-blanco.html

    …and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”.

    Horse manure. She does quite good work on illegal immigration, including a best-selling book, and is tough on Islam and other bêtes-noires of theirs. She’s not there because they have a thing for Flips.

    Their policy has always been, explicitly, that if they pay for a columnist, they post everything. They did the same for Paul Craig Roberts, who makes Mrs Malkin look calm and reasonable by comparison.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    It doesn't really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There's really no point hosting her articles there.
    , @John Derbyshire, @Ace
    Malkin is calm and reasonable at all times.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Douthat: “Why Isn’t Marco Rubio Winning?”

    Because few Americans want two gay presidents in succession?

    Some argue we’ve already gone through that, starting in 1857.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    The fact that James Buchanan was our only (probably) Gay president has really got to annoy Homosexual activists. Indeed, it seems to have pushed Larry Kramer right over the edge...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Clyde says:
    @pyrrhus
    Yes, and Rubio would be doing so much better if he had been clever and hidden them by fighting the Gang of 7....Steve's analysis is 100% on target.

    Steve’s analysis is 100% on target.

    Yup. 100% perceptive and getting down to the real motivations of open borders billionaires and Marco Rubio. Marco is auditioning for his next job. He is leaving The Senate and taking his Rolodex with him. Marco is in it for the money, not the ideology. Marco is copying former Senator Mel Martinez (born in Cuba) of Florida who left the Senate in 2009 to become a DC lobbyist. He resigned from the Senate after just four years. So Mel was able to get very well connected in four years to where he could “graduate” and make the big Washingtoon DC money.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. TWS says:

    If Hiss is president which Rosenberg gets the VP nod?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I am a Trump supporter 100%. I would vote for Sanders over Rubio. Maybe even Hillary over Rubio. Rubio is an extremely dangerous neocon puppet who comes out with scary hints about he will go along with the most dangerous and destructive moves provided to him by his neocon handlers. ‘Putin is a gangster who needs to be punched in the nose.” Oy vey, Putin is the only sane powerful leader to step in and save a secular Middle East country from becoming another genocidal Islamist wasteland. Rubio will be Dick Cheney on bath salts. Rubio will work to bring about all the worst things those here on iSteve bitch about all the time as well as the worst neoconish stuff which the average Bernie supporter harps on.

    Btw, why haven’t the major media outlets run the story of Rubio’s arrest (citation?) at that park when he was 19?? What that park had a reputation for is the rest-of-the-story kind of thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @tbraton
    "I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more."

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions. I think Cruz got his opportunity tonight to be the lead dog, and imo he blew it. I think anybody watching tonight's debate would be extremely uncomfortable with Ted Cruz. I think Rand Paul nailed it with his characterization of Cruz. Rubio is a complete lightweight liar with a penchant to wage endless wars, in accordance with the desires of his wealthy backers who are clearly pulling his strings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Thanks for the post. I missed that. I had heard that Cruz was not popular, but I didn't realize the other candidates were shunning him like that. That's what they did to Romney back in 2008.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @AnonAnon
    - Rubio very much comes across as another slick lying politician who will say whatever he needs to to get elected - been there, done that.

    - He one of the least intelligent candidates, down there with Jeb. Most of the people running are very intelligent, he is not.

    - He married a Dolphins cheerleader who didn't graduate her crummy college. I can't respect a man who doesn't choose his spouse with better care - one giant reason I can't stand Jeb Bush.

    - I don't want a Hispanic in the White House - the beat down on whites will continue on as Hispanic Lives Matter.

    - Lots of whispers of impropriety about him from financial to marital issues.

    Rubio sounds like he’s on meth or maybe a similar prescription drug.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @tbraton
    "I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more."

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions. I think Cruz got his opportunity tonight to be the lead dog, and imo he blew it. I think anybody watching tonight's debate would be extremely uncomfortable with Ted Cruz. I think Rand Paul nailed it with his characterization of Cruz. Rubio is a complete lightweight liar with a penchant to wage endless wars, in accordance with the desires of his wealthy backers who are clearly pulling his strings.

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions.

    Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election."

    Wow. I guess Rubio's neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn't vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me. I think he would have had a hard time getting reelected to the Senate had he chosen to run again. Polls show him consistently trailing far behind Trump, so I'm not sure why you're enthusiastic about him. He seems too young and inexperienced to me to be President of the U.S. That's why I changed my registration in Florida from "Independent" to "Republican." Just so I could vote for Trump and against Rubio and Bush in the Florida primary.
    , @reiner Tor
    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said:

    "I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Clyde says:
    @Bill P

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)
     
    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.

    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.

    Andrew Breitbart was born to non-Jews and was adopted by a Jewish couple. He grew up culturally Jewish and he started Breitbart. com with a childhood Jewish friend. Larry Solov who owns and runs Breitbart with one or two other men

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/11/17/breitbart-news-network-born-in-the-usa-conceived-in-israel/

    Breitbart. com is a tremendous operation these days. They get an astounding number of comments which must translate into web traffic plus the owners have other projects going on designed to influence public opinion. They are firmly in the Trump and Cruz camps. They are not cucks. They throw Rand Paul a bone from time to time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Yes he looked very Irish. I always just assumed he was Irish. He looked like the Irish actor Colm Meaney:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colm_Meaney

    Meaney was great as the only NCO or warrant officer or whatever he was supposed to be on the Enterprise on Star Trek: TNG.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    TNG always was liberal nerds' idea of what the military should be.

    It still did give us some of the best televised scifi of the era, albeit in the liberal 'think-piece' mode rather than the conservative 'spaceships-and-blasters' mode. Who can forget Picard living an entire life in an hour, or the people who communicated through metaphors? It would be funny to imagine some of the people here doing that...

    'Trump, and Sailer, at Trump Tower.'
    'Soros! His face black, his nose large!'
    'Enoch! The river Enoch, foaming with blood!
    'Trump and Sailer, at the White House.'

    , @Alec Leamas
    The role of Meaney's lifetime was Jimmy Rabbitte, Sr. in The Commitments.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Reg Cæsar

    they’re named after the first white child born in North America
     
    No, they're not. Virginia Dare was the first English child born in North America. She's not even the first white child born in what's the modern US. This kid is:

    http://hispanememento.blogspot.com/2012/02/martin-de-arguelles-primer-nino-blanco.html

    ...and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”.

     

    Horse manure. She does quite good work on illegal immigration, including a best-selling book, and is tough on Islam and other bêtes-noires of theirs. She's not there because they have a thing for Flips.

    Their policy has always been, explicitly, that if they pay for a columnist, they post everything. They did the same for Paul Craig Roberts, who makes Mrs Malkin look calm and reasonable by comparison.

    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    It doesn’t really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There’s really no point hosting her articles there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "I mean white as in non-Hispanic white"

    So George Zimmerman is out.
    , @This Is Our Home

    It doesn’t really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There’s really no point hosting her articles there.
     
    She is a good writer. Don't be weird about this stuff.
    , @ben tillman

    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.
     
    Why would you invent such a bogus category?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Curle
    Speaking of the RNC braintrust, anyone see this article? http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/republicans-point-fingers-who-let-trump-get-this-far-218260

    This is what passes for brains in the Republican Party:

    "Sally Bradshaw, a longtime top Bush adviser who helped write the report, blamed a "lack of courage in our party" for the failure to take on Trump, as Bush has. She called Trump a “bigot” and said he “couldn’t unite our party and bring women, Hispanics and independent voters into the fold.”

    The stupid truly runs deep. But at least one guy has part of it figured out. From Curt Anderson, a former Republican National Committee political director and veteran operative:

    "“If you want to know how to lose elections, the first people who you should talk to are the Republican Party’s major donors.”

    Ya think? You mean the folks who thought running a corporate raider in the middle of a middle class busting recession would be a good idea?

    Trump could easily do 5 points better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney in the general election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why do you say that? Trump is viewed most negatively among the GOP candidates by Democrats and Independents:

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Anonymous
    Yes he looked very Irish. I always just assumed he was Irish. He looked like the Irish actor Colm Meaney:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colm_Meaney

    My professor of British literature was 150% Irish, and he was the spitting image of Andrew Breitbart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Hepp
    They just asked Bush about Puerto Rican statehood, and pointed out that only 25% of the island is employed. This guy....

    Good to know at least one person is watching the debate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dew
    I tried my best to watch it. Couldn't bring myself to watch more than a few minutes of the actual debate but saw a good amount of the pre-debate coverage on Fox.

    The Fox News types like O' Rilley were so darn smug about Trump not being in it. "Scared of Megyn Kelly" yeah right.

    Anyone else here see it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Dave Pinsen
    Trump could easily do 5 points better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney in the general election.

    Why do you say that? Trump is viewed most negatively among the GOP candidates by Democrats and Independents:

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Does that include the Democrats and Independents packing his rallies?
    , @Dave Pinsen
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/breaking-poll-40-of-blacks-line-behind-trump-45-of-hispanics/
    , @Maj. Kong
    Trump was underwater with Republicans a month or two back. He's turned that around now. It's just as likely he will do it with Democrats.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. guest says:
    @Anonymous
    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    It doesn't really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There's really no point hosting her articles there.

    “I mean white as in non-Hispanic white”

    So George Zimmerman is out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Anonymous
    Why do you say that? Trump is viewed most negatively among the GOP candidates by Democrats and Independents:

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

    Does that include the Democrats and Independents packing his rallies?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    No, but it's the rest of the country not at the rally you have to worry about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. guest says:
    @e
    Cruz is VERY smart and very Joe Isuzu-ish. He's verbally fluent and yeah, a master debater, but you can see him plan every_damn_pause, just like a Mike Huckabee, who practiced his deliveries for years from the pulpit.

    Cruz=smarmy.

    I can never understand why they don’t recruit actors to be politicians, or at least try to turn politicians into actors. Reagan played that Old Uncle Ronnie character perfectly. Cruz lacks chops. Everybody else does, too, mostly, wich is why mediocrities like Clinton get hailed as the great orators of the age.

    We were promised better by science fiction and a million predictions about the sinister machinations of hidden persuaders. Wait a minute. Maybe they make politicians boring on purpose, to throw us off the scent!

    By the way, could politicians act they’d probably go make an easier and less demeaning living.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Rubio, the guy who graduated high school (in FL mind you) with a GPA of 2.1 and was arrested at night from possessing of alcohol (and/or a controlled substance) in a Miami park known for drug dealing and use.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Forgot to include story link (comment #69): https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rubios-summer-of-90-an-arrest-then-newfound-purpose/2016/01/21/3582a72e-c04d-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html
    , @AP
    Well, he did graduate cum lauda from a decently ranked law school .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    Rubio, the guy who graduated high school (in FL mind you) with a GPA of 2.1 and was arrested at night from possessing of alcohol (and/or a controlled substance) in a Miami park known for drug dealing and use.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Trump really hit a home run tonight. It was really something to see.

    As for Rubio, I’m not sure why people are ridiculing his intellect. I’m afraid he’s quite intelligent and talented and could still very possibly win the Presidency. He can seem moderate and pleasant while stabbing the middle class in the back, that’s a real skill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    As for Rubio, I’m not sure why people are ridiculing his intellect.
     
    Let's just say that his university record is less than impressive:

    He then attended Tarkio College in Missouri for one year on a football scholarship from 1989 to 1990, before enrolling at Santa Fe Community College (now Santa Fe College) in Gainesville, Florida. He earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Florida in 1993, and his J.D. degree cum laude from the University of Miami School of Law in 1996.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rubio
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Anonymous
    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    It doesn't really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There's really no point hosting her articles there.

    It doesn’t really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There’s really no point hosting her articles there.

    She is a good writer. Don’t be weird about this stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Don’t be weird about this stuff.
     
    That's the whole point of being Anonymous.

    Though I have to admit, while I usually agree with her, her tone is far too shrill for me. At least Ann Coulter leavens hers with good jokes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Why do you say that? Trump is viewed most negatively among the GOP candidates by Democrats and Independents:

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx
    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, I've seen those polls which seem to be the basis for this sort of hype. That poll was conducted by World Net Daily. Have there been any other polls put out by major pollsters suggesting the same thing? It seems to be inconsistent with polls such as the recent Gallup one suggesting that Trump is viewed most negatively by Dems and Independents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @AndrewR
    Although genes do matter, culture plays a significant if not overwhelming role in these matters. I'd accept a hundred million people like Malkin and Kassam into the US if, in exchange, I could expel every "genuine actual white person" who pushes an anti-white agenda.

    I think you should revisit Aesop’s fables.

    Fundamentally, all non-European immigration is problematic. Even the idea of letting in only the genious class from other countries would only result in creating a brown elite in the US. It’s either a Trojan Horse or a recipe for an inverted Brazil.

    BTW, I think Snori Thorfinnson predated Virginia Dare.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Fundamentally, all non-European immigration is problematic. Even the idea of letting in only the genious class from other countries would only result in creating a brown elite in the US. It’s either a Trojan Horse or a recipe for an inverted Brazil.

    There were some videos of Indian immigrant businessmen emphasizing how much good they were doing India by their activities in the U.S. I’m more and more inlined to agree with the quote. Honestly, in this labor market, aside from an incidental entertainer or someone like that, I’m inclined to think we don’t need any immigration at all. There’s even a Canadian Indian tribe that has a “marry out, move out” policy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. tbraton says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions.
     
    Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.

    “Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.”

    Wow. I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me. I think he would have had a hard time getting reelected to the Senate had he chosen to run again. Polls show him consistently trailing far behind Trump, so I’m not sure why you’re enthusiastic about him. He seems too young and inexperienced to me to be President of the U.S. That’s why I changed my registration in Florida from “Independent” to “Republican.” Just so I could vote for Trump and against Rubio and Bush in the Florida primary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me
     
    I agree with you that Rubio is too hawkish on foreign policy and too dovish on immigration policy.

    However, I generally agree with Rubio's stance on economic issues. He is an eloquent advocate of our free market and our opportunity society.

    Rubio also has much successful political experience in the Florida state government.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty. I think that's what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted. That's why I want him to explain satisfactorily his involvement in the Gang of Eight.

    Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential.

    I like Cruz and Trump more right now, but each of them has faults too.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. eah says:

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here — now it simply says [removed], yet in familiar and typically stupid fashion, all of the comments are still there.

    At the moment, you can read the gist of what was [removed] at this link:

    As a quick summary: we know that the man Rubio was arrested with in 1990 was sued by Miami in 2007 for running a gay pornography studio out of one of his properties. We believe the totality of the evidence strongly implies that Rubio was engaged in sexual relations with that man in 1990, and that’s why they were arrested. Full story below.

    Read the ‘full story’ for yourself…before it is also [removed].

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Available at the internet archive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Mike Sylwester

    I am puzzled why you would be comfortable to have any one of those three, as if there is no difference in their political positions.
     
    Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.

    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said:

    “I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Ironically, most people could and did survive fascism, communism, or liberal democracy, and would keep their heads down and go along to get along (and avoid getting killed in the first two cases).

    Those three leaders happened to be at war, which is a different story.

    , @Mike Sylwester

    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said: “I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.”
     
    Is this what you mean?

    Rubio = Hitler

    Cruz = Churchill

    Trump = Stalin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. LondonBob says:
    @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).

    Roger Stone characterised Bush senior as a fiercely competitive and ruthless technocrat who gave the impression of a likeable upper class wasp gentleman. Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don’t underestimate him. He did alright, could have been an American Putin though. Unlucky to face Perot and Clinton too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manton
    Bush was DCI for less than one year and never otherwise served in the CIA.
    , @Johann Ricke

    Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don’t underestimate him.
     
    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. SFG says:
    @Bill P

    Hell, Breitbart himself was half-Jewish. (Does he get one set of parentheses?)
     
    From the looks of him, Andrew Breitbart was 150% Irish. Actually, he was adopted by a Jew and a convert to Judaism, so if environment is 50% of how we turn out then he was half Jewish. But genetically I highly doubt he had more than negligible Jewish ancestry, if any at all.

    I stand corrected.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. “In retrospect, Rubio was well-positioned by ethnicity to instead lead resistance to the billionaires’ hopes to worsen the Latinization of our country (on the Nixon-goes-to-China principle of politics).”

    This reminds me that Obama’s election could have been a great opportunity to reverse the worsening Africanization of our government (i.e. Big Man loots the other tribes and spreads the wealth over to his own and himself). Instead, Obama doubled down on all the policies dividing the nation, ultimately trapping blacks into deeper dependency and driving whites further into despondency.

    I think that for the Nixon-goes-to-China gambit to work, there needs to be establishment support for going to China. Nixon could screw his anti-communist base because everyone else in Washington was gung ho with opening relations with China. Similarly, De Gaulle could screw the French colonists in Algeria because the French establishment was largely anti-colonialist. Obama couldn’t ramp down affirmative action and redistribution because everyone in Washington is on the gravy train, and Rubio can’t oppose turning the US into a Latin-American Caudillo State, because everyone in Washington is in favor of it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. SFG says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    Does that include the Democrats and Independents packing his rallies?

    No, but it’s the rest of the country not at the rally you have to worry about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. SFG says:
    @reiner Tor
    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said:

    "I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept."

    Ironically, most people could and did survive fascism, communism, or liberal democracy, and would keep their heads down and go along to get along (and avoid getting killed in the first two cases).

    Those three leaders happened to be at war, which is a different story.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. SFG says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    Meaney was great as the only NCO or warrant officer or whatever he was supposed to be on the Enterprise on Star Trek: TNG.

    TNG always was liberal nerds’ idea of what the military should be.

    It still did give us some of the best televised scifi of the era, albeit in the liberal ‘think-piece’ mode rather than the conservative ‘spaceships-and-blasters’ mode. Who can forget Picard living an entire life in an hour, or the people who communicated through metaphors? It would be funny to imagine some of the people here doing that…

    ‘Trump, and Sailer, at Trump Tower.’
    ‘Soros! His face black, his nose large!’
    ‘Enoch! The river Enoch, foaming with blood!
    ‘Trump and Sailer, at the White House.’

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The first few seasons of TNG were more liberal due to more Roddenberry influence. The metaphor show was kind of dumb - I wondered at the time how such a people would have been able to develop engineering with such a lack of precision in their language.

    The other episode you alluded too, "The Light Within", was arguably TNG's best. Stewart was a great actor, but in a stagey sort of way. Meaney just kind of inhabited his small role and made it believable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Reg Cæsar

    they’re named after the first white child born in North America
     
    No, they're not. Virginia Dare was the first English child born in North America. She's not even the first white child born in what's the modern US. This kid is:

    http://hispanememento.blogspot.com/2012/02/martin-de-arguelles-primer-nino-blanco.html

    ...and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”.

     

    Horse manure. She does quite good work on illegal immigration, including a best-selling book, and is tough on Islam and other bêtes-noires of theirs. She's not there because they have a thing for Flips.

    Their policy has always been, explicitly, that if they pay for a columnist, they post everything. They did the same for Paul Craig Roberts, who makes Mrs Malkin look calm and reasonable by comparison.
    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Snorri Porfinnsson."

    Are you suggesting a name change for "VDare"? I think a snappier title would be "SPorfinnson." That will really draw the readers.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    That's "Thorfinnsson". That P-thingy is the thorn, for an unvoiced TH. It's usually rendered TH on non-Icelandic (or non-old-English) systems.

    Sorry, Derb, to be a thorn in your side.
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Funny, that name doesn't sound English. Best to leave it as is, at Virginia Dare.
    , @Blobby5
    What a coincidence! My partner calls me 'Snorri' as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @tbraton
    "Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.

    If Rubio became the Republican nominee, he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election."

    Wow. I guess Rubio's neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn't vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me. I think he would have had a hard time getting reelected to the Senate had he chosen to run again. Polls show him consistently trailing far behind Trump, so I'm not sure why you're enthusiastic about him. He seems too young and inexperienced to me to be President of the U.S. That's why I changed my registration in Florida from "Independent" to "Republican." Just so I could vote for Trump and against Rubio and Bush in the Florida primary.

    I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me

    I agree with you that Rubio is too hawkish on foreign policy and too dovish on immigration policy.

    However, I generally agree with Rubio’s stance on economic issues. He is an eloquent advocate of our free market and our opportunity society.

    Rubio also has much successful political experience in the Florida state government.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty. I think that’s what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted. That’s why I want him to explain satisfactorily his involvement in the Gang of Eight.

    Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential.

    I like Cruz and Trump more right now, but each of them has faults too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "I think that’s what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted."

    LOL - then he didn't try very hard to not be outwitted.

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. Even with such an amendment there is no way to guarantee our laws would ever be enforced, but at least (one hopes, perhaps in vain) the Constitutional questions would be settled once and for all.

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.
    , @syonredux

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.
     
    We've been down this road before. They pass the mass amnesty and forget about the effective enforcement part.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential. "

    Rubio is Paul Singer's bitch. Or at least, he was going to be when it seemed that Bush was flaming out and Rubio could step into his shoes. Rubio will never do anything to stem immigration. Neither he wants to nor do the people to whom he will owe his position. And Rubio talks a great deal about family values and such, but his biggest backer (Singer) used his money and influence to ram gay marriage through the New York State legislature.

    Rubio is - like most of the rest of them - a corrupt duplicitous sell-out. He is just less bright than they are. Come to think of it, that might be his best quality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. dr kill says:

    Yabba Dabba Doo!!!1!!11

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. @reiner Tor
    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said:

    "I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept."

    You sound a bit like the guy who in 1942 said: “I like Hitler, but I like Churchill and Stalin even more. Yes, they have different political positions, but they all are within a range that I can accept.”

    Is this what you mean?

    Rubio = Hitler

    Cruz = Churchill

    Trump = Stalin

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Taco
    Pat Nixon appeared in 4 films, each time as an uncredited extra.

    http://m.imdb.com/name/nm0633268/filmotype/actress?ref_=m_nmfm_1

    Your claims about Richatd Nixon being coddled and not understanding public morals are equalLuna's absurd as your claim that Pat Nixon was a "movie star"

    Taco – you make good points but I think you misread my words. Of course Pat Nixon was not a “movie star”. In traditional American speech “Hollywood star” and “movie star” meant different things. “Movie stars” were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and “Hollywood stars” were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies. As to coddled, Nixon’s Navy service was not coddled in general, and only a very ignorant person would say that: I meant that his status as an officer protected him from learning many of the life lessons in morality that ordinary men in the Navy at that time probably learned. He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School and in corporate law and, maybe, even in Congress; with the exception of his 14 or so years in the White House, he had more in common with sheltered and privileged academics than regular Americans; and privileged academics are notorious for absurd and uninformed theories about the morals of those they think of as the “common people”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew Jackson

    Of course Pat Nixon was not a “movie star”. In traditional American speech “Hollywood star” and “movie star” meant different things. “Movie stars” were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and “Hollywood stars” were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies.
     
    Hahaha. What a crock of nonsense.
    , @Taco
    "He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School"

    Look, even a cursory search of the internet will tell you that this simply isn't true.

    Richard Nixon's early life was hardscrabble. From wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Early_life


    Nixon's early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: "We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn't know it".[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     

    Instead, they sent Richard to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[13][14] He received excellent grades, even though he had to ride a school bus for an hour each way during his freshman year
     

    His parents permitted Richard to transfer to Whittier High School for his junior year, beginning in September 1928. At Whittier High, Nixon suffered his first electoral defeat, for student body president. He generally rose at 4 a.m., to drive the family truck into Los Angeles and purchase vegetables at the market. He then drove to the store to wash and display them, before going to school. Harold had been diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona in the hopes of improving his health, the demands on Richard increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Richard graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207 students.[18]
     

    Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but Harold's continued illness and the need for their mother to care for him meant Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown and attended Whittier College, his expenses there covered by a bequest from his maternal grandfather.[19] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, but lacked the size to play. He remained on the team as a substitute, and was noted for his enthusiasm.[20] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins; many members of the Franklins were from prominent families but Nixon was not.
     
    I could go on, but you can just click the link.

    Richard Nixon's family was a hand-to-mouth lower middle class family with 5 children one of whom died young and one of whom had tuberculosis. Throughout his time in high school and college he had to spend his spare time working at the family business. Despite this, he got good enough grades to get an academic scholarship to law school.

    As to his military service, Nixon was a Quaker. He could have been a legitimate conscientious objector. I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be "coddled" he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    And Pat Nixon, yes, appeared in 4 films as an extra. She was also a delivery driver, secretary, telephone operator, pharmacist's assistant, and janitor, among other things. Does this sound to you like a lady who is a "Hollywood Star" or a lady who had to work hard, at any job that was available, who at some point on her day off made a few extra bucks by being an extra?

    Richard and Pat Nixon both came up as working poor. Maybe Richard Nixon truly suffered some detachment from public morality. I will not deny the possibility. But that deficit, if it existed, certainly didn't stem from a "coddled" existence in his formative years.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. iffen says:

    Romney – oily, plastic slug

    Rubio – brown-skinned, oily, plastic slug

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  93. Wilkey says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me
     
    I agree with you that Rubio is too hawkish on foreign policy and too dovish on immigration policy.

    However, I generally agree with Rubio's stance on economic issues. He is an eloquent advocate of our free market and our opportunity society.

    Rubio also has much successful political experience in the Florida state government.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty. I think that's what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted. That's why I want him to explain satisfactorily his involvement in the Gang of Eight.

    Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential.

    I like Cruz and Trump more right now, but each of them has faults too.

    “I think that’s what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted.”

    LOL – then he didn’t try very hard to not be outwitted.

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. Even with such an amendment there is no way to guarantee our laws would ever be enforced, but at least (one hopes, perhaps in vain) the Constitutional questions would be settled once and for all.

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. ....

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.
     
    I agree with the first paragraph and disagree with the third paragraph.

    In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites.

    When Barack Obama got into political trouble because of his attending Jeremiah Wright's church, Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech and resolved the issue for most voters. Rubio should do something similar about his participation in the Gang of Eight.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. tbraton says:
    @John Derbyshire

    “Snorri Porfinnsson.”

    Are you suggesting a name change for “VDare”? I think a snappier title would be “SPorfinnson.” That will really draw the readers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. CAL says:
    @Mike Sylwester
    I like Rubio, but I like Cruz and Trump more.

    I have been hoping that Rubio would give a long, thoughtful speech about participating in the Gang of Eight like Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech about attending Jeremiah Wright's church. It's still not too late for Rubio to do so.

    Instead, Rubio's statements on the subject have been canned and glib.

    It's not so much that I want him to repent. I want him to explain in much more detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and what decisions and agreements he made during the process. I want to know the lessons he learned.

    The most important thing that Rubio needs to do in this campaign is to deal effectively with the immigration issue. He is squandering his opportunity to become the US President.

    His chance to do that died when he supported the recent CASA bill which would legalize the patently un-Constitutional star chamber trials of men on college campuses.

    I don’t think he is that bright in the political sense. He’s easily manipulated and doesn’t seem to have a rudder of his own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    His [Rubio's] chance to do that [become the US President] died when he supported the recent CASA bill which would legalize the patently un-Constitutional star chamber trials of men on college campuses.

    I don’t think he is that bright in the political sense. He’s easily manipulated and doesn’t seem to have a rudder of his own.
     

    I agree with all of your statement except that his chance has died.

    I still think that Rubio will learn from his mistakes and has great political talent and potential.

    In the meantime, I am supporting Cruz and Trump over Rubio.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Dave Pinsen
    Meaney was great as the only NCO or warrant officer or whatever he was supposed to be on the Enterprise on Star Trek: TNG.

    The role of Meaney’s lifetime was Jimmy Rabbitte, Sr. in The Commitments.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Svigor says:

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here

    https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/42cvjr/something_very_interesting_some_friends_and_i/%2BSomething+very+interesting+some+friends+and+I+discovered+about+Marco+Rubio&hl=en&biw&bih&gbv=1&&ct=clnk” href=http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Rr2XZ2nmqrEJ:https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/42cvjr/something_very_interesting_some_friends_and_i/%2BSomething+very+interesting+some+friends+and+I+discovered+about+Marco+Rubio&hl=en&biw&bih&gbv=1&&ct=clnk rel=”nofollow”>G**gle cache of page in question

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.

    I don’t see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.

    The figures show that Trump has picked up most of the support that used to go to Jeb!!! and not Rubio.

    Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it’s not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently.

    Same data showed that even with the bump he’ll still be way behind Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.
     
    Actually, the minimum wage law adjusted for aliens on green cards is as good and effective a tool as I've seen anyone propose. And only Randall Burns of Vdare.com has ever brought it up.

    Furthermore, you've got three federal agencies to enforce it. The immigration officers, the Department of Labor, and the IRS-- if the alien hasn't paid net income tax, he's earning too little and breaking the law.

    And the legal status of the alien is irrelevant. The states could do this themselves.
    , @tbraton
    "Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it’s not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently."

    Well, I have been reading similar things since last summer, and it turned out to be misinformed speculation. I cited actual figures of the Reuters' polls from last August to this January which show Trump's percentage growing dramatically while Rubio's have grown very slightly and others (such as Bush) have declined dramatically. The actual figures belie the speculation of last summer. I seem to recall that Reuters-Ipsos polls were among the most accurate in the 2012 cycle. After the election, Nate Silver ranked Reuters-Ipsos sixth out of 23 pollsters in 2012, with an average error not that far off the second ranked poll. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/?_r=0
    , @Mike Sylwester

    I don’t see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.
     
    I too favor a crackdown on employers.

    Unfortunately, the Democrat Party will continue to block such crackdowns until a mass amnesty is promised.

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.

    I wish I could count on Trump becoming President, but his conduct has remained extremely erratic. He might win in a landslide or lose in a landslide.

    That's why I have switched my support from Trump to Cruz.

    If Rubio could explain himself convincingly on the immigration issue, I might switch from Cruz to Rubio, because I think that Rubio has a better chance of being elected President than Cruz does.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @middle aged vet
    Taco - you make good points but I think you misread my words. Of course Pat Nixon was not a "movie star". In traditional American speech "Hollywood star" and "movie star" meant different things. "Movie stars" were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and "Hollywood stars" were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies. As to coddled, Nixon's Navy service was not coddled in general, and only a very ignorant person would say that: I meant that his status as an officer protected him from learning many of the life lessons in morality that ordinary men in the Navy at that time probably learned. He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School and in corporate law and, maybe, even in Congress; with the exception of his 14 or so years in the White House, he had more in common with sheltered and privileged academics than regular Americans; and privileged academics are notorious for absurd and uninformed theories about the morals of those they think of as the "common people".

    Of course Pat Nixon was not a “movie star”. In traditional American speech “Hollywood star” and “movie star” meant different things. “Movie stars” were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and “Hollywood stars” were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies.

    Hahaha. What a crock of nonsense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @This Is Our Home

    It doesn’t really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There’s really no point hosting her articles there.
     
    She is a good writer. Don't be weird about this stuff.

    Don’t be weird about this stuff.

    That’s the whole point of being Anonymous.

    Though I have to admit, while I usually agree with her, her tone is far too shrill for me. At least Ann Coulter leavens hers with good jokes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Definitely agree about Ann and her jokes. In an earlier era, Ann would definitely have been one of Bob Hope's main joke writers. If you read her stuff carefully, you can almost hear Hope delivering these zingers to his live audience.

    Wonder if Ann Coulter missed her calling early in life by not applying for an internship with David Letterman's staff to help write his jokes? (since Hope would've been way ancient by that time).

    Hi Ann!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Svigor says:

    The edit window still way too short.

    Ron may want to look at site code. I’m looking at the link I pasted in, and it looks kosher no matter how long I stare at it. Here’s a tinyurl version:

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here

    G**gle cache of page in question

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. @Svigor

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here
     
    G**gle cache of page in question

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.
     
    I don't see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors' pols defend them, we'll see how that plays out.

    The figures show that Trump has picked up most of the support that used to go to Jeb!!! and not Rubio.
     
    Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it's not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently.

    Same data showed that even with the bump he'll still be way behind Trump.

    The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.

    Actually, the minimum wage law adjusted for aliens on green cards is as good and effective a tool as I’ve seen anyone propose. And only Randall Burns of Vdare.com has ever brought it up.

    Furthermore, you’ve got three federal agencies to enforce it. The immigration officers, the Department of Labor, and the IRS– if the alien hasn’t paid net income tax, he’s earning too little and breaking the law.

    And the legal status of the alien is irrelevant. The states could do this themselves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @SFG
    TNG always was liberal nerds' idea of what the military should be.

    It still did give us some of the best televised scifi of the era, albeit in the liberal 'think-piece' mode rather than the conservative 'spaceships-and-blasters' mode. Who can forget Picard living an entire life in an hour, or the people who communicated through metaphors? It would be funny to imagine some of the people here doing that...

    'Trump, and Sailer, at Trump Tower.'
    'Soros! His face black, his nose large!'
    'Enoch! The river Enoch, foaming with blood!
    'Trump and Sailer, at the White House.'

    The first few seasons of TNG were more liberal due to more Roddenberry influence. The metaphor show was kind of dumb – I wondered at the time how such a people would have been able to develop engineering with such a lack of precision in their language.

    The other episode you alluded too, “The Light Within”, was arguably TNG’s best. Stewart was a great actor, but in a stagey sort of way. Meaney just kind of inhabited his small role and made it believable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    Agreed. "The Inner Light" was moving and haunting. I'd say the best Star Trek episode. It came out when my first born was a few months old--still in the crawling stage--and i was newly attuned to questions of posterity. The flute was the perfect accompaniment to the haunting tale.

    We must all work hard to defeat the evil Zuckerbergianization--Merkelization of the West so we don't find ourselves in the same sad situation, facing extinction and seeking to send forth some inkling of the glory that was once white Western Christian civilization.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @John Derbyshire

    That’s “Thorfinnsson”. That P-thingy is the thorn, for an unvoiced TH. It’s usually rendered TH on non-Icelandic (or non-old-English) systems.

    Sorry, Derb, to be a thorn in your side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Thorn could be voiced or unvoiced, depending on its position in a word.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Taco says:
    @middle aged vet
    Taco - you make good points but I think you misread my words. Of course Pat Nixon was not a "movie star". In traditional American speech "Hollywood star" and "movie star" meant different things. "Movie stars" were distinguished from people in the movies who were not stars, and "Hollywood stars" were people who lived in Hollywood and made a living (or who were beginning to make a living, or had previously made a living) appearing in movies. As to coddled, Nixon's Navy service was not coddled in general, and only a very ignorant person would say that: I meant that his status as an officer protected him from learning many of the life lessons in morality that ordinary men in the Navy at that time probably learned. He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School and in corporate law and, maybe, even in Congress; with the exception of his 14 or so years in the White House, he had more in common with sheltered and privileged academics than regular Americans; and privileged academics are notorious for absurd and uninformed theories about the morals of those they think of as the "common people".

    “He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School”

    Look, even a cursory search of the internet will tell you that this simply isn’t true.

    Richard Nixon’s early life was hardscrabble. From wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Early_life

    Nixon’s early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: “We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn’t know it”.[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]

    Instead, they sent Richard to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[13][14] He received excellent grades, even though he had to ride a school bus for an hour each way during his freshman year

    His parents permitted Richard to transfer to Whittier High School for his junior year, beginning in September 1928. At Whittier High, Nixon suffered his first electoral defeat, for student body president. He generally rose at 4 a.m., to drive the family truck into Los Angeles and purchase vegetables at the market. He then drove to the store to wash and display them, before going to school. Harold had been diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona in the hopes of improving his health, the demands on Richard increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Richard graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207 students.[18]

    Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but Harold’s continued illness and the need for their mother to care for him meant Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown and attended Whittier College, his expenses there covered by a bequest from his maternal grandfather.[19] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, but lacked the size to play. He remained on the team as a substitute, and was noted for his enthusiasm.[20] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins; many members of the Franklins were from prominent families but Nixon was not.

    I could go on, but you can just click the link.

    Richard Nixon’s family was a hand-to-mouth lower middle class family with 5 children one of whom died young and one of whom had tuberculosis. Throughout his time in high school and college he had to spend his spare time working at the family business. Despite this, he got good enough grades to get an academic scholarship to law school.

    As to his military service, Nixon was a Quaker. He could have been a legitimate conscientious objector. I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be “coddled” he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    And Pat Nixon, yes, appeared in 4 films as an extra. She was also a delivery driver, secretary, telephone operator, pharmacist’s assistant, and janitor, among other things. Does this sound to you like a lady who is a “Hollywood Star” or a lady who had to work hard, at any job that was available, who at some point on her day off made a few extra bucks by being an extra?

    Richard and Pat Nixon both came up as working poor. Maybe Richard Nixon truly suffered some detachment from public morality. I will not deny the possibility. But that deficit, if it existed, certainly didn’t stem from a “coddled” existence in his formative years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be “coddled” he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.
     
    What, and miss out on thousands of easy marks?

    Nixon was notoriously the best poker sharp in the WWII Navy.

    Yeah, not coddled. Not close.
    , @Blobby5
    Pat Buchanan was speaking to Lew Rockwell and they both agreed,
    Pat Nixon was a wonderful person, at one point it was only she and (maybe Rosemary) and Pat B. sharing an office.
    , @middle aged vet
    Taco - I consider Nixon a great president and the most interesting chief executive we had in the 20th century. I appreciate the fact that you seem to feel the same. However, perhaps because you are young and lack cultural memory and context, or because you mistakenly took me for a Nixon critic, you did not understand the point I was making. I will try one more time. When I was commissioned as an officer back in the 80s I noticed that many of the other officers - even the ones who thought they were tough - were often a heck of a lot more naive than the enlisted men their age. Annapolis grads (and I know Nixon did not go to Annapolis, but that is not central here) were notorious for their beaming optimism and coddled unawareness of how hard life can be outside of the generally solvable challenges of military life. If you think I am wrong about that, fine, but please don't invite me to click on Wikipedia to learn more about a subject that I could easily write a hundred or two hundred pages on with exponentially more detail and insight than the Wikipedia editors could. Anyway, my formative military experiences were about halfway between now and Nixon's day, but the patterns are not that dissimilar. Looking back, I see many similarities between the naiveté shown by so many lieutenants of the 80s and many of the anecdotes I read about Nixon, for example his lack of full awareness of how monumentally crooked the Kennedy operatives were, and the way he was steamrolled by the sharp boys who wanted their way on the Supreme Court, not to mention by little guys like Mark Felt and David Frost. As for whether Pat Nixon was a "Hollywood star", either you understand the nuances of a language or you don't. It is not something everyone can be taught to understand. (The best short description of that wonderful woman that I know, by the way, is Ben Stein's speech on the occasion of the centenary of her birth, easily available on the internet). In addition to what I have previously and accurately pointed out, not all mathematicians publish in the best journals, but they are still those one-in-ten-thousand people who can be called mathematicians. Next hint: watch an episode or two of the Beverly Hillbillies for a refresher on the fact that people used to use different words for things (inside and outside the movie industry) that we now call by other words. Another hint: when someone tells you he married the prettiest girl in town, he is not always speaking in the role of someone who has conducted a detailed polling operation. Finally, Richard Nixon was not working poor. He was rural poor trying to hang on to the good farmstead that was in the family. People like that often did working-class jobs but they were not "working poor" in the sense that those who live from paycheck to paycheck in a set of rented rooms or a rundown shack are. Just another important nuance that anyone who has spent time with poor people who lived through the Depression instantly and intuitively understands.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. tbraton says:
    @Svigor

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here
     
    G**gle cache of page in question

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.
     
    I don't see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors' pols defend them, we'll see how that plays out.

    The figures show that Trump has picked up most of the support that used to go to Jeb!!! and not Rubio.
     
    Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it's not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently.

    Same data showed that even with the bump he'll still be way behind Trump.

    “Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it’s not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently.”

    Well, I have been reading similar things since last summer, and it turned out to be misinformed speculation. I cited actual figures of the Reuters’ polls from last August to this January which show Trump’s percentage growing dramatically while Rubio’s have grown very slightly and others (such as Bush) have declined dramatically. The actual figures belie the speculation of last summer. I seem to recall that Reuters-Ipsos polls were among the most accurate in the 2012 cycle. After the election, Nate Silver ranked Reuters-Ipsos sixth out of 23 pollsters in 2012, with an average error not that far off the second ranked poll. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/?_r=0

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Reg Cæsar

    Don’t be weird about this stuff.
     
    That's the whole point of being Anonymous.

    Though I have to admit, while I usually agree with her, her tone is far too shrill for me. At least Ann Coulter leavens hers with good jokes.

    Definitely agree about Ann and her jokes. In an earlier era, Ann would definitely have been one of Bob Hope’s main joke writers. If you read her stuff carefully, you can almost hear Hope delivering these zingers to his live audience.

    Wonder if Ann Coulter missed her calling early in life by not applying for an internship with David Letterman’s staff to help write his jokes? (since Hope would’ve been way ancient by that time).

    Hi Ann!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Ann's calling is as a political commentator made all the more effective by her wit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @John Derbyshire

    Funny, that name doesn’t sound English. Best to leave it as is, at Virginia Dare.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. AP says:
    @Anonymous
    Rubio, the guy who graduated high school (in FL mind you) with a GPA of 2.1 and was arrested at night from possessing of alcohol (and/or a controlled substance) in a Miami park known for drug dealing and use.

    Well, he did graduate cum lauda from a decently ranked law school .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. syonredux says:
    @Anon
    Jeb isn't anti-American. He is neo-American.

    He sees America as Canada-US-Mexico.

    And even though Mexican masses do pour into the US, Jeb knows that the closer Canada-US-Mexico becomes, US will dominate at the elite level.

    As Jeb belongs to the elite class that will dominate all of neo-America, he sees it as something positive.

    As US-Mexico merge closer, US will gain elite control over Mexico. Globalism destroyed mass power. So, even though Mexers will pour in the US, they won't rule. Look at CA. Totally ruled by Jews and whites with Asians as middle managers. Mexers are just lettuce pickers and busboys.

    At the mass level, it is true enough that US in being invaded by masses of foreigners. But at the elite level, it means US is taking over the world.
    Look at the Middle East. US takes in immigrants but has used might, money, and diplomacy to totally remake the place.

    At mass level, Americans lose to the world. At the elite level, the world loses to America. US elites rule all. "We take your people, you give up your sovereignty."
    And US elites care about their own power, not about the American people.

    Also, Jewish elites have another 'nation' in their mind. It is Kosheria, and it stretches from NY to Chicago to LA to Tel Aviv to Paris to London to Warsaw and etc to etc wherever there are agents and operative of Kosheria. To people like Soros, even the US is must a colony in the larger Kosheria or Koshmir.

    Jeb isn’t anti-American. He is neo-American.

    He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.
     
    He's post-American.
    , @Anon
    "He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American."

    He's actually Texican.

    Initially, Anglo-Americans were racially exclusive, and this was especially in the East Coast.

    But as Anglos moved to other places, some just got looser and less 'uptight' and mixed with the locals. Some did this in Hawaii. And some did this in SW territories. Some even went to Mexico and settled there and became Amexicans.

    It was more doable with Mexers and Hawaiians cuz they were okay folks. White folks lived in closer proximity with Negroes in the South, but Negroes were too scary. (That seems to be changing now since interracism is the official faith of America, and southern white girls now got the hots for rapper and black football players.)
    So, Anglo elites merged with Mexers in places in Texas. And they mixed with Hawiian and other tropical native types, like in DONOVON'S REEF.
    It was less easy with American Indians --- even though races did mix --- cuz of the bitter tribal wars that came to define both communities as blood enemies in myth and lore.

    So, the Bush family's attitude isn't really anti-Anglo or anti-American. It's like how Pierce Brosnan feels in NOBLE LOUSE. He's part of the British Empire but also feels sort of 'Chinese' as he was brought up in the culture and learned the language. He has to play the game both ways.

    Interestingly enough, even though NE Anglos remained most pure for a long spell, the takeover of that region by Jews meant that NE Anglos began to merge with Jews, even intermarrying with them in big numbers. In some cases of declining wasp fortunes in NE area, their only hope of remaining privileged was by marrying some up-and-coming Jew.

    So, we have Zio-Anglos in the NE, Meso-Anglos in SW, and Akebono-Anglos in Hawaii.

    It's like THE DESCENDANTS.

    But in a way, Meso-Anglos are more powerful as Anglos than Zio-Anglos.
    When Anglos mix with Jews, Jews win.
    When Anglos mix with Mexos, Anglos win.
    Anglos follow Jews, but Mexos follow Anglos.

    Guillermos of the world don't run anything.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. syonredux says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me
     
    I agree with you that Rubio is too hawkish on foreign policy and too dovish on immigration policy.

    However, I generally agree with Rubio's stance on economic issues. He is an eloquent advocate of our free market and our opportunity society.

    Rubio also has much successful political experience in the Florida state government.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty. I think that's what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted. That's why I want him to explain satisfactorily his involvement in the Gang of Eight.

    Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential.

    I like Cruz and Trump more right now, but each of them has faults too.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.

    We’ve been down this road before. They pass the mass amnesty and forget about the effective enforcement part.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    We’ve been down this road before. They pass the mass amnesty and forget about the effective enforcement part.
     
    They did it once.

    They have not been able to do it a second time.

    The most recent failed attempt was the Gang of Eight.

    The only way forward is a grand bargain that does include effective enforcement.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. Keith Vaz [AKA "Sir Charles Pipkins"] says:

    Rubio also looks very Scots-Irish (strangely more East Med than West Med) and in an age of social media people are wise to it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  112. syonredux says:
    @Judah Benjamin Hur
    Trump really hit a home run tonight. It was really something to see.

    As for Rubio, I'm not sure why people are ridiculing his intellect. I'm afraid he's quite intelligent and talented and could still very possibly win the Presidency. He can seem moderate and pleasant while stabbing the middle class in the back, that's a real skill.

    As for Rubio, I’m not sure why people are ridiculing his intellect.

    Let’s just say that his university record is less than impressive:

    He then attended Tarkio College in Missouri for one year on a football scholarship from 1989 to 1990, before enrolling at Santa Fe Community College (now Santa Fe College) in Gainesville, Florida. He earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from the University of Florida in 1993, and his J.D. degree cum laude from the University of Miami School of Law in 1996.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rubio

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. syonredux says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Douthat: "Why Isn't Marco Rubio Winning?"
     
    Because few Americans want two gay presidents in succession?

    Some argue we've already gone through that, starting in 1857.

    The fact that James Buchanan was our only (probably) Gay president has really got to annoy Homosexual activists. Indeed, it seems to have pushed Larry Kramer right over the edge…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Anon
    He looks like a boy.

    He looks like a boy.

    To be more precise, Rubio looks like a “rent boy”.

    Here are pictures of a young Marco Rubio and his rent boy gone mad spree killing doppleganger Andrew Cunanan who was notorious for murdering in Miami the gay icon the fashion designer Gianni Versace back in 1998.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=pictures+of+Marco+rubio+as+a+young+man&espv=2&biw=824&bih=407&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJz-

    PBu8_KAhXlloMKHYdmCkUQ7AkIPw

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan

    It’s Marco Rubio’s lack of “Quien Es Mas Macho?” that creeps lots of people out, especially Latinos outside of his base South Florida Cuban constituency. The idea that macho obsessed mestizo Mexicans
    and Central Americans would ever vote for Rubio is pure plutocrat billionaire self deception. Of course the idea that Rubio’s politics just like his dubious sexuality might be for rent is exactly what the billionaires like about him.

    The various rumors and not to mention legitimate questions about Rubio’s past arrest history and fashion choices don’t help.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Curle
    C'mon a lot of boyish looking men aren't gay. Tom Cruise for example.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Desiderius
    24 years of callowness in the White House is enough.

    “24 years of callowness in the White House is enough.”

    Wow, that really says a mouthful. No more man-children for President! Its time for a grown-up President. Its time for a man in the White House.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    He’s the distillation of every insufferable cuckservative idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  117. res says:
    @eah
    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here -- now it simply says [removed], yet in familiar and typically stupid fashion, all of the comments are still there.

    At the moment, you can read the gist of what was [removed] at this link:

    As a quick summary: we know that the man Rubio was arrested with in 1990 was sued by Miami in 2007 for running a gay pornography studio out of one of his properties. We believe the totality of the evidence strongly implies that Rubio was engaged in sexual relations with that man in 1990, and that’s why they were arrested. Full story below.

    Read the 'full story' for yourself...before it is also [removed].

    Available at the internet archive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @CAL
    His chance to do that died when he supported the recent CASA bill which would legalize the patently un-Constitutional star chamber trials of men on college campuses.

    I don't think he is that bright in the political sense. He's easily manipulated and doesn't seem to have a rudder of his own.

    His [Rubio's] chance to do that [become the US President] died when he supported the recent CASA bill which would legalize the patently un-Constitutional star chamber trials of men on college campuses.

    I don’t think he is that bright in the political sense. He’s easily manipulated and doesn’t seem to have a rudder of his own.

    I agree with all of your statement except that his chance has died.

    I still think that Rubio will learn from his mistakes and has great political talent and potential.

    In the meantime, I am supporting Cruz and Trump over Rubio.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Rob McX says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    That's "Thorfinnsson". That P-thingy is the thorn, for an unvoiced TH. It's usually rendered TH on non-Icelandic (or non-old-English) systems.

    Sorry, Derb, to be a thorn in your side.

    Thorn could be voiced or unvoiced, depending on its position in a word.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Then what was the point of edh?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. “Rubio is the human epitomization of the Republican billionaire class’s evident desire to <turn the United States into Latin America Norte,

    with its vast inequalities of wealth, rigged social systems, and fragile rule of law.”

    oh shyte…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  121. @Wilkey
    "I think that’s what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted."

    LOL - then he didn't try very hard to not be outwitted.

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. Even with such an amendment there is no way to guarantee our laws would ever be enforced, but at least (one hopes, perhaps in vain) the Constitutional questions would be settled once and for all.

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. ….

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.

    I agree with the first paragraph and disagree with the third paragraph.

    In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites.

    When Barack Obama got into political trouble because of his attending Jeremiah Wright’s church, Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech and resolved the issue for most voters. Rubio should do something similar about his participation in the Gang of Eight.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites."

    So basically what you're saying is "I want Rubio to lie to me - to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time." Gotcha.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Svigor

    One used to be able to read some interesting info on Rubio here
     
    G**gle cache of page in question

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.
     
    I don't see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors' pols defend them, we'll see how that plays out.

    The figures show that Trump has picked up most of the support that used to go to Jeb!!! and not Rubio.
     
    Read an article just yesterday on how polls show Rubio is going to benefit most from the shaking out process, Trump the least. Like 65 to 20, or something. It may be wrong, but it's not just based on opinion or speculation, apparently.

    Same data showed that even with the bump he'll still be way behind Trump.

    I don’t see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.

    I too favor a crackdown on employers.

    Unfortunately, the Democrat Party will continue to block such crackdowns until a mass amnesty is promised.

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.

    I wish I could count on Trump becoming President, but his conduct has remained extremely erratic. He might win in a landslide or lose in a landslide.

    That’s why I have switched my support from Trump to Cruz.

    If Rubio could explain himself convincingly on the immigration issue, I might switch from Cruz to Rubio, because I think that Rubio has a better chance of being elected President than Cruz does.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Rubio has an excellent chance of starting World War III, given that he has promised as much. Two hawkish R candidates have lost in a row. Only Trump and Rand Paul (done) have a record of not being neocon shills.
    , @rod1963
    I'll take Trump's so-called "erratic" behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes - yes on TPP and Corker amendment.

    Not mention his 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs on the NAU.

    His idea of a fence is completing the last 70 miles of the border fence Bush put up. He won't deport either.

    He's not for America, that's for sure.

    Rubio is a billionaire's b***h and neo-con on FP. If you want WWIII and mass amnesty, this Cuban lightweight is your boy.

    Cruz OTOH has all the earmarks of a fool. You don't associate with loons like Beck or a loser such as Perry. Really going down to the border to give teddy bears and soccer balls to illegal aliens is just plain stupid with Beck or having him do a faux swearing in ceremony is just nuts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @ben tillman

    Nobody’s sure why. …
     
    I haven't looked closely at all the Republicans, but Cruz appears to be the smartest of the top four Republican candidates. And he seems smarter than the two Democrats.

    “I haven’t looked closely at all the Republicans, but Cruz appears to be the smartest of the top four Republican candidates.”

    He may well have a measurably higher I.Q. (or possibly just more formal education) than Trump…but I’m not sure I’d really characterize him as “smarter,” based on actual performance. Maybe Cruz has a greater propensity for understanding higher mathematical functions than Trump, but I doubt he’d make a more effective national leader.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Dave Pinsen
    The first few seasons of TNG were more liberal due to more Roddenberry influence. The metaphor show was kind of dumb - I wondered at the time how such a people would have been able to develop engineering with such a lack of precision in their language.

    The other episode you alluded too, "The Light Within", was arguably TNG's best. Stewart was a great actor, but in a stagey sort of way. Meaney just kind of inhabited his small role and made it believable.

    Agreed. “The Inner Light” was moving and haunting. I’d say the best Star Trek episode. It came out when my first born was a few months old–still in the crawling stage–and i was newly attuned to questions of posterity. The flute was the perfect accompaniment to the haunting tale.

    We must all work hard to defeat the evil Zuckerbergianization–Merkelization of the West so we don’t find ourselves in the same sad situation, facing extinction and seeking to send forth some inkling of the glory that was once white Western Christian civilization.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The guy who played Picard's adult son in that episode was Patrick Stewart's son.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Reg: it must’ve been something to do with my connection. I’m tellin’ ya, I stared at what I pasted in longer than I needed to and it’s kosher. YMMV.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. Svigor says:

    Actually, the minimum wage law adjusted for aliens on green cards is as good and effective a tool as I’ve seen anyone propose. And only Randall Burns of Vdare.com has ever brought it up.

    Yeah that one works too. Kill ‘em with kindness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. tbraton says:

    Well, it looks like the debate without Trump drew only 12.5 million, about half of what the first debate on Fox with Trump drew. http://deadline.com/2016/01/donald-trump-gop-debate-ratings-fox-news-megyn-kelly-1201692686/ If Trump does win Iowa, I guess it will be easy to conclude that his decision was the right one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. tbraton says:
    @Dave Pinsen
    https://twitter.com/slate/status/692924229017309184

    Thanks for the post. I missed that. I had heard that Cruz was not popular, but I didn’t realize the other candidates were shunning him like that. That’s what they did to Romney back in 2008.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    I didn’t realize the other candidates were shunning him like that.
     
    Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don't see where it hurts Cruz much.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    This urge isn’t as annoying in Rubio as it is in the perversely anti-American ¡Jeb¡ because Rubio’s loyalty to the Latin American way of doing things is understandably natural and personally conservative (in the sense of Rubio having concentric loyalties that start with the Miami Cuban community).
     
    Rubio is loyal to Latin America; Jeb Bush is a traitor to Anglo-America.'Nuff said.

    Rubio is loyal to Latin America; Jeb Bush is a traitor to Anglo-America.’Nuff said.

    “Anglo-America” existed in the 19th century. I think you mean “White America” or “European America”, which replaced “Anglo-America” in the 20th century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    “Anglo-America” existed in the 19th century. I think you mean “White America” or “European America”, which replaced “Anglo-America” in the 20th century.
     
    No, I mean Anglo-America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Alice says:
    @middle aged vet
    Contra the day by day more insightful Mr Douthat, I am sure about one reason why young Mr Rubio is not winning. Right now, he looks like an eternal sophomore who forgot to show up on the first day of school when the sophomores became juniors. It is simple as that. Rick Santorum, Pat Buchanan, even Ted Cruz could have told him what he needed to do to look enough like a leader to win an election outside of his own state, but he may not have listened.

    He reminds me of the episode of Seinfeld where Jerry gets his haircut, and it looks like he’s 7 when it is finished. I can’t stop seeing Rubio as an overly earnest child.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Rob McX
    Thorn could be voiced or unvoiced, depending on its position in a word.

    Then what was the point of edh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Thorn and edh were interchangeable in Old English, and could be voiced or unvoiced according to their position. Thorn could be both voiced and unvoiced in Icelandic before edh was introduced to its alphabet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Dave Pinsen
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/breaking-poll-40-of-blacks-line-behind-trump-45-of-hispanics/

    Yes, I’ve seen those polls which seem to be the basis for this sort of hype. That poll was conducted by World Net Daily. Have there been any other polls put out by major pollsters suggesting the same thing? It seems to be inconsistent with polls such as the recent Gallup one suggesting that Trump is viewed most negatively by Dems and Independents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Is the Gallup poll broken down by race? If not, the effect might be due to SWPLs.

    The World Net Daily poll results seem exaggerated, but I still think Trump would do better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney did. Trump has been the subject of rap songs. His lifestyle and unapologetic wealth will play better with average blacks than any of Rand Paul's warmed over Kempism. Average Latinos are also likely to respect him as a caudillo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Rob McX says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    Then what was the point of edh?

    Thorn and edh were interchangeable in Old English, and could be voiced or unvoiced according to their position. Thorn could be both voiced and unvoiced in Icelandic before edh was introduced to its alphabet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. I’m no fan of Rubio’s but I don’t see much significance to his bust in the park. Lots of people do stupid s–t when they’re 20.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rob McX

    Lots of people do stupid s–t when they’re 20.
     
    True, but only a tiny number of them run for a position later in life where they could be open to blackmail. If he was active in the gay scene, it doesn't particularly matter if he did nothing illegal or outrageous. The important thing is that it's the kind of information that someone would be keen to suppress if confronted with it decades later when they hoped they'd left it behind.
    , @eah
    I don’t see much significance

    That's big of you.

    Does the "stupid s--t" normally include gay sex in public? If 'lots of people' includes you, did your 'youthful indiscretions' include homosexual acts in public?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Yes, I've seen those polls which seem to be the basis for this sort of hype. That poll was conducted by World Net Daily. Have there been any other polls put out by major pollsters suggesting the same thing? It seems to be inconsistent with polls such as the recent Gallup one suggesting that Trump is viewed most negatively by Dems and Independents.

    Is the Gallup poll broken down by race? If not, the effect might be due to SWPLs.

    The World Net Daily poll results seem exaggerated, but I still think Trump would do better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney did. Trump has been the subject of rap songs. His lifestyle and unapologetic wealth will play better with average blacks than any of Rand Paul’s warmed over Kempism. Average Latinos are also likely to respect him as a caudillo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Sanders, who's presumably less popular among blacks and Hispanics than Hillary is, has a 12 point lead over Trump in a matchup according to a recent Reuters poll, compared to Hillary's 10 point lead over Trump:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bloomberg-idUSMTZSAPEC1SOOMWHP

    In a matchup between Trump and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, adding Bloomberg's name to the ballot would trim Clinton's lead over Trump to six percentage points from 10, according to the poll conducted from Jan. 23 to Jan. 27.

    In a Trump versus Democratic hopeful Bernie Sanders matchup, adding Bloomberg would erode Sanders' lead over Trump to seven points from 12, the poll results showed.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Dave Pinsen
    Is the Gallup poll broken down by race? If not, the effect might be due to SWPLs.

    The World Net Daily poll results seem exaggerated, but I still think Trump would do better with blacks and Hispanics than Romney did. Trump has been the subject of rap songs. His lifestyle and unapologetic wealth will play better with average blacks than any of Rand Paul's warmed over Kempism. Average Latinos are also likely to respect him as a caudillo.

    Sanders, who’s presumably less popular among blacks and Hispanics than Hillary is, has a 12 point lead over Trump in a matchup according to a recent Reuters poll, compared to Hillary’s 10 point lead over Trump:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bloomberg-idUSMTZSAPEC1SOOMWHP

    In a matchup between Trump and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, adding Bloomberg’s name to the ballot would trim Clinton’s lead over Trump to six percentage points from 10, according to the poll conducted from Jan. 23 to Jan. 27.

    In a Trump versus Democratic hopeful Bernie Sanders matchup, adding Bloomberg would erode Sanders’ lead over Trump to seven points from 12, the poll results showed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Hillary hasn't been challenged during the primary so far. Sanders has treated her with kid gloves. She would whither in a contest with Trump. One offhand comment by him had young liberal women questioning their support for Hillary.

    And there's also the distinct possibility she gets indicted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @Taco
    "He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School"

    Look, even a cursory search of the internet will tell you that this simply isn't true.

    Richard Nixon's early life was hardscrabble. From wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Early_life


    Nixon's early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: "We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn't know it".[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     

    Instead, they sent Richard to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[13][14] He received excellent grades, even though he had to ride a school bus for an hour each way during his freshman year
     

    His parents permitted Richard to transfer to Whittier High School for his junior year, beginning in September 1928. At Whittier High, Nixon suffered his first electoral defeat, for student body president. He generally rose at 4 a.m., to drive the family truck into Los Angeles and purchase vegetables at the market. He then drove to the store to wash and display them, before going to school. Harold had been diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona in the hopes of improving his health, the demands on Richard increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Richard graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207 students.[18]
     

    Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but Harold's continued illness and the need for their mother to care for him meant Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown and attended Whittier College, his expenses there covered by a bequest from his maternal grandfather.[19] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, but lacked the size to play. He remained on the team as a substitute, and was noted for his enthusiasm.[20] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins; many members of the Franklins were from prominent families but Nixon was not.
     
    I could go on, but you can just click the link.

    Richard Nixon's family was a hand-to-mouth lower middle class family with 5 children one of whom died young and one of whom had tuberculosis. Throughout his time in high school and college he had to spend his spare time working at the family business. Despite this, he got good enough grades to get an academic scholarship to law school.

    As to his military service, Nixon was a Quaker. He could have been a legitimate conscientious objector. I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be "coddled" he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    And Pat Nixon, yes, appeared in 4 films as an extra. She was also a delivery driver, secretary, telephone operator, pharmacist's assistant, and janitor, among other things. Does this sound to you like a lady who is a "Hollywood Star" or a lady who had to work hard, at any job that was available, who at some point on her day off made a few extra bucks by being an extra?

    Richard and Pat Nixon both came up as working poor. Maybe Richard Nixon truly suffered some detachment from public morality. I will not deny the possibility. But that deficit, if it existed, certainly didn't stem from a "coddled" existence in his formative years.

    I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be “coddled” he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    What, and miss out on thousands of easy marks?

    Nixon was notoriously the best poker sharp in the WWII Navy.

    Yeah, not coddled. Not close.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @tbraton
    Thanks for the post. I missed that. I had heard that Cruz was not popular, but I didn't realize the other candidates were shunning him like that. That's what they did to Romney back in 2008.

    I didn’t realize the other candidates were shunning him like that.

    Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don’t see where it hurts Cruz much.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don’t see where it hurts Cruz much."

    Well, the country is not exactly shunning Donald Trump, and he is an "other candidate." I guess you must work for Fox News. They also have a habit of not mentioning Trump whenever possible but always hailing one of the "other candidates" who "appears to be surging" in one state or another (but never in more than one). Sometimes they hail two candidates who, they claim, are both surging in the same state. But, when you check out other news sites, you find Donald Trump still leading (often by a hefty margin) in that state, something not mentioned by Fox News. Personally, after watching the Trump-less debate the other night, I don't think Cruz was helped at all and possibly hurt. I guess we will have to wait and see how he does in next week's caucus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @syonredux

    Jeb isn’t anti-American. He is neo-American.
     
    He's not anti-American; he's anti-Anglo-American.

    He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.

    He’s post-American.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    He’s post-American.
     
    Only in the sense that he's a Latin American LARPer.
    , @Curle

    He’s post-American.
     
    Pan American.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous

    Rubio is loyal to Latin America; Jeb Bush is a traitor to Anglo-America.’Nuff said.
     
    "Anglo-America" existed in the 19th century. I think you mean "White America" or "European America", which replaced "Anglo-America" in the 20th century.

    “Anglo-America” existed in the 19th century. I think you mean “White America” or “European America”, which replaced “Anglo-America” in the 20th century.

    No, I mean Anglo-America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That ship sailed like a century ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. syonredux says:
    @Desiderius

    He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.
     
    He's post-American.

    He’s post-American.

    Only in the sense that he’s a Latin American LARPer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Rubio is lacking in natural leadership. He appears like a teenager trying to tell his parents how they are wrong about everything because at 15 he is so smart.

    THE TEST FOR LEADERSHIP:

    If a random hundred people were lost and marooned on a desert island (or wilderness) with little chance of rescue for foreseeable future, a guy like Rubio would be relegated to gather firewood. Trump, on the other hand, would likely emerge as the natural leader to get things done for the group’s survival. Always ask yourself, which candidates would be group-selected to be a leader or THE leader; and which would be relegated to join Rubio in performing the mundane tasks.

    Thatcher would be a leader, so LBJ and Reagan. But except for Trump, the current crop of the candidates of BOTH parties are gatherers. By the way, “Obama, don’t just stand there, make yourself useful and gather some firewood.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    Ted Cruz would be appointed to blow kazoos at the seagulls.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    Jeb isn’t anti-American. He is neo-American.
     
    He's not anti-American; he's anti-Anglo-American.

    “He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.”

    He’s actually Texican.

    Initially, Anglo-Americans were racially exclusive, and this was especially in the East Coast.

    But as Anglos moved to other places, some just got looser and less ‘uptight’ and mixed with the locals. Some did this in Hawaii. And some did this in SW territories. Some even went to Mexico and settled there and became Amexicans.

    It was more doable with Mexers and Hawaiians cuz they were okay folks. White folks lived in closer proximity with Negroes in the South, but Negroes were too scary. (That seems to be changing now since interracism is the official faith of America, and southern white girls now got the hots for rapper and black football players.)
    So, Anglo elites merged with Mexers in places in Texas. And they mixed with Hawiian and other tropical native types, like in DONOVON’S REEF.
    It was less easy with American Indians — even though races did mix — cuz of the bitter tribal wars that came to define both communities as blood enemies in myth and lore.

    So, the Bush family’s attitude isn’t really anti-Anglo or anti-American. It’s like how Pierce Brosnan feels in NOBLE LOUSE. He’s part of the British Empire but also feels sort of ‘Chinese’ as he was brought up in the culture and learned the language. He has to play the game both ways.

    Interestingly enough, even though NE Anglos remained most pure for a long spell, the takeover of that region by Jews meant that NE Anglos began to merge with Jews, even intermarrying with them in big numbers. In some cases of declining wasp fortunes in NE area, their only hope of remaining privileged was by marrying some up-and-coming Jew.

    So, we have Zio-Anglos in the NE, Meso-Anglos in SW, and Akebono-Anglos in Hawaii.

    It’s like THE DESCENDANTS.

    But in a way, Meso-Anglos are more powerful as Anglos than Zio-Anglos.
    When Anglos mix with Jews, Jews win.
    When Anglos mix with Mexos, Anglos win.
    Anglos follow Jews, but Mexos follow Anglos.

    Guillermos of the world don’t run anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    Sadly incorrect, dear fellow. JEB Bush has been absorbed into Latinity. It's quite disgusting, actually. Here are some excerpts from David Frum's classic article:

    Yet when a man speaks for the record as often as has Jeb Bush, he deposits there enough material to learn something interesting about the man he is, rather than the boy he was.

    Jeb Bush will tell you that, thanks to his marriage to his Mexican-born wife, he is bicultural. Here he is speaking at New York’s 92nd Street Y in November 2013:

    I’m bicultural—maybe that’s more important than bilingual. For those who have those kinds of marriages, appreciating the culture of your spouse is the most powerful part of the relationship. Being able to share that culture and live in it has been one of the great joys of my life. We chose Miami to live because it is a bicultural city. It’s as American as any, but it has a flair to it that is related to this bicultural feeling. I wanted my children to grow up in a bicultural way.”
     

    His three children speak both English and Spanish.

    As Jeb Bush himself notes, there is a Bush family tradition of moving away from the culture into which one is born, to plunge into another. George H.W. Bush, born to a family of Northeastern grandees, reinvented himself as Sunbelt conservative. George W. Bush, born in New Haven, Connecticut, was the only member of the next generation of Bush brothers not born in Texas, and yet became the most Texan of them all. Jeb Bush moved away first from Texas, and then from his family’s patrician identity as White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

    “I’ve actually converted to Catholicism … I’m whatever a W-A-S-C would be. I’m a proud Catholic and a converted one, principally because this was the faith of my wife, and I wanted our children to grow up in a non-mixed marriage. So … no longer a WASP.

    His family story and his relocation to Miami, a gateway to Latin America, have focused Jeb Bush’s attention on the topic of immigration. Listen to hours of his comments on public policy, and it quickly becomes overwhelmingly apparent that this is the public policy issue he cares about by far the most.

     


    Twenty-first century America is a place consumed by issues of identity. More and more Americans identify themselves as “Americans-plus”—fully American, yet also partially something else; in America, but not exclusively defined by their American-ness. An older America expected that people would be all one thing or all another: black or white, male or female, American or foreign. Barack Obama excited a new generation of voters because he—like them—transcended such categories. In this latest scion of the Bush family, of all unlikely persons, the GOP may have found its own candidate for the age of fluidity represented—and accelerated—by the presidency of Barack Obama.
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/is-jeb-bush-a-republican-obama/385168/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Rob McX says:
    @Ripple Earthdevil
    I'm no fan of Rubio's but I don't see much significance to his bust in the park. Lots of people do stupid s--t when they're 20.

    Lots of people do stupid s–t when they’re 20.

    True, but only a tiny number of them run for a position later in life where they could be open to blackmail. If he was active in the gay scene, it doesn’t particularly matter if he did nothing illegal or outrageous. The important thing is that it’s the kind of information that someone would be keen to suppress if confronted with it decades later when they hoped they’d left it behind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Curle

    If he was active in the gay scene, it doesn’t particularly matter if he did nothing illegal or outrageous.
     
    I'm no Rubio fan but I followed a link to an article about it and it appears the c0-youthful miscreant was simply the property manager (his dad's firm) of a residence used as a business by gays. And that the park was a drinking/drugging hang-out. Is there any more significant evidence than this for a) the idea the park was a homo hang-out; and b) that the associate was a homo? Are there other rumors out there about Marco?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Dr. Doom says:

    The Stupid party has become a parody of itself. Have you ever seen a Political Party try to take down the frontrunner who is beating the Dem opponent in hypothetical matchups? I haven’t seen such vitriol since Ronald Reagan ran in 1976. Everyone said Ford was the better candidate to carry Lincoln’s Party to Bull Run, and we got the malaise excuse for some nobody named carter who creamed him. Reagan took nearly every state when he ran. These insiders are the worst enemy of the Party. Every donor is either a Globalist or a Rockerfeller Republican. They hate their voters more than the Dems do.
    Remember how the media attacked Sarah Palin and John McCain stood idly by while saying Obama was a good American? That’s the Stupid Party right there. These guys are not even trying to oppose Obama now. This “democracy” thing is a joke. The idea that a Nation founded entirely by White Men with guns is a Nation of Immigrants is right up there with Flurpity Flurp as the worst claim in advertising history.
    White people believe in Freedom, and Limited Government. Everyone else has a Ruthless Dictator with Secret Police and Death Squads ruling them. Why exactly do we want them here much less allow these idiots to vote? White racism is so bad that everyone on Earth is dying to experience it. Unfortunately it will destroy any idea of anyone ever having a better life in the process. Only a fool would kill the Goose that Lays the Golden eggs because they want the gold in the Goose now. But fools is what we’re dealing with here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  146. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Steve Sailer has nailed it once again. In 2010, when the relatively unknown Rubio challenged former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist for the GOP Senate nomination, he ran as a tea party conservative and opponent of amnesty. This was a big deal in Miami. Many of us who supported Rubio then and worked for his campaign did so because we were fed up with the Latinization of South Florida and were thrilled with what Sailer describes: Marco’s positioning “by ethnicity to…lead resistance to the billionaires’ hopes to worsen the Latinization of our country.” And we quickly saw Rubio’s potential to become a viable, attractive, exciting, conservative, proud-to-be-AMERICAN-first Latin candidate for POTUS. Which is precisely why we were shattered when he co-wrote the Gang of 8 bill. It was a betrayal of the first order of those who elected him. So though we saw our dreams for him to lead that resistance smashed, it truly is unknown “whether Rubio ever had the imagination to have seized that opportunity” or even was aware of it. Moot point. He turned his back on we who would have now been his most tireless and passionate supporters. He is not who we thought he was. Better to know now than later.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  147. eah says:
    @Ripple Earthdevil
    I'm no fan of Rubio's but I don't see much significance to his bust in the park. Lots of people do stupid s--t when they're 20.

    I don’t see much significance

    That’s big of you.

    Does the “stupid s–t” normally include gay sex in public? If ‘lots of people’ includes you, did your ‘youthful indiscretions’ include homosexual acts in public?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    To be fair, there really isn't any evidence to that effect. See Curle's comment above. Rubio might have just been busted for public drinking.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Maj. Kong says:
    @Anonymous
    Why do you say that? Trump is viewed most negatively among the GOP candidates by Democrats and Independents:

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188177/trump-image-among-democrats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx

    Trump was underwater with Republicans a month or two back. He’s turned that around now. It’s just as likely he will do it with Democrats.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Maj. Kong says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I don’t see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.
     
    I too favor a crackdown on employers.

    Unfortunately, the Democrat Party will continue to block such crackdowns until a mass amnesty is promised.

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.

    I wish I could count on Trump becoming President, but his conduct has remained extremely erratic. He might win in a landslide or lose in a landslide.

    That's why I have switched my support from Trump to Cruz.

    If Rubio could explain himself convincingly on the immigration issue, I might switch from Cruz to Rubio, because I think that Rubio has a better chance of being elected President than Cruz does.

    Rubio has an excellent chance of starting World War III, given that he has promised as much. Two hawkish R candidates have lost in a row. Only Trump and Rand Paul (done) have a record of not being neocon shills.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. manton says:
    @LondonBob
    Roger Stone characterised Bush senior as a fiercely competitive and ruthless technocrat who gave the impression of a likeable upper class wasp gentleman. Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don't underestimate him. He did alright, could have been an American Putin though. Unlucky to face Perot and Clinton too.

    Bush was DCI for less than one year and never otherwise served in the CIA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Absolutely correct!

    That was a "different George Bush"! *cough* *cough*
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Blobby5 says:
    @John Derbyshire

    What a coincidence! My partner calls me ‘Snorri’ as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Blobby5 says:
    @Taco
    "He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School"

    Look, even a cursory search of the internet will tell you that this simply isn't true.

    Richard Nixon's early life was hardscrabble. From wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Early_life


    Nixon's early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: "We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn't know it".[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     

    Instead, they sent Richard to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[13][14] He received excellent grades, even though he had to ride a school bus for an hour each way during his freshman year
     

    His parents permitted Richard to transfer to Whittier High School for his junior year, beginning in September 1928. At Whittier High, Nixon suffered his first electoral defeat, for student body president. He generally rose at 4 a.m., to drive the family truck into Los Angeles and purchase vegetables at the market. He then drove to the store to wash and display them, before going to school. Harold had been diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona in the hopes of improving his health, the demands on Richard increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Richard graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207 students.[18]
     

    Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but Harold's continued illness and the need for their mother to care for him meant Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown and attended Whittier College, his expenses there covered by a bequest from his maternal grandfather.[19] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, but lacked the size to play. He remained on the team as a substitute, and was noted for his enthusiasm.[20] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins; many members of the Franklins were from prominent families but Nixon was not.
     
    I could go on, but you can just click the link.

    Richard Nixon's family was a hand-to-mouth lower middle class family with 5 children one of whom died young and one of whom had tuberculosis. Throughout his time in high school and college he had to spend his spare time working at the family business. Despite this, he got good enough grades to get an academic scholarship to law school.

    As to his military service, Nixon was a Quaker. He could have been a legitimate conscientious objector. I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be "coddled" he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    And Pat Nixon, yes, appeared in 4 films as an extra. She was also a delivery driver, secretary, telephone operator, pharmacist's assistant, and janitor, among other things. Does this sound to you like a lady who is a "Hollywood Star" or a lady who had to work hard, at any job that was available, who at some point on her day off made a few extra bucks by being an extra?

    Richard and Pat Nixon both came up as working poor. Maybe Richard Nixon truly suffered some detachment from public morality. I will not deny the possibility. But that deficit, if it existed, certainly didn't stem from a "coddled" existence in his formative years.

    Pat Buchanan was speaking to Lew Rockwell and they both agreed,
    Pat Nixon was a wonderful person, at one point it was only she and (maybe Rosemary) and Pat B. sharing an office.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. anowow says:

    Sweetest moment of the debate-

    Jeb twisting the knife in Rubio over the latter’s flip-flopping. To Jeb’s credit he even owned up to his own flip-flopping when Rubio tried to turn the table back on him. Bush vendetta winning out over Bushian project?

    Will Jeb stay in this thing just to spite Rubio and possible endanger the project? Is this just a Jeb thing or a Bush thing.

    Jeb is certainly his own man in that he is being treated much different than his brother. Dubya knew how to manipulate the GOPer rank and file. I always wonder if it were Dubya running now, or a Dubya-esque Bush, would he being doing so poorly? Unfortunately, I think not. I don’t trust the good political sense of the GOP-inclined middle class and working class enough.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  154. Svigor says:

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.

    Yup. I think the laws on the books are plenty. They just need vigorous enforcement. Trump can fire some federal prosecutors and LEO brass and everyone would get the message. This would probably be more useful than new legislation, ceteris paribus.

    Nixon’s early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: “We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn’t know it”.[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]

    Opening grocery stores and gas stations doesn’t seem like what poor people do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @a Newsreader
    "Opening grocery stores and gas stations doesn’t seem like what poor people do."

    It's something that poor Quakers do.
    , @Hibernian
    They aren't what rich people do, either, unless you're talking about those who open giant supermarkets or ten gas stations at a time. The poster who put forth the thesis that Nixon was too sheltered to understand the true state of public morality in the US was clueless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. Wilkey says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    There might be versions of an amnesty I could accept, but those versions would include numerical caps and a Constitutional amendment ending birthright citizenship, limiting the power of Congress to increase legal immigration and grant further amnesties, and allowing or even requiring state and local governments to assist in immigration enforcement. ....

    Rubio backed the amnesty in spite of massive flaws, including the absence of numerical caps on the number of illegals granted amnesty. He knew what he was doing, and what he was doing had nothing to do with making our immigration laws more rational.

    The fact is that Rubio is a lying and a traitor. A talented liar is still just a liar.
     
    I agree with the first paragraph and disagree with the third paragraph.

    In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites.

    When Barack Obama got into political trouble because of his attending Jeremiah Wright's church, Obama gave a long, thoughtful speech and resolved the issue for most voters. Rubio should do something similar about his participation in the Gang of Eight.

    “In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites.”

    So basically what you’re saying is “I want Rubio to lie to me – to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time.” Gotcha.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    So basically what you’re saying is “I want Rubio to lie to me – to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time.” Gotcha.
     
    I want Rubio to explain in detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and the decisions and agreements he made in the process. I also want him to explain the lessons he learned.

    Rubio needs to explain himself convincingly to the many people -- such as yourself -- who feel that he lied to the electorate about the immigration issue when he ran for the US Senate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @AnotherDad
    Agreed. "The Inner Light" was moving and haunting. I'd say the best Star Trek episode. It came out when my first born was a few months old--still in the crawling stage--and i was newly attuned to questions of posterity. The flute was the perfect accompaniment to the haunting tale.

    We must all work hard to defeat the evil Zuckerbergianization--Merkelization of the West so we don't find ourselves in the same sad situation, facing extinction and seeking to send forth some inkling of the glory that was once white Western Christian civilization.

    The guy who played Picard’s adult son in that episode was Patrick Stewart’s son.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. @Taco
    "He also lived a privileged life at Whittier and at Duke Law School"

    Look, even a cursory search of the internet will tell you that this simply isn't true.

    Richard Nixon's early life was hardscrabble. From wikipedia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon#Early_life


    Nixon's early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: "We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn't know it".[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     

    Instead, they sent Richard to the larger Fullerton Union High School.[13][14] He received excellent grades, even though he had to ride a school bus for an hour each way during his freshman year
     

    His parents permitted Richard to transfer to Whittier High School for his junior year, beginning in September 1928. At Whittier High, Nixon suffered his first electoral defeat, for student body president. He generally rose at 4 a.m., to drive the family truck into Los Angeles and purchase vegetables at the market. He then drove to the store to wash and display them, before going to school. Harold had been diagnosed with tuberculosis the previous year; when their mother took him to Arizona in the hopes of improving his health, the demands on Richard increased, causing him to give up football. Nevertheless, Richard graduated from Whittier High third in his class of 207 students.[18]
     

    Nixon was offered a tuition grant to attend Harvard University, but Harold's continued illness and the need for their mother to care for him meant Richard was needed at the store. He remained in his hometown and attended Whittier College, his expenses there covered by a bequest from his maternal grandfather.[19] Nixon played for the basketball team; he also tried out for football, but lacked the size to play. He remained on the team as a substitute, and was noted for his enthusiasm.[20] Instead of fraternities and sororities, Whittier had literary societies. Nixon was snubbed by the only one for men, the Franklins; many members of the Franklins were from prominent families but Nixon was not.
     
    I could go on, but you can just click the link.

    Richard Nixon's family was a hand-to-mouth lower middle class family with 5 children one of whom died young and one of whom had tuberculosis. Throughout his time in high school and college he had to spend his spare time working at the family business. Despite this, he got good enough grades to get an academic scholarship to law school.

    As to his military service, Nixon was a Quaker. He could have been a legitimate conscientious objector. I think its possible that concern for his future political prospects, more than sheer patriotism, motivated him to join the Navy. But if he wanted to be "coddled" he could have stayed out of WWII entirely.

    And Pat Nixon, yes, appeared in 4 films as an extra. She was also a delivery driver, secretary, telephone operator, pharmacist's assistant, and janitor, among other things. Does this sound to you like a lady who is a "Hollywood Star" or a lady who had to work hard, at any job that was available, who at some point on her day off made a few extra bucks by being an extra?

    Richard and Pat Nixon both came up as working poor. Maybe Richard Nixon truly suffered some detachment from public morality. I will not deny the possibility. But that deficit, if it existed, certainly didn't stem from a "coddled" existence in his formative years.

    Taco – I consider Nixon a great president and the most interesting chief executive we had in the 20th century. I appreciate the fact that you seem to feel the same. However, perhaps because you are young and lack cultural memory and context, or because you mistakenly took me for a Nixon critic, you did not understand the point I was making. I will try one more time. When I was commissioned as an officer back in the 80s I noticed that many of the other officers – even the ones who thought they were tough – were often a heck of a lot more naive than the enlisted men their age. Annapolis grads (and I know Nixon did not go to Annapolis, but that is not central here) were notorious for their beaming optimism and coddled unawareness of how hard life can be outside of the generally solvable challenges of military life. If you think I am wrong about that, fine, but please don’t invite me to click on Wikipedia to learn more about a subject that I could easily write a hundred or two hundred pages on with exponentially more detail and insight than the Wikipedia editors could. Anyway, my formative military experiences were about halfway between now and Nixon’s day, but the patterns are not that dissimilar. Looking back, I see many similarities between the naiveté shown by so many lieutenants of the 80s and many of the anecdotes I read about Nixon, for example his lack of full awareness of how monumentally crooked the Kennedy operatives were, and the way he was steamrolled by the sharp boys who wanted their way on the Supreme Court, not to mention by little guys like Mark Felt and David Frost. As for whether Pat Nixon was a “Hollywood star”, either you understand the nuances of a language or you don’t. It is not something everyone can be taught to understand. (The best short description of that wonderful woman that I know, by the way, is Ben Stein’s speech on the occasion of the centenary of her birth, easily available on the internet). In addition to what I have previously and accurately pointed out, not all mathematicians publish in the best journals, but they are still those one-in-ten-thousand people who can be called mathematicians. Next hint: watch an episode or two of the Beverly Hillbillies for a refresher on the fact that people used to use different words for things (inside and outside the movie industry) that we now call by other words. Another hint: when someone tells you he married the prettiest girl in town, he is not always speaking in the role of someone who has conducted a detailed polling operation. Finally, Richard Nixon was not working poor. He was rural poor trying to hang on to the good farmstead that was in the family. People like that often did working-class jobs but they were not “working poor” in the sense that those who live from paycheck to paycheck in a set of rented rooms or a rundown shack are. Just another important nuance that anyone who has spent time with poor people who lived through the Depression instantly and intuitively understands.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. rod1963 says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I don’t see what makes a crackdown on employers impractical. In fact, I think the American public would eat it up. The idea of a crackdown on the exploitative slave bosses has broad appeal IMO. Let the traitors’ pols defend them, we’ll see how that plays out.
     
    I too favor a crackdown on employers.

    Unfortunately, the Democrat Party will continue to block such crackdowns until a mass amnesty is promised.

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.

    I wish I could count on Trump becoming President, but his conduct has remained extremely erratic. He might win in a landslide or lose in a landslide.

    That's why I have switched my support from Trump to Cruz.

    If Rubio could explain himself convincingly on the immigration issue, I might switch from Cruz to Rubio, because I think that Rubio has a better chance of being elected President than Cruz does.

    I’ll take Trump’s so-called “erratic” behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes – yes on TPP and Corker amendment.

    Not mention his 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs on the NAU.

    His idea of a fence is completing the last 70 miles of the border fence Bush put up. He won’t deport either.

    He’s not for America, that’s for sure.

    Rubio is a billionaire’s b***h and neo-con on FP. If you want WWIII and mass amnesty, this Cuban lightweight is your boy.

    Cruz OTOH has all the earmarks of a fool. You don’t associate with loons like Beck or a loser such as Perry. Really going down to the border to give teddy bears and soccer balls to illegal aliens is just plain stupid with Beck or having him do a faux swearing in ceremony is just nuts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    I’ll take Trump’s so-called “erratic” behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes .... TPP and Corker amendment ... 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs ... the last 70 miles of the border fence ... won’t deport either ... all the earmarks of a fool. ....
     
    From July to December 2015, my favorite candidate was Donald Trump. I agreed with his hard line on immigration, and I hoped that he would moderate his conduct.

    I have come to recognize that he probably will not moderate his conduct.

    In the meantime, Ted Cruz has announced an immigration position that I consider to be adequately hard-line.

    I still like Trump, and he's my second-favorite candidate.

    However, Trump's rhetoric is rambling, and his political philosophy is incoherent.

    Watch any one of Trump's speeches and then watch Ronald Reagan's speech announcing his candidacy for the Presidency in 1979.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAtYMD-H2UY

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Well said. A good summary of both Cruz and Rubio.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @syonredux

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty.
     
    We've been down this road before. They pass the mass amnesty and forget about the effective enforcement part.

    We’ve been down this road before. They pass the mass amnesty and forget about the effective enforcement part.

    They did it once.

    They have not been able to do it a second time.

    The most recent failed attempt was the Gang of Eight.

    The only way forward is a grand bargain that does include effective enforcement.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    “Anglo-America” existed in the 19th century. I think you mean “White America” or “European America”, which replaced “Anglo-America” in the 20th century.
     
    No, I mean Anglo-America.

    That ship sailed like a century ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    That ship sailed like a century ago.
     
    Hardly. The old WASP elite put the hammer down in the early 20th century. Cf the Kulturkampf waged against German culture during WWI, the massive restrictions on immigration in the 1920s, the concerted campaigns to Anglicize the children of immigrants, etc.

    Anglo culture is what makes the USA and Anglophone Canada distinct from Latin America. It is something worth fighting for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Wilkey
    "In regard to the second paragraph, it is why I think Rubio should give a long, thoughtful speech to explain his participation in the Gang of Eight. I have heard him explain himself only in glib sound-bites."

    So basically what you're saying is "I want Rubio to lie to me - to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time." Gotcha.

    So basically what you’re saying is “I want Rubio to lie to me – to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time.” Gotcha.

    I want Rubio to explain in detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and the decisions and agreements he made in the process. I also want him to explain the lessons he learned.

    Rubio needs to explain himself convincingly to the many people — such as yourself — who feel that he lied to the electorate about the immigration issue when he ran for the US Senate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    A desire for an explanation is understandable. I just have no reason to believe his explanation will be any more honest than his 2010 promise to oppose amnesty.

    There are basically two ways to look at this: he lied in 2010 when he claimed he would oppose amnesty, or he didn't lie but was suckered into supporting amnesty (plus an insanely enormous increase in legal immigration) anyway. In my view either explanation disqualifies him for the presidency.

    My hunch is that Rubio, at the behest of his patrons, has always been an amnesty supporter. Open borders Republicans used Mitt Romney's 2012 defeat as a reason the party "needed" to embrace amnesty, and Rubio saw that as an opening to betray a major campaign promise. The conservative ennui in the fallout of Mitt Romney's defeat led an awful lot of people to believe that amnesty was genuinely inevitable. One of those people was Marco Rubio. But the fact is that Marco Rubio wanted it to be inevitable.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. syonredux says:
    @Anon
    "He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American."

    He's actually Texican.

    Initially, Anglo-Americans were racially exclusive, and this was especially in the East Coast.

    But as Anglos moved to other places, some just got looser and less 'uptight' and mixed with the locals. Some did this in Hawaii. And some did this in SW territories. Some even went to Mexico and settled there and became Amexicans.

    It was more doable with Mexers and Hawaiians cuz they were okay folks. White folks lived in closer proximity with Negroes in the South, but Negroes were too scary. (That seems to be changing now since interracism is the official faith of America, and southern white girls now got the hots for rapper and black football players.)
    So, Anglo elites merged with Mexers in places in Texas. And they mixed with Hawiian and other tropical native types, like in DONOVON'S REEF.
    It was less easy with American Indians --- even though races did mix --- cuz of the bitter tribal wars that came to define both communities as blood enemies in myth and lore.

    So, the Bush family's attitude isn't really anti-Anglo or anti-American. It's like how Pierce Brosnan feels in NOBLE LOUSE. He's part of the British Empire but also feels sort of 'Chinese' as he was brought up in the culture and learned the language. He has to play the game both ways.

    Interestingly enough, even though NE Anglos remained most pure for a long spell, the takeover of that region by Jews meant that NE Anglos began to merge with Jews, even intermarrying with them in big numbers. In some cases of declining wasp fortunes in NE area, their only hope of remaining privileged was by marrying some up-and-coming Jew.

    So, we have Zio-Anglos in the NE, Meso-Anglos in SW, and Akebono-Anglos in Hawaii.

    It's like THE DESCENDANTS.

    But in a way, Meso-Anglos are more powerful as Anglos than Zio-Anglos.
    When Anglos mix with Jews, Jews win.
    When Anglos mix with Mexos, Anglos win.
    Anglos follow Jews, but Mexos follow Anglos.

    Guillermos of the world don't run anything.

    Sadly incorrect, dear fellow. JEB Bush has been absorbed into Latinity. It’s quite disgusting, actually. Here are some excerpts from David Frum’s classic article:

    Yet when a man speaks for the record as often as has Jeb Bush, he deposits there enough material to learn something interesting about the man he is, rather than the boy he was.

    Jeb Bush will tell you that, thanks to his marriage to his Mexican-born wife, he is bicultural. Here he is speaking at New York’s 92nd Street Y in November 2013:

    I’m bicultural—maybe that’s more important than bilingual. For those who have those kinds of marriages, appreciating the culture of your spouse is the most powerful part of the relationship. Being able to share that culture and live in it has been one of the great joys of my life. We chose Miami to live because it is a bicultural city. It’s as American as any, but it has a flair to it that is related to this bicultural feeling. I wanted my children to grow up in a bicultural way.”

    His three children speak both English and Spanish.

    As Jeb Bush himself notes, there is a Bush family tradition of moving away from the culture into which one is born, to plunge into another. George H.W. Bush, born to a family of Northeastern grandees, reinvented himself as Sunbelt conservative. George W. Bush, born in New Haven, Connecticut, was the only member of the next generation of Bush brothers not born in Texas, and yet became the most Texan of them all. Jeb Bush moved away first from Texas, and then from his family’s patrician identity as White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

    “I’ve actually converted to Catholicism … I’m whatever a W-A-S-C would be. I’m a proud Catholic and a converted one, principally because this was the faith of my wife, and I wanted our children to grow up in a non-mixed marriage. So … no longer a WASP.

    His family story and his relocation to Miami, a gateway to Latin America, have focused Jeb Bush’s attention on the topic of immigration. Listen to hours of his comments on public policy, and it quickly becomes overwhelmingly apparent that this is the public policy issue he cares about by far the most.

    Twenty-first century America is a place consumed by issues of identity. More and more Americans identify themselves as “Americans-plus”—fully American, yet also partially something else; in America, but not exclusively defined by their American-ness. An older America expected that people would be all one thing or all another: black or white, male or female, American or foreign. Barack Obama excited a new generation of voters because he—like them—transcended such categories. In this latest scion of the Bush family, of all unlikely persons, the GOP may have found its own candidate for the age of fluidity represented—and accelerated—by the presidency of Barack Obama.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/is-jeb-bush-a-republican-obama/385168/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    You are correct. This is very disgusting coming directly from Yeb Bush's mouth. He would be in the Republican lead if Trump had not barged in and exposed him as low energy. His idiotic brainwashed thinking on how he likes being absorbed by his wife's Mexican culture and purposely lives in bicultural Miami (his words) is a symptom of being low energy. Not to mention being on some kind of weird mental trip of submission.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @rod1963
    I'll take Trump's so-called "erratic" behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes - yes on TPP and Corker amendment.

    Not mention his 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs on the NAU.

    His idea of a fence is completing the last 70 miles of the border fence Bush put up. He won't deport either.

    He's not for America, that's for sure.

    Rubio is a billionaire's b***h and neo-con on FP. If you want WWIII and mass amnesty, this Cuban lightweight is your boy.

    Cruz OTOH has all the earmarks of a fool. You don't associate with loons like Beck or a loser such as Perry. Really going down to the border to give teddy bears and soccer balls to illegal aliens is just plain stupid with Beck or having him do a faux swearing in ceremony is just nuts.

    I’ll take Trump’s so-called “erratic” behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes …. TPP and Corker amendment … 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs … the last 70 miles of the border fence … won’t deport either … all the earmarks of a fool. ….

    From July to December 2015, my favorite candidate was Donald Trump. I agreed with his hard line on immigration, and I hoped that he would moderate his conduct.

    I have come to recognize that he probably will not moderate his conduct.

    In the meantime, Ted Cruz has announced an immigration position that I consider to be adequately hard-line.

    I still like Trump, and he’s my second-favorite candidate.

    However, Trump’s rhetoric is rambling, and his political philosophy is incoherent.

    Watch any one of Trump’s speeches and then watch Ronald Reagan’s speech announcing his candidacy for the Presidency in 1979.

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.
     
    Unless he focuses on that other landslide-- mass low-wage Third World immigration. I don't think even those in Vermont and Hawaii want that. (Heck, Hawaii has been bitching about mainlanders showing up for decades now.)

    How are Hillary, Bernie, or Martin to defend themselves against that?
    , @Mr. Anon
    "Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide."

    Did Clinton conduct himself in a "Presidential" manner when he put on a pair of sun-glasses and blew his sax on the Arsenio Hall show (during which he came off more as his own band-geek self, rather than some kind of cool jazz hipster)? Was it Presidential of him to discuss his preference in underwear, or talk about El Camino with the astroturf in back? Clinton was a kind of soft, puffy, middle-management version of the character that Matthew McConaughey played in "Dazed and Confused". He was the crassest, most tawdry vulgarian to ever win the office (and that's including LBJ). Emphasis on "win".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous
    That ship sailed like a century ago.

    That ship sailed like a century ago.

    Hardly. The old WASP elite put the hammer down in the early 20th century. Cf the Kulturkampf waged against German culture during WWI, the massive restrictions on immigration in the 1920s, the concerted campaigns to Anglicize the children of immigrants, etc.

    Anglo culture is what makes the USA and Anglophone Canada distinct from Latin America. It is something worth fighting for.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacobite
    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.
    , @Anonymous
    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception. Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America's heyday was the 19th century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @LondonBob
    Roger Stone characterised Bush senior as a fiercely competitive and ruthless technocrat who gave the impression of a likeable upper class wasp gentleman. Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don't underestimate him. He did alright, could have been an American Putin though. Unlucky to face Perot and Clinton too.

    Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don’t underestimate him.

    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dcite

    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.
     
    I

    It is. They check in but they can never leave.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Anonymous
    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    It doesn't really matter if her writing is decent. Nobody goes to VDare to read her. There's really no point hosting her articles there.

    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.

    Why would you invent such a bogus category?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What did I invent and what's bogus about it? The Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then did not establish a polity that developed into the US. They traded Florida to the UK.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Jacobite says: • Website
    @syonredux

    That ship sailed like a century ago.
     
    Hardly. The old WASP elite put the hammer down in the early 20th century. Cf the Kulturkampf waged against German culture during WWI, the massive restrictions on immigration in the 1920s, the concerted campaigns to Anglicize the children of immigrants, etc.

    Anglo culture is what makes the USA and Anglophone Canada distinct from Latin America. It is something worth fighting for.

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.
     
    Whatever makes you happy.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.
     
    You left out its Siamese twin, "woman suffrage".
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.
     
    You left out its Siamese twin, "woman suffrage".
    , @syonredux
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jl_9ayxs69A


    Joseph Palmi: Let me ask you something... we Italians, we got our families, and we got the church; the Irish, they have the homeland, Jews their tradition; even the n******, they got their music. What about you people, Mr. Wilson, what do you have?

    Edward Wilson: The United States of America. The rest of you are just visiting.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    That ship sailed like a century ago.
     
    Hardly. The old WASP elite put the hammer down in the early 20th century. Cf the Kulturkampf waged against German culture during WWI, the massive restrictions on immigration in the 1920s, the concerted campaigns to Anglicize the children of immigrants, etc.

    Anglo culture is what makes the USA and Anglophone Canada distinct from Latin America. It is something worth fighting for.

    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception. Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America’s heyday was the 19th century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception.
     
    Hardly. The WASP elite were a vital force until the high 1960s. Indeed, much of the '60s turmoil was about Jewish anti-WASP resentment.

    Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America’s heyday was the 19th century.
     
    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    So, yes, Anglo-America is still a going concern. And Latin American immigration is its greatest threat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Rick Johnson
    Rubio is lacking in natural leadership. He appears like a teenager trying to tell his parents how they are wrong about everything because at 15 he is so smart.

    THE TEST FOR LEADERSHIP:

    If a random hundred people were lost and marooned on a desert island (or wilderness) with little chance of rescue for foreseeable future, a guy like Rubio would be relegated to gather firewood. Trump, on the other hand, would likely emerge as the natural leader to get things done for the group's survival. Always ask yourself, which candidates would be group-selected to be a leader or THE leader; and which would be relegated to join Rubio in performing the mundane tasks.

    Thatcher would be a leader, so LBJ and Reagan. But except for Trump, the current crop of the candidates of BOTH parties are gatherers. By the way, "Obama, don't just stand there, make yourself useful and gather some firewood."

    Ted Cruz would be appointed to blow kazoos at the seagulls.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @ben tillman

    Yes, I know there were Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then. I mean white as in non-Hispanic white.
     
    Why would you invent such a bogus category?

    What did I invent and what’s bogus about it? The Spaniards schlepping around Florida back then did not establish a polity that developed into the US. They traded Florida to the UK.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. syonredux says:
    @Jacobite
    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    Whatever makes you happy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Jacobite
    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    You left out its Siamese twin, “woman suffrage”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Jacobite
    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    You left out its Siamese twin, “woman suffrage”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous
    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception. Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America's heyday was the 19th century.

    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception.

    Hardly. The WASP elite were a vital force until the high 1960s. Indeed, much of the ’60s turmoil was about Jewish anti-WASP resentment.

    Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America’s heyday was the 19th century.

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    So, yes, Anglo-America is still a going concern. And Latin American immigration is its greatest threat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.
     
    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. syonredux says:
    @Jacobite
    The old WASP elite lost all credibility by their willing collusion in the imposition of Prohibition.

    Joseph Palmi: Let me ask you something… we Italians, we got our families, and we got the church; the Irish, they have the homeland, Jews their tradition; even the n******, they got their music. What about you people, Mr. Wilson, what do you have?

    Edward Wilson: The United States of America. The rest of you are just visiting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    That was the last dying gasp of the WASP elite, and the nail was in the coffin with FDR and the rise of mass media culture, which WASPs had little influence or control over since its inception.
     
    Hardly. The WASP elite were a vital force until the high 1960s. Indeed, much of the '60s turmoil was about Jewish anti-WASP resentment.

    Subsequently you had the formation of a general White America or European America. Anglo-America’s heyday was the 19th century.
     
    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    So, yes, Anglo-America is still a going concern. And Latin American immigration is its greatest threat.

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.
     
    And the unifying glue is Anglo culture. My father is English-Scots and my mother is Ashkenazi Jewish. The woman in the office across from mine is 25% Ashkenazi, 25% English, 25% Italian, and 25% Polish. And the guy that she is dating is half Finnish and half Italian.

    What language do we communicate in? English.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Wilkey says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    So basically what you’re saying is “I want Rubio to lie to me – to lie to me good and hard, and deceive me about his reasons for lying to me the first time.” Gotcha.
     
    I want Rubio to explain in detail how he became involved in the Gang of Eight and the decisions and agreements he made in the process. I also want him to explain the lessons he learned.

    Rubio needs to explain himself convincingly to the many people -- such as yourself -- who feel that he lied to the electorate about the immigration issue when he ran for the US Senate.

    A desire for an explanation is understandable. I just have no reason to believe his explanation will be any more honest than his 2010 promise to oppose amnesty.

    There are basically two ways to look at this: he lied in 2010 when he claimed he would oppose amnesty, or he didn’t lie but was suckered into supporting amnesty (plus an insanely enormous increase in legal immigration) anyway. In my view either explanation disqualifies him for the presidency.

    My hunch is that Rubio, at the behest of his patrons, has always been an amnesty supporter. Open borders Republicans used Mitt Romney’s 2012 defeat as a reason the party “needed” to embrace amnesty, and Rubio saw that as an opening to betray a major campaign promise. The conservative ennui in the fallout of Mitt Romney’s defeat led an awful lot of people to believe that amnesty was genuinely inevitable. One of those people was Marco Rubio. But the fact is that Marco Rubio wanted it to be inevitable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @tbraton
    Well, you offered Mike Sylwester a pretty good explanation of Rubio's position on immigration and amnesty, much better than any explanation he will get from Rubio. I wonder if Mike needs an explanation of Rubio's neoconnish foreign policy stance. I'm still shaking my head that he would regard Rubio as acceptable a candidate and possible President as Trump.
    , @tbraton
    Well, you offered Mike Sylwester a pretty good explanation of Rubio's position on immigration and amnesty, much better than any explanation he will get from Rubio. I wonder if Mike needs an explanation of Rubio's neoconnish foreign policy stance. I'm still shaking my head that he would regard Rubio as acceptable a candidate and possible President as Trump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Curle says:
    @anonymous-antimarxist

    He looks like a boy.
     
    To be more precise, Rubio looks like a "rent boy".

    Here are pictures of a young Marco Rubio and his rent boy gone mad spree killing doppleganger Andrew Cunanan who was notorious for murdering in Miami the gay icon the fashion designer Gianni Versace back in 1998.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=pictures+of+Marco+rubio+as+a+young+man&espv=2&biw=824&bih=407&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJz-
    PBu8_KAhXlloMKHYdmCkUQ7AkIPw

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Cunanan

    It's Marco Rubio's lack of “Quien Es Mas Macho?” that creeps lots of people out, especially Latinos outside of his base South Florida Cuban constituency. The idea that macho obsessed mestizo Mexicans
    and Central Americans would ever vote for Rubio is pure plutocrat billionaire self deception. Of course the idea that Rubio's politics just like his dubious sexuality might be for rent is exactly what the billionaires like about him.

    The various rumors and not to mention legitimate questions about Rubio's past arrest history and fashion choices don't help.

    C’mon a lot of boyish looking men aren’t gay. Tom Cruise for example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    Rubio won't keep his boyish good looks for long. He is losing his hair and putting weight, both which do not suit him well. Trump on the other hand has also lost his youthful good looks but he is worth $10 billion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Curle says:
    @Desiderius

    He’s not anti-American; he’s anti-Anglo-American.
     
    He's post-American.

    He’s post-American.

    Pan American.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. Curle says:
    @Rob McX

    Lots of people do stupid s–t when they’re 20.
     
    True, but only a tiny number of them run for a position later in life where they could be open to blackmail. If he was active in the gay scene, it doesn't particularly matter if he did nothing illegal or outrageous. The important thing is that it's the kind of information that someone would be keen to suppress if confronted with it decades later when they hoped they'd left it behind.

    If he was active in the gay scene, it doesn’t particularly matter if he did nothing illegal or outrageous.

    I’m no Rubio fan but I followed a link to an article about it and it appears the c0-youthful miscreant was simply the property manager (his dad’s firm) of a residence used as a business by gays. And that the park was a drinking/drugging hang-out. Is there any more significant evidence than this for a) the idea the park was a homo hang-out; and b) that the associate was a homo? Are there other rumors out there about Marco?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. tbraton says:
    @Desiderius

    I didn’t realize the other candidates were shunning him like that.
     
    Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don't see where it hurts Cruz much.

    “Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don’t see where it hurts Cruz much.”

    Well, the country is not exactly shunning Donald Trump, and he is an “other candidate.” I guess you must work for Fox News. They also have a habit of not mentioning Trump whenever possible but always hailing one of the “other candidates” who “appears to be surging” in one state or another (but never in more than one). Sometimes they hail two candidates who, they claim, are both surging in the same state. But, when you check out other news sites, you find Donald Trump still leading (often by a hefty margin) in that state, something not mentioned by Fox News. Personally, after watching the Trump-less debate the other night, I don’t think Cruz was helped at all and possibly hurt. I guess we will have to wait and see how he does in next week’s caucus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    "The other candidates" refers to the ones who shunned Cruz (specifically Bush). Trump wasn't there to shun him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. tbraton says:
    @Wilkey
    A desire for an explanation is understandable. I just have no reason to believe his explanation will be any more honest than his 2010 promise to oppose amnesty.

    There are basically two ways to look at this: he lied in 2010 when he claimed he would oppose amnesty, or he didn't lie but was suckered into supporting amnesty (plus an insanely enormous increase in legal immigration) anyway. In my view either explanation disqualifies him for the presidency.

    My hunch is that Rubio, at the behest of his patrons, has always been an amnesty supporter. Open borders Republicans used Mitt Romney's 2012 defeat as a reason the party "needed" to embrace amnesty, and Rubio saw that as an opening to betray a major campaign promise. The conservative ennui in the fallout of Mitt Romney's defeat led an awful lot of people to believe that amnesty was genuinely inevitable. One of those people was Marco Rubio. But the fact is that Marco Rubio wanted it to be inevitable.

    Well, you offered Mike Sylwester a pretty good explanation of Rubio’s position on immigration and amnesty, much better than any explanation he will get from Rubio. I wonder if Mike needs an explanation of Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy stance. I’m still shaking my head that he would regard Rubio as acceptable a candidate and possible President as Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    Sanders, who's presumably less popular among blacks and Hispanics than Hillary is, has a 12 point lead over Trump in a matchup according to a recent Reuters poll, compared to Hillary's 10 point lead over Trump:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bloomberg-idUSMTZSAPEC1SOOMWHP

    In a matchup between Trump and Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, adding Bloomberg's name to the ballot would trim Clinton's lead over Trump to six percentage points from 10, according to the poll conducted from Jan. 23 to Jan. 27.

    In a Trump versus Democratic hopeful Bernie Sanders matchup, adding Bloomberg would erode Sanders' lead over Trump to seven points from 12, the poll results showed.
     

    Hillary hasn’t been challenged during the primary so far. Sanders has treated her with kid gloves. She would whither in a contest with Trump. One offhand comment by him had young liberal women questioning their support for Hillary.

    And there’s also the distinct possibility she gets indicted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    She would whither in a contest with Trump.
     
    Whither withereth the wench?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @Svigor

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.
     
    Yup. I think the laws on the books are plenty. They just need vigorous enforcement. Trump can fire some federal prosecutors and LEO brass and everyone would get the message. This would probably be more useful than new legislation, ceteris paribus.

    Nixon’s early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: “We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn’t know it”.[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     
    Opening grocery stores and gas stations doesn't seem like what poor people do.

    “Opening grocery stores and gas stations doesn’t seem like what poor people do.”

    It’s something that poor Quakers do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Rubio should spend some time in the Senate, pay some Goddamned dues, and get some real accomplishments under his belt first before running for President for Crissakes.

    This isn’t complicated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manton
    You'd think so, but that's apparently not the way it's done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are "qualified" to be president.
    , @CJ
    You have a point, but the U.S. Senate is a blowhard talking shop where very little is ever accomplished. What "dues" do Senators pay exactly? Other than Jeff Sessions and maybe a couple of others, the longer they are there, the more corrupt and out of touch they become.

    As others have noted, after eight years of Obama any argument that a President needs qualifications rings hollow, at least coming from Democrats. On the Republican side, George W. Bush had excellent "qualifications" as an experienced big-state governor, but I don't think too many people on this site would claim he was a good President.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Hibernian says:
    @Svigor

    If Trump becomes President, then he can apply existing laws to crack down on employers.
     
    Yup. I think the laws on the books are plenty. They just need vigorous enforcement. Trump can fire some federal prosecutors and LEO brass and everyone would get the message. This would probably be more useful than new legislation, ceteris paribus.

    Nixon’s early life was marked by hardship, and he later quoted a saying of Eisenhower to describe his boyhood: “We were poor, but the glory of it was we didn’t know it”.[7] The Nixon family ranch failed in 1922, and the family moved to Whittier, California. In an area with many Quakers, Frank Nixon opened a grocery store and gas station.[8]
     
    Opening grocery stores and gas stations doesn't seem like what poor people do.

    They aren’t what rich people do, either, unless you’re talking about those who open giant supermarkets or ten gas stations at a time. The poster who put forth the thesis that Nixon was too sheltered to understand the true state of public morality in the US was clueless.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. tbraton says:
    @Wilkey
    A desire for an explanation is understandable. I just have no reason to believe his explanation will be any more honest than his 2010 promise to oppose amnesty.

    There are basically two ways to look at this: he lied in 2010 when he claimed he would oppose amnesty, or he didn't lie but was suckered into supporting amnesty (plus an insanely enormous increase in legal immigration) anyway. In my view either explanation disqualifies him for the presidency.

    My hunch is that Rubio, at the behest of his patrons, has always been an amnesty supporter. Open borders Republicans used Mitt Romney's 2012 defeat as a reason the party "needed" to embrace amnesty, and Rubio saw that as an opening to betray a major campaign promise. The conservative ennui in the fallout of Mitt Romney's defeat led an awful lot of people to believe that amnesty was genuinely inevitable. One of those people was Marco Rubio. But the fact is that Marco Rubio wanted it to be inevitable.

    Well, you offered Mike Sylwester a pretty good explanation of Rubio’s position on immigration and amnesty, much better than any explanation he will get from Rubio. I wonder if Mike needs an explanation of Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy stance. I’m still shaking my head that he would regard Rubio as acceptable a candidate and possible President as Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. manton says:
    @Desiderius
    Rubio should spend some time in the Senate, pay some Goddamned dues, and get some real accomplishments under his belt first before running for President for Crissakes.

    This isn't complicated.

    You’d think so, but that’s apparently not the way it’s done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are “qualified” to be president.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "You’d think so, but that’s apparently not the way it’s done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are “qualified” to be president."

    And that hasn't been the way it's been done for a longtime. Congress is the graveyard of presidential ambitions. Men who spend a long time in the Senate generally don't get elected as President. Kennedy spent only 1 1/3 terms in office. Obama less than one. And they were the only sitting Senators elected to the Presidency in over a century. Both Truman and LBJ were in the Senate longer, but they only got the office of President by virtue of having been chosen as veeps.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Mike Sylwester

    I’ll take Trump’s so-called “erratic” behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes .... TPP and Corker amendment ... 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs ... the last 70 miles of the border fence ... won’t deport either ... all the earmarks of a fool. ....
     
    From July to December 2015, my favorite candidate was Donald Trump. I agreed with his hard line on immigration, and I hoped that he would moderate his conduct.

    I have come to recognize that he probably will not moderate his conduct.

    In the meantime, Ted Cruz has announced an immigration position that I consider to be adequately hard-line.

    I still like Trump, and he's my second-favorite candidate.

    However, Trump's rhetoric is rambling, and his political philosophy is incoherent.

    Watch any one of Trump's speeches and then watch Ronald Reagan's speech announcing his candidacy for the Presidency in 1979.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAtYMD-H2UY

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.

    Unless he focuses on that other landslide– mass low-wage Third World immigration. I don’t think even those in Vermont and Hawaii want that. (Heck, Hawaii has been bitching about mainlanders showing up for decades now.)

    How are Hillary, Bernie, or Martin to defend themselves against that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Dave Pinsen
    Hillary hasn't been challenged during the primary so far. Sanders has treated her with kid gloves. She would whither in a contest with Trump. One offhand comment by him had young liberal women questioning their support for Hillary.

    And there's also the distinct possibility she gets indicted.

    She would whither in a contest with Trump.

    Whither withereth the wench?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    I've been giving this some thought: How would Trump fare in a contest with Hillary Clinton? I think a lot better than most people think. Hillary has been used to dealing with dweeb Republicans for years, so she's quite prepared for a Cruz, Rubio or Bush. But Trump is much less predictable. Moreover, I think that one of Trump's strengths as a businessman is that he can size people up pretty quickly. He has met Hillary Clinton personally on a number of occasions and I'll bet that he has a pretty good idea where her insecurities lie. In a debate I predict at least a couple of "deer in the headlight" moments for Hillary when Trump verbally hits her with something unexpected that leaves her unable to respond coherently.

    A Trump-Sanders debate, by contrast, might become a genuine exchange of ideas with truth breaking out. Trump versus Clinton is better theater; Trump versus Sanders is better substance.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @Anon
    He looks like a boy.

    He looks like a boy.

    In a boy band.

    Sadly for him, 14-year-old girls can’t vote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. Clyde says:
    @syonredux
    Sadly incorrect, dear fellow. JEB Bush has been absorbed into Latinity. It's quite disgusting, actually. Here are some excerpts from David Frum's classic article:

    Yet when a man speaks for the record as often as has Jeb Bush, he deposits there enough material to learn something interesting about the man he is, rather than the boy he was.

    Jeb Bush will tell you that, thanks to his marriage to his Mexican-born wife, he is bicultural. Here he is speaking at New York’s 92nd Street Y in November 2013:

    I’m bicultural—maybe that’s more important than bilingual. For those who have those kinds of marriages, appreciating the culture of your spouse is the most powerful part of the relationship. Being able to share that culture and live in it has been one of the great joys of my life. We chose Miami to live because it is a bicultural city. It’s as American as any, but it has a flair to it that is related to this bicultural feeling. I wanted my children to grow up in a bicultural way.”
     

    His three children speak both English and Spanish.

    As Jeb Bush himself notes, there is a Bush family tradition of moving away from the culture into which one is born, to plunge into another. George H.W. Bush, born to a family of Northeastern grandees, reinvented himself as Sunbelt conservative. George W. Bush, born in New Haven, Connecticut, was the only member of the next generation of Bush brothers not born in Texas, and yet became the most Texan of them all. Jeb Bush moved away first from Texas, and then from his family’s patrician identity as White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

    “I’ve actually converted to Catholicism … I’m whatever a W-A-S-C would be. I’m a proud Catholic and a converted one, principally because this was the faith of my wife, and I wanted our children to grow up in a non-mixed marriage. So … no longer a WASP.

    His family story and his relocation to Miami, a gateway to Latin America, have focused Jeb Bush’s attention on the topic of immigration. Listen to hours of his comments on public policy, and it quickly becomes overwhelmingly apparent that this is the public policy issue he cares about by far the most.

     


    Twenty-first century America is a place consumed by issues of identity. More and more Americans identify themselves as “Americans-plus”—fully American, yet also partially something else; in America, but not exclusively defined by their American-ness. An older America expected that people would be all one thing or all another: black or white, male or female, American or foreign. Barack Obama excited a new generation of voters because he—like them—transcended such categories. In this latest scion of the Bush family, of all unlikely persons, the GOP may have found its own candidate for the age of fluidity represented—and accelerated—by the presidency of Barack Obama.
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/02/is-jeb-bush-a-republican-obama/385168/

    You are correct. This is very disgusting coming directly from Yeb Bush’s mouth. He would be in the Republican lead if Trump had not barged in and exposed him as low energy. His idiotic brainwashed thinking on how he likes being absorbed by his wife’s Mexican culture and purposely lives in bicultural Miami (his words) is a symptom of being low energy. Not to mention being on some kind of weird mental trip of submission.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. On some late night show, they introduced a ten year boy as Marco Rubio. It was meant as a joke about Rubio’s youthful appearance. the problem was that the ten year old looked more intelligent andhad more charisma than the real Rubio.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  194. @Curle
    C'mon a lot of boyish looking men aren't gay. Tom Cruise for example.

    Rubio won’t keep his boyish good looks for long. He is losing his hair and putting weight, both which do not suit him well. Trump on the other hand has also lost his youthful good looks but he is worth $10 billion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.
     
    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.

    And the unifying glue is Anglo culture. My father is English-Scots and my mother is Ashkenazi Jewish. The woman in the office across from mine is 25% Ashkenazi, 25% English, 25% Italian, and 25% Polish. And the guy that she is dating is half Finnish and half Italian.

    What language do we communicate in? English.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Depends what you mean by 'Anglo'. We don't call each other 'chavs' and 'wankers' or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.

    There's a mainstream American culture you can call 'Anglo' to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It's descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.

    , @Anonymous
    So do Jamaicans.

    The "unifying glue" is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It's also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. dcite says:
    @Johann Ricke

    Bush senior spent a lifetime in the dirty end of the CIA, don’t underestimate him.
     
    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.

    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.

    I

    It is. They check in but they can never leave.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    GHW Bush was some sort of fellow traveler of the CIA in the 1960s, letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs. So when he became Director in the 1970s, he was nominally an outsider, but was more of a friendly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Mr. Anon says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I guess Rubio’s neoconnish foreign policy must not bother you at all. That was the main reason I didn’t vote for him as Senator in 2010. Of course, his betrayal of his pledge to oppose legalization of illegal aliens turned off a lot of Floridians, including me
     
    I agree with you that Rubio is too hawkish on foreign policy and too dovish on immigration policy.

    However, I generally agree with Rubio's stance on economic issues. He is an eloquent advocate of our free market and our opportunity society.

    Rubio also has much successful political experience in the Florida state government.

    I would like to deport all the illegal immigrants, but I think the only practical resolution will be a grand bargain the comprises effective enforcement and one last mass amnesty. I think that's what Rubio intended in the Gang of Eight, but he I think he was outwitted. That's why I want him to explain satisfactorily his involvement in the Gang of Eight.

    Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential.

    I like Cruz and Trump more right now, but each of them has faults too.

    “Rubio is an eloquent, inspirational and attractive politician who could win the Presidency for the Republican Party. He has great political talent and potential. ”

    Rubio is Paul Singer’s bitch. Or at least, he was going to be when it seemed that Bush was flaming out and Rubio could step into his shoes. Rubio will never do anything to stem immigration. Neither he wants to nor do the people to whom he will owe his position. And Rubio talks a great deal about family values and such, but his biggest backer (Singer) used his money and influence to ram gay marriage through the New York State legislature.

    Rubio is – like most of the rest of them – a corrupt duplicitous sell-out. He is just less bright than they are. Come to think of it, that might be his best quality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. J1234 says:

    From Douthat:

    ….Rubio’s role in the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill is plainly a liability. Possibly enough of a liability, in fact, to deny him the nomination.

    Despite the talent of people like Douthat and David Brooks, word “possibly” in that statement pretty much says it all about the media’s officially sanctioned “conservative” pundits. Specifically, as to how out of touch they are with the rest of conservative America. There’s no “possibly” about it, Ross. You’d know that if you paid a little closer attention to what’s going in the country and less attention to your career path with the New York Times.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  199. Mr. Anon says:
    @Mike Sylwester

    I’ll take Trump’s so-called “erratic” behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes .... TPP and Corker amendment ... 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs ... the last 70 miles of the border fence ... won’t deport either ... all the earmarks of a fool. ....
     
    From July to December 2015, my favorite candidate was Donald Trump. I agreed with his hard line on immigration, and I hoped that he would moderate his conduct.

    I have come to recognize that he probably will not moderate his conduct.

    In the meantime, Ted Cruz has announced an immigration position that I consider to be adequately hard-line.

    I still like Trump, and he's my second-favorite candidate.

    However, Trump's rhetoric is rambling, and his political philosophy is incoherent.

    Watch any one of Trump's speeches and then watch Ronald Reagan's speech announcing his candidacy for the Presidency in 1979.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAtYMD-H2UY

    Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.

    “Unfortunately, Trump does not conduct himself in a Presidential manner (as Reagan did), and so he well might lose in a landslide.”

    Did Clinton conduct himself in a “Presidential” manner when he put on a pair of sun-glasses and blew his sax on the Arsenio Hall show (during which he came off more as his own band-geek self, rather than some kind of cool jazz hipster)? Was it Presidential of him to discuss his preference in underwear, or talk about El Camino with the astroturf in back? Clinton was a kind of soft, puffy, middle-management version of the character that Matthew McConaughey played in “Dazed and Confused”. He was the crassest, most tawdry vulgarian to ever win the office (and that’s including LBJ). Emphasis on “win”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. Mr. Anon says:
    @rod1963
    I'll take Trump's so-called "erratic" behavior any day over that of a overly ambitious junior senator that has already made some serious vote mistakes - yes on TPP and Corker amendment.

    Not mention his 5x increase in H1-B workers, his wife working for Goldman-Sachs on the NAU.

    His idea of a fence is completing the last 70 miles of the border fence Bush put up. He won't deport either.

    He's not for America, that's for sure.

    Rubio is a billionaire's b***h and neo-con on FP. If you want WWIII and mass amnesty, this Cuban lightweight is your boy.

    Cruz OTOH has all the earmarks of a fool. You don't associate with loons like Beck or a loser such as Perry. Really going down to the border to give teddy bears and soccer balls to illegal aliens is just plain stupid with Beck or having him do a faux swearing in ceremony is just nuts.

    Well said. A good summary of both Cruz and Rubio.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Mr. Anon says:
    @eah
    I don’t see much significance

    That's big of you.

    Does the "stupid s--t" normally include gay sex in public? If 'lots of people' includes you, did your 'youthful indiscretions' include homosexual acts in public?

    To be fair, there really isn’t any evidence to that effect. See Curle’s comment above. Rubio might have just been busted for public drinking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @dcite

    Only if you consider a couple of years as CIA director a lifetime.
     
    I

    It is. They check in but they can never leave.

    GHW Bush was some sort of fellow traveler of the CIA in the 1960s, letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs. So when he became Director in the 1970s, he was nominally an outsider, but was more of a friendly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    J Edgar Hoover certainly believed Bush was CIA.

    https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bush_Sr,_JFK_-_J_Edgar_Hoover_memo_2.jpg

    Another George Bush did actually work for the CIA at the time but was a low level clerk, unlikely to converse with the head of the FBI. Also made a sworn statement it was not him. Ironically it was a law passed by Bush that declassified said memo.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Bush the Elder was DCI for just about one year, beginning in January 1976. Prior to that he had been chairman of the RNC. Nixon once described Bush as "brainless, but loyal". With the Church committee investigations still fresh in everyone's mind, I wouldn't be surprised if Ford appointed Bush to be head of the CIA to make sure he had someone reliable in the job, who would tamp down any revelations that might have given him trouble during his reelection campaign.
    , @dcite

    ..letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs.
     
    Yes. One was named "Barbara." Bush I lost big time in that fracas. This man was/is closer to the CIA than its jugular vein. Don't let titles fool you. With that crowd, titles are for pr.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. SFG says:
    @syonredux

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.
     
    And the unifying glue is Anglo culture. My father is English-Scots and my mother is Ashkenazi Jewish. The woman in the office across from mine is 25% Ashkenazi, 25% English, 25% Italian, and 25% Polish. And the guy that she is dating is half Finnish and half Italian.

    What language do we communicate in? English.

    Depends what you mean by ‘Anglo’. We don’t call each other ‘chavs’ and ‘wankers’ or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.

    There’s a mainstream American culture you can call ‘Anglo’ to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It’s descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Depends what you mean by ‘Anglo’.
     
    I use it as a counterpart to Hispanic.Mexico, Argentina, Columbia, etc, are all Hispanic countries, but the the USA, Canada (barring the Francophone portions, of course), Australia, New Zealand, etc, are all Anglo countries:

    Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld
    by James Belich

    Why are we speaking English? Replenishing the Earth gives a new answer to that question, uncovering a 'settler revolution' that took place from the early nineteenth century that led to the explosive settlement of the American West and its forgotten twin, the British West, comprising the settler dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.

    When the great settler booms busted, as they always did, a second pattern set in. Links between the Anglo-wests and their metropolises, London and New York, actually tightened as rising tides of staple products flowed one way and ideas the other. This 're-colonization' re-integrated Greater America and Greater Britain, bulking them out to become the superpowers of their day. The 'Settler Revolution' was not exclusive to the Anglophone countries - Argentina, Siberia, and Manchuria also experienced it. But it was the Anglophone settlers who managed to integrate frontier and metropolis most successfully, and it was this that gave them the impetus and the material power to provide the world's leading super-powers for the last 200 years.
     
    http://www.amazon.com/Replenishing-Earth-Settler-Revolution-Angloworld/dp/0199604541

    We don’t call each other ‘chavs’ and ‘wankers’ or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.
     
    Americans speak a variety of English. But we are also part of the Anglosphere.

    There’s a mainstream American culture you can call ‘Anglo’ to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It’s descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.
     
    And that is essentially my definition of Anglo. I would quibble, though, in regards to many Asian Americans on the West Coast. Japanese Americans, for example, have been quite successfully assimilated into the Anglo-American mainstream.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @manton
    Bush was DCI for less than one year and never otherwise served in the CIA.

    Absolutely correct!

    That was a “different George Bush”! *cough* *cough*

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. syonredux says:
    @SFG
    Depends what you mean by 'Anglo'. We don't call each other 'chavs' and 'wankers' or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.

    There's a mainstream American culture you can call 'Anglo' to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It's descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.

    Depends what you mean by ‘Anglo’.

    I use it as a counterpart to Hispanic.Mexico, Argentina, Columbia, etc, are all Hispanic countries, but the the USA, Canada (barring the Francophone portions, of course), Australia, New Zealand, etc, are all Anglo countries:

    Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld
    by James Belich

    Why are we speaking English? Replenishing the Earth gives a new answer to that question, uncovering a ‘settler revolution’ that took place from the early nineteenth century that led to the explosive settlement of the American West and its forgotten twin, the British West, comprising the settler dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.

    When the great settler booms busted, as they always did, a second pattern set in. Links between the Anglo-wests and their metropolises, London and New York, actually tightened as rising tides of staple products flowed one way and ideas the other. This ‘re-colonization’ re-integrated Greater America and Greater Britain, bulking them out to become the superpowers of their day. The ‘Settler Revolution’ was not exclusive to the Anglophone countries – Argentina, Siberia, and Manchuria also experienced it. But it was the Anglophone settlers who managed to integrate frontier and metropolis most successfully, and it was this that gave them the impetus and the material power to provide the world’s leading super-powers for the last 200 years.

    http://www.amazon.com/Replenishing-Earth-Settler-Revolution-Angloworld/dp/0199604541

    We don’t call each other ‘chavs’ and ‘wankers’ or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.

    Americans speak a variety of English. But we are also part of the Anglosphere.

    There’s a mainstream American culture you can call ‘Anglo’ to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It’s descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.

    And that is essentially my definition of Anglo. I would quibble, though, in regards to many Asian Americans on the West Coast. Japanese Americans, for example, have been quite successfully assimilated into the Anglo-American mainstream.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    That was Ben Franklin's argument to the British government in 1760: don't let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.
    , @SFG
    Right. They're of Japanese ancestry, but Anglo culturally.

    I basically agree with you, it's a bit of a terminology quibble since I don't really think of America as part of British culture anymore--it's America. But we are closer to England than we are to, say, France or Germany, to take the next two countries over.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. LondonBob says:
    @Steve Sailer
    GHW Bush was some sort of fellow traveler of the CIA in the 1960s, letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs. So when he became Director in the 1970s, he was nominally an outsider, but was more of a friendly.

    J Edgar Hoover certainly believed Bush was CIA.

    Another George Bush did actually work for the CIA at the time but was a low level clerk, unlikely to converse with the head of the FBI. Also made a sworn statement it was not him. Ironically it was a law passed by Bush that declassified said memo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. @syonredux

    Depends what you mean by ‘Anglo’.
     
    I use it as a counterpart to Hispanic.Mexico, Argentina, Columbia, etc, are all Hispanic countries, but the the USA, Canada (barring the Francophone portions, of course), Australia, New Zealand, etc, are all Anglo countries:

    Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld
    by James Belich

    Why are we speaking English? Replenishing the Earth gives a new answer to that question, uncovering a 'settler revolution' that took place from the early nineteenth century that led to the explosive settlement of the American West and its forgotten twin, the British West, comprising the settler dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.

    When the great settler booms busted, as they always did, a second pattern set in. Links between the Anglo-wests and their metropolises, London and New York, actually tightened as rising tides of staple products flowed one way and ideas the other. This 're-colonization' re-integrated Greater America and Greater Britain, bulking them out to become the superpowers of their day. The 'Settler Revolution' was not exclusive to the Anglophone countries - Argentina, Siberia, and Manchuria also experienced it. But it was the Anglophone settlers who managed to integrate frontier and metropolis most successfully, and it was this that gave them the impetus and the material power to provide the world's leading super-powers for the last 200 years.
     
    http://www.amazon.com/Replenishing-Earth-Settler-Revolution-Angloworld/dp/0199604541

    We don’t call each other ‘chavs’ and ‘wankers’ or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.
     
    Americans speak a variety of English. But we are also part of the Anglosphere.

    There’s a mainstream American culture you can call ‘Anglo’ to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It’s descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.
     
    And that is essentially my definition of Anglo. I would quibble, though, in regards to many Asian Americans on the West Coast. Japanese Americans, for example, have been quite successfully assimilated into the Anglo-American mainstream.

    That was Ben Franklin’s argument to the British government in 1760: don’t let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Too bad Franklin's allegiance to the Crown was shaky, at best.
    , @syonredux
    The Interest of Great Britain Considered, With Regard to her Colonies, And the Acquisitions of Canada and Guadaloupe. To which are added, Observations concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, &c.

    http://franklinpapers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=9&page=047a

    Franklin's thoughts on greater Imperial unity go back at least to the early 1750s:

    LETTER III

    ON THE SUBJECT OF UNITING THE COLONIES MORE INTIMATELY WITH GREAT BRITAIN BY ALLOWING THEM REPRESENTATIVES IN PARLIAMENT

    BOSTON, December 22, 1754

    SIR:




    Since the conversation your Excellency was pleased to honor me with, on the subject of uniting the colonies more intimately with Great Britain, by allowing them representatives in Parliament, I have something further considered that matter and am of opinion that such a union would be very acceptable to the colonies, provided they had a reasonable number of representatives allowed them; and that all the old acts of Parliament restraining the trade or cramping the manufactures of the colonies be at the same time repealed, and the British subjects on this side the water put, in those respects, on the same footing with those in Great Britain, till the new Parliament, representing the whole, shall think it for the interest of the whole to re-enact some or all of them. It is not that I imagine so many representatives will be allowed the colonies as to have any great weight by their numbers, but I think there might be sufficient to occasion those laws to be better and more impartially considered, and perhaps to overcome the interest of a petty corporation, or of any particular set of artificers or traders in England, who heretofore seem, in some instances, to have been more regarded than all the colonies or than was consistent with the general interest or best national good. I think, too, that the government of the colonies by a Parliament in which they are fairly represented would be vastly more agreeable to the people than the method lately attempted to be introduced by royal instructions, as well as more agreeable to the nature of an English constitution and to English liberty; 4 and that such laws as now seem to bear hard on the colonies would (when judged by such a Parliament for the best interest of the whole) be more cheerfully submitted to and more easily executed.

    I should hope, too, that by such a union the people of Great Britain and the people of the colonies would learn to consider themselves as not belonging to a different community with different interests but to one community with one interest, which I imagine would contribute to strengthen the whole and greatly lessen the danger of future separations.
     
    , @syonredux
    Yeah, when one reads the stuff that Franklin wrote immediately before, during, and after the Seven Years' War, one tends to get the impression that he was, perhaps, the only man who really understood what was at stake.
    , @SFG
    He was right. I'm surprised anyone listened to an argument that looked that far ahead, but I'm glad they did!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. @tbraton
    "Well, the country is shunning the other candidates, so I don’t see where it hurts Cruz much."

    Well, the country is not exactly shunning Donald Trump, and he is an "other candidate." I guess you must work for Fox News. They also have a habit of not mentioning Trump whenever possible but always hailing one of the "other candidates" who "appears to be surging" in one state or another (but never in more than one). Sometimes they hail two candidates who, they claim, are both surging in the same state. But, when you check out other news sites, you find Donald Trump still leading (often by a hefty margin) in that state, something not mentioned by Fox News. Personally, after watching the Trump-less debate the other night, I don't think Cruz was helped at all and possibly hurt. I guess we will have to wait and see how he does in next week's caucus.

    “The other candidates” refers to the ones who shunned Cruz (specifically Bush). Trump wasn’t there to shun him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Mr. Anon says:
    @Steve Sailer
    GHW Bush was some sort of fellow traveler of the CIA in the 1960s, letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs. So when he became Director in the 1970s, he was nominally an outsider, but was more of a friendly.

    Bush the Elder was DCI for just about one year, beginning in January 1976. Prior to that he had been chairman of the RNC. Nixon once described Bush as “brainless, but loyal”. With the Church committee investigations still fresh in everyone’s mind, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ford appointed Bush to be head of the CIA to make sure he had someone reliable in the job, who would tamp down any revelations that might have given him trouble during his reelection campaign.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. BB753 says:
    @Steve Sailer
    That was Ben Franklin's argument to the British government in 1760: don't let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.

    Too bad Franklin’s allegiance to the Crown was shaky, at best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Allegiance wasn't Franklin's strong suit, not that the Crown's ministers inspired much in anyone at that time. There'd have been no Revolution on either Pitt's watch.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. Mr. Anon says:
    @manton
    You'd think so, but that's apparently not the way it's done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are "qualified" to be president.

    “You’d think so, but that’s apparently not the way it’s done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are “qualified” to be president.”

    And that hasn’t been the way it’s been done for a longtime. Congress is the graveyard of presidential ambitions. Men who spend a long time in the Senate generally don’t get elected as President. Kennedy spent only 1 1/3 terms in office. Obama less than one. And they were the only sitting Senators elected to the Presidency in over a century. Both Truman and LBJ were in the Senate longer, but they only got the office of President by virtue of having been chosen as veeps.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    Which is what worries me about the Democrats' Moonbat Wing pushing first-termer Granny Warren as presidential timber, stepping in to carry the Womyn banner in place of the damaged Hillary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. CJ says:
    @Desiderius
    Rubio should spend some time in the Senate, pay some Goddamned dues, and get some real accomplishments under his belt first before running for President for Crissakes.

    This isn't complicated.

    You have a point, but the U.S. Senate is a blowhard talking shop where very little is ever accomplished. What “dues” do Senators pay exactly? Other than Jeff Sessions and maybe a couple of others, the longer they are there, the more corrupt and out of touch they become.

    As others have noted, after eight years of Obama any argument that a President needs qualifications rings hollow, at least coming from Democrats. On the Republican side, George W. Bush had excellent “qualifications” as an experienced big-state governor, but I don’t think too many people on this site would claim he was a good President.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Desiderius

    You have a point, but the U.S. Senate is a blowhard talking shop where very little is ever accomplished
     
    Ever is a long time. Seems like the perfect setting for a young man of Presidential timber to get things turned around and distinguish himself.

    As others have noted, after eight years of Obama any argument that a President needs qualifications rings hollow
     
    Especially considering the exemplary job Obama has done fulfilling the duties of that office. Right? Bueller? If a Democrat told you not to jump in a lake, would you go looking for your swim trunks?

    George W. Bush had excellent “qualifications”
     
    With or without scare quotes, he had nothing of the sort.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. syonredux says:
    @Steve Sailer
    That was Ben Franklin's argument to the British government in 1760: don't let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.

    The Interest of Great Britain Considered, With Regard to her Colonies, And the Acquisitions of Canada and Guadaloupe. To which are added, Observations concerning the Increase of Mankind, Peopling of Countries, &c.

    http://franklinpapers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=9&page=047a

    Franklin’s thoughts on greater Imperial unity go back at least to the early 1750s:

    LETTER III

    ON THE SUBJECT OF UNITING THE COLONIES MORE INTIMATELY WITH GREAT BRITAIN BY ALLOWING THEM REPRESENTATIVES IN PARLIAMENT

    BOSTON, December 22, 1754

    SIR:

    Since the conversation your Excellency was pleased to honor me with, on the subject of uniting the colonies more intimately with Great Britain, by allowing them representatives in Parliament, I have something further considered that matter and am of opinion that such a union would be very acceptable to the colonies, provided they had a reasonable number of representatives allowed them; and that all the old acts of Parliament restraining the trade or cramping the manufactures of the colonies be at the same time repealed, and the British subjects on this side the water put, in those respects, on the same footing with those in Great Britain, till the new Parliament, representing the whole, shall think it for the interest of the whole to re-enact some or all of them. It is not that I imagine so many representatives will be allowed the colonies as to have any great weight by their numbers, but I think there might be sufficient to occasion those laws to be better and more impartially considered, and perhaps to overcome the interest of a petty corporation, or of any particular set of artificers or traders in England, who heretofore seem, in some instances, to have been more regarded than all the colonies or than was consistent with the general interest or best national good. I think, too, that the government of the colonies by a Parliament in which they are fairly represented would be vastly more agreeable to the people than the method lately attempted to be introduced by royal instructions, as well as more agreeable to the nature of an English constitution and to English liberty; 4 and that such laws as now seem to bear hard on the colonies would (when judged by such a Parliament for the best interest of the whole) be more cheerfully submitted to and more easily executed.

    I should hope, too, that by such a union the people of Great Britain and the people of the colonies would learn to consider themselves as not belonging to a different community with different interests but to one community with one interest, which I imagine would contribute to strengthen the whole and greatly lessen the danger of future separations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. syonredux says:
    @Steve Sailer
    That was Ben Franklin's argument to the British government in 1760: don't let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.

    Yeah, when one reads the stuff that Franklin wrote immediately before, during, and after the Seven Years’ War, one tends to get the impression that he was, perhaps, the only man who really understood what was at stake.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Andrew Jackson
    There's probably an easier trick. But google upside down exclamation mark and then copy and paste. Or just copy and paste someone else's.

    Go to any decent Word type software and you’ll find the upside down characters under the special characters, or Symbols tabs.
    My copy of Orafice is screwed at the moment but I had one of these lying around and much prefer it.

    ¿Jeb?

    feel free to cut and paste.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. Ace says:
    @middle aged vet
    Desiderius - In my humble opinion, the Bush who won in 1988 was a very old (albeit chronologically middle-aged) man who had been an extremely brave young man with a good education and with wonderful examples to follow. Any of us, even including our exceptional contemporaries who were almost or even more brave in their youth than the elder Bush, could have failed to live up to the education and examples they were given. Bush the elder did fail, for simple reasons (my guess is that he was happy to be a fairly mediocre, even Wodehousian guy, who simply did not spend enough time in prayer and reading the Bible).

    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent, I believe. John Podhoretz’s book about his presidency, Hell of a Ride is a brilliant portrait of a man with no clue about the political issues of his time. Good luck finding out what he actually did as ambassador to China, ambassador to the U.N., or DCI. He warmed the chair is all I can tell but I’ve not studied his life. The most important job Bush held was chairman of the RNC where he did well at raising money for Republicans. His run for the presidency was greatly fueled by calling in chits for his help to fellow Republicans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent,
     
    I dunno; Bush I's" mediocrity" looks pretty good when stacked up against Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. I certainly prefer his foreign policy to his son's .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Ace says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    they’re named after the first white child born in North America
     
    No, they're not. Virginia Dare was the first English child born in North America. She's not even the first white child born in what's the modern US. This kid is:

    http://hispanememento.blogspot.com/2012/02/martin-de-arguelles-primer-nino-blanco.html

    ...and anyone can infer from the content and tone of some of the articles that hosting Malkin’s articles there is some sort of half-assed attempt to appear “diverse”.

     

    Horse manure. She does quite good work on illegal immigration, including a best-selling book, and is tough on Islam and other bêtes-noires of theirs. She's not there because they have a thing for Flips.

    Their policy has always been, explicitly, that if they pay for a columnist, they post everything. They did the same for Paul Craig Roberts, who makes Mrs Malkin look calm and reasonable by comparison.

    Malkin is calm and reasonable at all times.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. SFG says:
    @syonredux

    Depends what you mean by ‘Anglo’.
     
    I use it as a counterpart to Hispanic.Mexico, Argentina, Columbia, etc, are all Hispanic countries, but the the USA, Canada (barring the Francophone portions, of course), Australia, New Zealand, etc, are all Anglo countries:

    Replenishing the Earth: The Settler Revolution and the Rise of the Angloworld
    by James Belich

    Why are we speaking English? Replenishing the Earth gives a new answer to that question, uncovering a 'settler revolution' that took place from the early nineteenth century that led to the explosive settlement of the American West and its forgotten twin, the British West, comprising the settler dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa.

    When the great settler booms busted, as they always did, a second pattern set in. Links between the Anglo-wests and their metropolises, London and New York, actually tightened as rising tides of staple products flowed one way and ideas the other. This 're-colonization' re-integrated Greater America and Greater Britain, bulking them out to become the superpowers of their day. The 'Settler Revolution' was not exclusive to the Anglophone countries - Argentina, Siberia, and Manchuria also experienced it. But it was the Anglophone settlers who managed to integrate frontier and metropolis most successfully, and it was this that gave them the impetus and the material power to provide the world's leading super-powers for the last 200 years.
     
    http://www.amazon.com/Replenishing-Earth-Settler-Revolution-Angloworld/dp/0199604541

    We don’t call each other ‘chavs’ and ‘wankers’ or drive lorries. The USA has become its own beast, and more people speak American than British English in the world.
     
    Americans speak a variety of English. But we are also part of the Anglosphere.

    There’s a mainstream American culture you can call ‘Anglo’ to differentiate it from other cultures like Mexican in the Southwest or Chinese or Japanese on the West Coast. Your average Midwesterner has more in common with it than he does his German ancestors. It’s descended from British people and people who tried to imitate them, of course.
     
    And that is essentially my definition of Anglo. I would quibble, though, in regards to many Asian Americans on the West Coast. Japanese Americans, for example, have been quite successfully assimilated into the Anglo-American mainstream.

    Right. They’re of Japanese ancestry, but Anglo culturally.

    I basically agree with you, it’s a bit of a terminology quibble since I don’t really think of America as part of British culture anymore–it’s America. But we are closer to England than we are to, say, France or Germany, to take the next two countries over.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Right. They’re of Japanese ancestry, but Anglo culturally.

    I basically agree with you, it’s a bit of a terminology quibble since I don’t really think of America as part of British culture anymore–it’s America. But we are closer to England than we are to, say, France or Germany, to take the next two countries over.
     

    It's not really a case of us being part of British culture. It's more a case of Britain and the USA both being part of the same broader culture, the Anglosphere.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. @Anon
    He looks like a boy.

    He looks like a waiter on The Love Boat. Exciting and new, perhaps, but not presidential timber.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "He looks like a waiter on The Love Boat. Exciting and new, perhaps, but not presidential timber."

    Perhaps Rubio should be known as El Ardillon..........Gopher.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. SFG says:
    @Steve Sailer
    That was Ben Franklin's argument to the British government in 1760: don't let the French get back control of the two river entrances to the middle of North America, Quebec City and New Orleans, and by 1900 English-speaking North America and the home office in Britain will be the greatest superpower in the world.

    He was right. I’m surprised anyone listened to an argument that looked that far ahead, but I’m glad they did!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. Ace says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Definitely agree about Ann and her jokes. In an earlier era, Ann would definitely have been one of Bob Hope's main joke writers. If you read her stuff carefully, you can almost hear Hope delivering these zingers to his live audience.

    Wonder if Ann Coulter missed her calling early in life by not applying for an internship with David Letterman's staff to help write his jokes? (since Hope would've been way ancient by that time).

    Hi Ann!

    Ann’s calling is as a political commentator made all the more effective by her wit.

    Read More
    • Agree: EriK
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. Mr. Anon says:
    @Penguinchip
    He looks like a waiter on The Love Boat. Exciting and new, perhaps, but not presidential timber.

    “He looks like a waiter on The Love Boat. Exciting and new, perhaps, but not presidential timber.”

    Perhaps Rubio should be known as El Ardillon……….Gopher.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. syonredux says:
    @Ace
    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent, I believe. John Podhoretz's book about his presidency, Hell of a Ride is a brilliant portrait of a man with no clue about the political issues of his time. Good luck finding out what he actually did as ambassador to China, ambassador to the U.N., or DCI. He warmed the chair is all I can tell but I've not studied his life. The most important job Bush held was chairman of the RNC where he did well at raising money for Republicans. His run for the presidency was greatly fueled by calling in chits for his help to fellow Republicans.

    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent,

    I dunno; Bush I’s” mediocrity” looks pretty good when stacked up against Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. I certainly prefer his foreign policy to his son’s .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    Good point about his foreign policy though even there, in retrospect, the hysteria over Kuwait fits more with the mindless interventionism in later administrations. I chafed over his failure to exploit his victory but it turned out to be exactly the kind of restraint that would have saved the day in Libya and would cause us to cease and desist with the regime change nonsense in Syria now.

    I still hold to the mediocrity idea. His strange abandonment of his "no new taxes" pledge showed he had a flexible idea of what a pledge is. His disdain for "the vision thing" showed a pedestrian mind and that he had no curiosity about American politics to which his pedestrian mind could have been applied. Too, he seemed to want Gorbachev to find a way to keep the Soviet Union alive as though it had not been the instrument of horrific murder and torture.

    But, in our desperate times, it's true that a decent mediocrity would be a hundred times better than this glib destroyer.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. syonredux says:
    @SFG
    Right. They're of Japanese ancestry, but Anglo culturally.

    I basically agree with you, it's a bit of a terminology quibble since I don't really think of America as part of British culture anymore--it's America. But we are closer to England than we are to, say, France or Germany, to take the next two countries over.

    Right. They’re of Japanese ancestry, but Anglo culturally.

    I basically agree with you, it’s a bit of a terminology quibble since I don’t really think of America as part of British culture anymore–it’s America. But we are closer to England than we are to, say, France or Germany, to take the next two countries over.

    It’s not really a case of us being part of British culture. It’s more a case of Britain and the USA both being part of the same broader culture, the Anglosphere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    Dear fellow, the only thing that unites Americans of European stock is Anglo culture. Remove that, and the only thing that is left is a polyglot boardinghouse.

    No, because most Americans of European stock are no longer from distinct ethnicities. Most are a mix of various European ethnicities.
     
    And the unifying glue is Anglo culture. My father is English-Scots and my mother is Ashkenazi Jewish. The woman in the office across from mine is 25% Ashkenazi, 25% English, 25% Italian, and 25% Polish. And the guy that she is dating is half Finnish and half Italian.

    What language do we communicate in? English.

    So do Jamaicans.

    The “unifying glue” is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It’s also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    So do Jamaicans.
     
    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    The “unifying glue” is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It’s also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.
     
    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that's a very, very good thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    It should be called Deep Schtate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  227. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous
    So do Jamaicans.

    The "unifying glue" is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It's also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.

    So do Jamaicans.

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    The “unifying glue” is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It’s also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacobite
    I couldn't agree more. When one leaves the sphere of jury trails and the common law one ought to be in the company of a well trained rifle squad.
    , @Anonymous

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.
     
    If they're English speakers antagonistic towards Anglo culture, how does that distinguish them from many American academics?

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.
     
    Yes, we speak English, but the US now has a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century and is distinct from Anglo culture. Because of American cultural dominance and the lack of a language barrier, this general White or European American culture has been influencing the Anglosphere more than Anglo culture has been influencing the US, as well as influencing the West in general and the rest of the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. Ace says:
    @syonredux

    Bush was a mediocrity, though personally decent,
     
    I dunno; Bush I's" mediocrity" looks pretty good when stacked up against Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. I certainly prefer his foreign policy to his son's .

    Good point about his foreign policy though even there, in retrospect, the hysteria over Kuwait fits more with the mindless interventionism in later administrations. I chafed over his failure to exploit his victory but it turned out to be exactly the kind of restraint that would have saved the day in Libya and would cause us to cease and desist with the regime change nonsense in Syria now.

    I still hold to the mediocrity idea. His strange abandonment of his “no new taxes” pledge showed he had a flexible idea of what a pledge is. His disdain for “the vision thing” showed a pedestrian mind and that he had no curiosity about American politics to which his pedestrian mind could have been applied. Too, he seemed to want Gorbachev to find a way to keep the Soviet Union alive as though it had not been the instrument of horrific murder and torture.

    But, in our desperate times, it’s true that a decent mediocrity would be a hundred times better than this glib destroyer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    I believe Bush I was worried that something like the current Ukrainian Civil War would breakout all over the place in the Soviet Union. He was also highly reluctant to do the first Gulf War at all.

    I'm not American and was a small lad at the time but I get the impression with NAFTA, Perot etc. Bush was correctly seen to favour the elites, had he taken the policy positions that say Buchanan did then, or Trump now, then he would have got his second term and he could have gone down as a great President. As it is you got Clinton, Bush II and Obama...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. Jacobite says: • Website
    @syonredux

    So do Jamaicans.
     
    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    The “unifying glue” is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It’s also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.
     
    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that's a very, very good thing.

    I couldn’t agree more. When one leaves the sphere of jury trails and the common law one ought to be in the company of a well trained rifle squad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. @BB753
    Too bad Franklin's allegiance to the Crown was shaky, at best.

    Allegiance wasn’t Franklin’s strong suit, not that the Crown’s ministers inspired much in anyone at that time. There’d have been no Revolution on either Pitt’s watch.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacobite

    There’d have been no Revolution on either Pitt’s watch.
     
    So you really are a Whig. Good luck with that. Democracy and the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie is unravelling before our very eyes. No wait! Please tell us your plan for paying out the 200 trillion dollars our welfare/warfare state is already committed to spending on entitlements for the population of the US that is currently alive.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Dew says:
    @International Jew
    Good to know at least one person is watching the debate.

    I tried my best to watch it. Couldn’t bring myself to watch more than a few minutes of the actual debate but saw a good amount of the pre-debate coverage on Fox.

    The Fox News types like O’ Rilley were so darn smug about Trump not being in it. “Scared of Megyn Kelly” yeah right.

    Anyone else here see it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. @CJ
    You have a point, but the U.S. Senate is a blowhard talking shop where very little is ever accomplished. What "dues" do Senators pay exactly? Other than Jeff Sessions and maybe a couple of others, the longer they are there, the more corrupt and out of touch they become.

    As others have noted, after eight years of Obama any argument that a President needs qualifications rings hollow, at least coming from Democrats. On the Republican side, George W. Bush had excellent "qualifications" as an experienced big-state governor, but I don't think too many people on this site would claim he was a good President.

    You have a point, but the U.S. Senate is a blowhard talking shop where very little is ever accomplished

    Ever is a long time. Seems like the perfect setting for a young man of Presidential timber to get things turned around and distinguish himself.

    As others have noted, after eight years of Obama any argument that a President needs qualifications rings hollow

    Especially considering the exemplary job Obama has done fulfilling the duties of that office. Right? Bueller? If a Democrat told you not to jump in a lake, would you go looking for your swim trunks?

    George W. Bush had excellent “qualifications”

    With or without scare quotes, he had nothing of the sort.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. Jacobite says: • Website
    @Desiderius
    Allegiance wasn't Franklin's strong suit, not that the Crown's ministers inspired much in anyone at that time. There'd have been no Revolution on either Pitt's watch.

    There’d have been no Revolution on either Pitt’s watch.

    So you really are a Whig. Good luck with that. Democracy and the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie is unravelling before our very eyes. No wait! Please tell us your plan for paying out the 200 trillion dollars our welfare/warfare state is already committed to spending on entitlements for the population of the US that is currently alive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. dcite says:
    @Steve Sailer
    GHW Bush was some sort of fellow traveler of the CIA in the 1960s, letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs. So when he became Director in the 1970s, he was nominally an outsider, but was more of a friendly.

    ..letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs.

    Yes. One was named “Barbara.” Bush I lost big time in that fracas. This man was/is closer to the CIA than its jugular vein. Don’t let titles fool you. With that crowd, titles are for pr.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    I would assume he was recruited out of Yale, oil business is a great cover both in facilities that could be used, as they were with the Bay of Pigs, and it would allow him to disappear for weeks at a time, often to the right places. Of course George De Mohrenschildt had George Bush in his Rolodex.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. So you really are a Whig.

    The Whigs are no more. Marx’s disciples saw to that.

    Let me guess. Moldbug? I think he was deliberately overshooting in hopes of getting something along the lines of Walpole or Peel.

    Any idea if he’s writing these days under another pseudonym?

    Good luck with that. Democracy and the Dictatorship of the Bourgeoisie is unravelling before our very eyes. No wait! Please tell us your plan for paying out the 200 trillion dollars our welfare/warfare state is already committed to spending on entitlements for the population of the US that is currently alive.

    Your friend Macaulay remarks on his amazement at the concurrent growth of such liabilities along with economic output in the century and a half that had transpired between his subject and his writing. They have both continued to do so. I agree that it is a hell of a way to run a railroad.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  236. LondonBob says:
    @Ace
    Good point about his foreign policy though even there, in retrospect, the hysteria over Kuwait fits more with the mindless interventionism in later administrations. I chafed over his failure to exploit his victory but it turned out to be exactly the kind of restraint that would have saved the day in Libya and would cause us to cease and desist with the regime change nonsense in Syria now.

    I still hold to the mediocrity idea. His strange abandonment of his "no new taxes" pledge showed he had a flexible idea of what a pledge is. His disdain for "the vision thing" showed a pedestrian mind and that he had no curiosity about American politics to which his pedestrian mind could have been applied. Too, he seemed to want Gorbachev to find a way to keep the Soviet Union alive as though it had not been the instrument of horrific murder and torture.

    But, in our desperate times, it's true that a decent mediocrity would be a hundred times better than this glib destroyer.

    I believe Bush I was worried that something like the current Ukrainian Civil War would breakout all over the place in the Soviet Union. He was also highly reluctant to do the first Gulf War at all.

    I’m not American and was a small lad at the time but I get the impression with NAFTA, Perot etc. Bush was correctly seen to favour the elites, had he taken the policy positions that say Buchanan did then, or Trump now, then he would have got his second term and he could have gone down as a great President. As it is you got Clinton, Bush II and Obama…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    That would have been one aspect of the end of the USSR to keep in mind but I don't remember there being any indications of impending civil unrest. There was a hard core nationalist group that made some noise but did not get traction of any kind. Pamiyat?? I'd say there was commie fatigue, relief, and not a little joy in a lot of places but no pitchforks. It was a vintage Bush moment to focus on something that wasn't there (if I'm correct) and manage to not grasp the momentous event that was taking place.

    Your impression is correct concerning what might have been. Then every politician since Reagan has failed to do anything but carry water for a political class that is every bit as hostile to the "vision thing" or "voodoo economics" as Bush '41 was. The original constitutional scheme was an excellent concept that did not survive contact with human nature and, more to the point, human lust for power and riches at the expense of the taxpayers. Since the Great Depression it's been one betrayal of the Constitution after another. It's a Western disease actually. The Constitution is an expression of the best of Western political thinking, as are science, liberalism, free markets, the rule of law, and constitutional monarchies, inter alia. All of this is being thrown out in favor of what is, to be charitable, just odd. Savage, chaotic, lunatic are other words to describe it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. LondonBob says:
    @dcite

    ..letting his offshore oil rigs be used for staging logistics for the Bay of Pigs.
     
    Yes. One was named "Barbara." Bush I lost big time in that fracas. This man was/is closer to the CIA than its jugular vein. Don't let titles fool you. With that crowd, titles are for pr.

    I would assume he was recruited out of Yale, oil business is a great cover both in facilities that could be used, as they were with the Bay of Pigs, and it would allow him to disappear for weeks at a time, often to the right places. Of course George De Mohrenschildt had George Bush in his Rolodex.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marat
    GHWB is one of the very few living relics who was likely privy to at least second hand information (and possibly one or more original sources) about JFK. Although no one cares anymore, the coverup of Dallas was a major turning point in our history -- not to be eclipsed until the use of terror being exposed in 2004.

    Bush's front company was named "Zapatas" - just a little company humor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. Brutusale says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "You’d think so, but that’s apparently not the way it’s done any more. The Obama precedent seems to have convinced anyone they are “qualified” to be president."

    And that hasn't been the way it's been done for a longtime. Congress is the graveyard of presidential ambitions. Men who spend a long time in the Senate generally don't get elected as President. Kennedy spent only 1 1/3 terms in office. Obama less than one. And they were the only sitting Senators elected to the Presidency in over a century. Both Truman and LBJ were in the Senate longer, but they only got the office of President by virtue of having been chosen as veeps.

    Which is what worries me about the Democrats’ Moonbat Wing pushing first-termer Granny Warren as presidential timber, stepping in to carry the Womyn banner in place of the damaged Hillary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. Marat says:
    @LondonBob
    I would assume he was recruited out of Yale, oil business is a great cover both in facilities that could be used, as they were with the Bay of Pigs, and it would allow him to disappear for weeks at a time, often to the right places. Of course George De Mohrenschildt had George Bush in his Rolodex.

    GHWB is one of the very few living relics who was likely privy to at least second hand information (and possibly one or more original sources) about JFK. Although no one cares anymore, the coverup of Dallas was a major turning point in our history — not to be eclipsed until the use of terror being exposed in 2004.

    Bush’s front company was named “Zapatas” – just a little company humor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    If anyone wants to read the best book on the Kennedy Assassination:


    Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
    by Vincent Bugliosi

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002GKGBM8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. Marat says:

    Correction “torture” not “terror” typo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  241. MJJB says:

    Don’t overthink this.

    Republicans nominate candidates of European heritage. Trump is in.

    Presidential third terms require a very popular president, which Obama isn’t. Trump is in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  242. syonredux says:
    @Marat
    GHWB is one of the very few living relics who was likely privy to at least second hand information (and possibly one or more original sources) about JFK. Although no one cares anymore, the coverup of Dallas was a major turning point in our history -- not to be eclipsed until the use of terror being exposed in 2004.

    Bush's front company was named "Zapatas" - just a little company humor.

    If anyone wants to read the best book on the Kennedy Assassination:

    Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
    by Vincent Bugliosi

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002GKGBM8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1

    Read More
    • Replies: @LondonBob
    I prefer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson's JFK An American Coup d'Etat. Still gobsmacked such a high ranking British intelligence officer, once a member of the JIC, would write an honest assessment of what happened.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. @Reg Cæsar

    She would whither in a contest with Trump.
     
    Whither withereth the wench?

    I’ve been giving this some thought: How would Trump fare in a contest with Hillary Clinton? I think a lot better than most people think. Hillary has been used to dealing with dweeb Republicans for years, so she’s quite prepared for a Cruz, Rubio or Bush. But Trump is much less predictable. Moreover, I think that one of Trump’s strengths as a businessman is that he can size people up pretty quickly. He has met Hillary Clinton personally on a number of occasions and I’ll bet that he has a pretty good idea where her insecurities lie. In a debate I predict at least a couple of “deer in the headlight” moments for Hillary when Trump verbally hits her with something unexpected that leaves her unable to respond coherently.

    A Trump-Sanders debate, by contrast, might become a genuine exchange of ideas with truth breaking out. Trump versus Clinton is better theater; Trump versus Sanders is better substance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. LondonBob says:
    @syonredux
    If anyone wants to read the best book on the Kennedy Assassination:


    Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy
    by Vincent Bugliosi

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002GKGBM8/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?ie=UTF8&btkr=1

    I prefer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson’s JFK An American Coup d’Etat. Still gobsmacked such a high ranking British intelligence officer, once a member of the JIC, would write an honest assessment of what happened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I prefer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson’s JFK An American Coup d’Etat. Still gobsmacked such a high ranking British intelligence officer, once a member of the JIC, would write an honest assessment of what happened.
     
    I flipped through it once. Found it quite risible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. Ace says:
    @LondonBob
    I believe Bush I was worried that something like the current Ukrainian Civil War would breakout all over the place in the Soviet Union. He was also highly reluctant to do the first Gulf War at all.

    I'm not American and was a small lad at the time but I get the impression with NAFTA, Perot etc. Bush was correctly seen to favour the elites, had he taken the policy positions that say Buchanan did then, or Trump now, then he would have got his second term and he could have gone down as a great President. As it is you got Clinton, Bush II and Obama...

    That would have been one aspect of the end of the USSR to keep in mind but I don’t remember there being any indications of impending civil unrest. There was a hard core nationalist group that made some noise but did not get traction of any kind. Pamiyat?? I’d say there was commie fatigue, relief, and not a little joy in a lot of places but no pitchforks. It was a vintage Bush moment to focus on something that wasn’t there (if I’m correct) and manage to not grasp the momentous event that was taking place.

    Your impression is correct concerning what might have been. Then every politician since Reagan has failed to do anything but carry water for a political class that is every bit as hostile to the “vision thing” or “voodoo economics” as Bush ’41 was. The original constitutional scheme was an excellent concept that did not survive contact with human nature and, more to the point, human lust for power and riches at the expense of the taxpayers. Since the Great Depression it’s been one betrayal of the Constitution after another. It’s a Western disease actually. The Constitution is an expression of the best of Western political thinking, as are science, liberalism, free markets, the rule of law, and constitutional monarchies, inter alia. All of this is being thrown out in favor of what is, to be charitable, just odd. Savage, chaotic, lunatic are other words to describe it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @syonredux

    So do Jamaicans.
     
    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    The “unifying glue” is a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century with the rise of mass media culture and American economic growth. This culture replaced the older Anglo American culture, and more recently, due to the shared language and easier broadcast of pop culture now internationally, it has been influencing the UK and Ireland, along with Canada and Australia, where a more Anglo culture has persisted. It’s also been influencing Europe, and the rest of the world to a lesser extent.
     
    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that's a very, very good thing.

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    If they’re English speakers antagonistic towards Anglo culture, how does that distinguish them from many American academics?

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.

    Yes, we speak English, but the US now has a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century and is distinct from Anglo culture. Because of American cultural dominance and the lack of a language barrier, this general White or European American culture has been influencing the Anglosphere more than Anglo culture has been influencing the US, as well as influencing the West in general and the rest of the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    If they’re English speakers antagonistic towards Anglo culture, how does that distinguish them from many American academics?
     
    Because they regard themselves as critiquing it from the inside.Jamaicans see themselves as the victim of Anglo culture.

    Mind you, there are exceptions. I know an Irish-American academic who loathes Anglo-America with a passion. He sees the Irish and the Blacks as natural allies, etc.

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.

    Yes, we speak English, but the US now has a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century and is distinct from Anglo culture. Because of American cultural dominance and the lack of a language barrier, this general White or European American culture has been influencing the Anglosphere more than Anglo culture has been influencing the US, as well as influencing the West in general and the rest of the world.
     
    I think that you are confusing "Anglo" with British/English.

    And Anglo-American culture is not some kind of perfect blend of Euro cultures. Subtract any of the non-Anglo groups (Germans, Poles, Italians, etc) , and the USA would still be recognizable. Subtract Anglo culture from the USA, and there would be nothing left....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. syonredux says:
    @LondonBob
    I prefer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson's JFK An American Coup d'Etat. Still gobsmacked such a high ranking British intelligence officer, once a member of the JIC, would write an honest assessment of what happened.

    I prefer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson’s JFK An American Coup d’Etat. Still gobsmacked such a high ranking British intelligence officer, once a member of the JIC, would write an honest assessment of what happened.

    I flipped through it once. Found it quite risible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. syonredux says:
    @Anonymous

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.
     
    If they're English speakers antagonistic towards Anglo culture, how does that distinguish them from many American academics?

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.
     
    Yes, we speak English, but the US now has a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century and is distinct from Anglo culture. Because of American cultural dominance and the lack of a language barrier, this general White or European American culture has been influencing the Anglosphere more than Anglo culture has been influencing the US, as well as influencing the West in general and the rest of the world.

    Try talking to Jamaican academics; they are quite antagonistic towards Anglo culture.

    If they’re English speakers antagonistic towards Anglo culture, how does that distinguish them from many American academics?

    Because they regard themselves as critiquing it from the inside.Jamaicans see themselves as the victim of Anglo culture.

    Mind you, there are exceptions. I know an Irish-American academic who loathes Anglo-America with a passion. He sees the Irish and the Blacks as natural allies, etc.

    Again, dear fellow, we are not communicating in German, or in French, or in Italian. We are communicating in English. The USA has far more in common with Britain than we do with Germany.The USA is part of the Anglosphere, and that’s a very, very good thing.

    Yes, we speak English, but the US now has a general White or European American culture that developed in the 20th century and is distinct from Anglo culture. Because of American cultural dominance and the lack of a language barrier, this general White or European American culture has been influencing the Anglosphere more than Anglo culture has been influencing the US, as well as influencing the West in general and the rest of the world.

    I think that you are confusing “Anglo” with British/English.

    And Anglo-American culture is not some kind of perfect blend of Euro cultures. Subtract any of the non-Anglo groups (Germans, Poles, Italians, etc) , and the USA would still be recognizable. Subtract Anglo culture from the USA, and there would be nothing left….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation