The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Tucker on America as Just an Idea
🔊 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

Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea.

But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

 
Hide 238 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Couldn’t people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    Read More
    • Agree: bomag, Logan, Paleo Liberal
    • LOL: Daniel H, Dieter Kief
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Couldn’t people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?
     
    It has been conclusively demonstrated that the American idea only works on American soil. Therefore, everybody who wants to experience that idea must live here. There's no point in arguing; it's science.
    , @anon
    I think we should get to tax anyone, no matter where they live, if they share our ideals. They're Americans, whether they like it or not.
    , @Thomas
    Heartiste made the same point.

    "If America is an idea, why can’t we just send a copy of that idea to shithole countries so they can build their own cities on the hill?”
     
    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/01/13/shithole-nationalism/
    , @Anonymous
    When Invade fails to bring democracy to a shithole, Invite picks up the tab.
    , @anonymouslee
    I don't know why we don't more often point out the absolutely definitive evidence against "muh Constitution" arguments:

    the worst shitholes, however you want to choose them from the Soviet Union to the failed states of Africa to the genocidal warmongers of Europe, have fantastic constitutions. Any country you hate, just name it and find a perfectly nice sounding Constitution.

    We are a people. The Constitution is something we decided to put on paper to better organize the government which exists to serve us, the nation. Not the other way around.

    The Constitution didn't write us, we wrote the Constitution. (hat tip to Malcolm Little for getting me down to one line)


    Something else we should point out is that rhetoric about how people are not really people paves the way for attempts at genocide. No people, no crime. Case closed!

    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
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. I’m really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn’t as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Read More
    • Replies: @oddsbodkins
    This is recent. Young Tucker was a boring parrot of standard right wing thinking back in those days.
    , @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.
    , @Realist
    "Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with."

    Totally agree. Many of the idiot libs he has on are repeat performers. He needs to get some new dumb ass libs....there are plenty of them. One of the acts on recently looks like Howdy Doody's grand daughter with brain to match.
    , @anon
    Yes, Tucker is great.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn’t as bright as Tucker Carlson.
     
    Lou, in the mid aughts while at CNN, was operating under a different zeitgeist than exists today. Strikes me as rather unfair to say he "wasn't as bright". The time wasn't right (ripe?) for the movement-- the masses were quite content taking cash-out mortgages and living above their means.

    Case in point: Tucker himself was on CNN around the same time doing the show Crossfire. Why didn't he head up an immigration restriction movement then? Had a great platform. Up until the last year, Liberals loved to post the clip of when Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire and "destroyed" Tucker Carlson, claiming it led to his departure from CNN. Pretty funny how that isn't brought up anymore.

    Another factor unrelated to intelligence is work politics-- what will their bosses allow them to harp on? Then they were both at CNN, now they're at FOX and FOX Business.

    And one last factor is social media/internet culture. This brings out the best arguments from around the web. Tucker's staff can easily pick out great arguments/talking points for him. There were blogs 12-15 years ago, but there is so much more now, and then best stuff gets collated and upvoted/repeated.

    , @songbird
    It is amazing to think that Dobbs was ever on CNN or Tucker at MSNBC, for that matter.

    They were probably good for ratings, and there is a sort of logic to playing to different groups in different timeslots, but still I wonder if management changed. Or maybe just became more radicalized.
    , @pepperinmono
    Tucker's show's problem is that he has the same few idiots on to argue with.
    He needs to expand the idiot list.
    It is quite shocking to see how unintellectual and stupid the other side is.
    After a while, it is just not entertaining.

    The other night he had on Heather Macdonald, Victor Davis Hanson, and Mark Steyn.
    Pretty good stuff, but maybe too highbrow for that time slot.
    Plus those guests (except for maybe Mark Steyn) need longer time slots to be effective.

    Too bad. I like him.Tucker gets it on immigration. He's a decent debater. Hope he makes it with few tweaks of the format.
    , @Pat Boyle
    I used to worry about Bill O'Reilly. He was the biggest thing in Cable News - Broadcast News too. But Bill was getting on in years. I couldn't see a successor anywhere in sight. Hannity was too partisan and Kelly would soon self immolate. Who could anchor the whole news evening the way O'Reilly did for what? twenty years?

    Then Fox News which had always had a ton of beautiful women on camera ran into a storm of male biology. Now it wasn't enough to be smart and hard working you had to also be a monk. Who could they get who could look but not touch? And since Fox had defined its strategy as moderately conservative and almost all of the prospective male anchors from other networks were rabid crypto-Marxists, it looked hopeless.

    There was a period of confusion and disorganization and out of the chaos emerged Tucker Carlson whom we had seen knocking around the news for years but whom we thought of as just a "pretty boy" news reader a sort of male eye candy air-head.

    But God must like Fox because Carlson is a happy surprise second only to the surprise of Donald Trump. Carlson's interviews are routinely taped and shown on YouTube. O'Reilly always praised his own interviewing abilities. But Carlson is better, much better and the public seems to know it.

    First of all O'Reilly always struggled to get major political celebrities to come on his show. He complained about it all the time. But it's easy to understand why. O'Reilly viewed an interview as a zero sum game. The interviewee was expected to lose. Or big Bill might blow a fuse and scream at the guest. And of course O'Reilly had his stable of sycophantic comedians and acolytes who never challenged him. Finally it was usually clear that the guests who did consent to submit to one of his interviews also often hated his guts. With Bill there was lots of psychodrama but with Carlson there is more actual news.

    Everyone likes Tucker and those that don't are still careful to be scrupulously polite. Tucker's guest dare not be obnoxious because Tucker is so polite and fair minded if they succumb to their darker impulses and try to savage him verbally, they will look like an ass on national TV.

    So it worked out just fine for Fox. Carlson elevates the tone of the main Fox News evening news show and simultaneously has more substantive guests and discussions than heretofore.

    , @e
    Lou Dobbs went from CNN to Fox, now has his own daily show on Fox Business Network and is still a fierce critic of our immigration policies. Further, he was on the Trump Train from almost day one, maybe even Day 1, just can't recall.

    He stood tall against all the Manhattanites and Wall Street global shills through it all. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump didn't get much of his stuff from watching Lou back in the day.
    , @pyrrhus
    Tucker is an amazing improvement on the Obama loving cuck that was Bill O'Reilly...Fox surely could not have intended that, could it?
    , @dr kill
    Seems I remember TC and that Willie Geist fellow on the same show. Seems one grew up and one didn't.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. America: Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Tiny Duck says:

    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/01/17/after-guest-calls-out-his-racism-tucker-carlson-has-meltdown-yours/219092

    Proving again that all you need to trigger a RW snowflake is accurately calling them out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe, averaged
    He used the “r” word guys, argument’s over.

    Seriously, you don’t see how much that sounds like “Witch!!!!’”
    , @Daniel H
    >>Tucker Carlson is a racist

    We're all racists now, Tiny.
    , @whorefinder
    I love you, you're perfect, don't ever change.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Tucker Carlson is a racist
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXnM1uHhsOI
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million “we just won’t talk about for a while.” They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    Read More
    • Agree: Autochthon
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status can be used as leverage to do away with chain migration and the diversity lottery, and to fund Trump's border wall.
    , @bomag

    Why are they still here...
     
    There is a significant infrastructure that has been built up around immigration, and the task involves dismantling this infrastructure.

    Consider what this support/enabling group consists of:

    1) half the House and Senate
    2) a large chunk of the federal judiciary
    3) half or better of your state and local politicians
    4) a large and growing number of lawyers that work in immigration law
    5) Eighty percent of the media
    6) a large number of NGOs and charities work to mainline immigrants and refugees into the country
    7) the usual business interests
    8) the citizenry either brainwashed; friends of above groups; the ethnic and "change" advocates that have seized on immigration as a weapon
    9) foreign countries and their infrastructure that has been built up to send minions abroad in service to remittance/population release/staking out more of the globe for their brand; (Europe's no help here, with its quest to eradicate itself, but it also has become a scary example to avoid)

    and more.

    A huge dismantling task.

    , @IHTG
    No, "future immigrants" are the most pressing issue. As Steve says, the first thing you do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging.
    , @Travis
    the current administration is having trouble deporting convicted criminal aliens....

    The DACA recipients will never be deported, even if DACA is ruled unconstitutional tomorrow. This is one reason the democrats are not willing to compromise with Trump and fund the wall or end the diversity Lottery.

    Ending the Diversity Lottery would produce better results than the wall, keeping out more muslims than the so-called muslim ban and keeping out people from shithole nations.

    Ending the Diversity Lottery and funding the wall would be a good compromise in return for granting residency to 800,000 Mexicans. The Diversity Lottery brings in 25,000 Africans each year and 9,000 Asian muslims each year....the 30,000 muslims admitted each year via the diversity lottery then sponsor 3 family members...The diversity Lottery is the main reason our muslim population has doubled since 2001.
    , @DRA
    By this time many DACA "children" have children, who are American Citizens by birth. Don't see us deporting the parents of minor children and putting them in foster care.

    And I don't even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often. Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. I generally hate TV talking heads, but I gotta say, Tucker is a talented guy. Or he has a talented staff, or both. He has good people; all you need are good people, the rest sorts itself out, and it is nice to see that he preaches what he practices.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    His talent is aligned with a common sense position now, which makes him look like a lot better than he did, say, 15 years ago.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Lindsey Graham: America is an idea – not defined by its people but by it’s ideals.

    Then I guess it doesn’t matter what kinds of kids are in U.S. schools. All kids are just the same. They have no influence on how good a school is or isn’t. No need to think that white kids can make schools better.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn’t accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions ‘E Pluribus Unum’ which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Emma Lasarus Statue of Liberty poem is the Zeroth Amendment, so I guess that makes the Great Seal Latin epigram the Minus First Amendment?

    The Minus Second Amendment would then be Benjamin Franklin's "Guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days."

    , @istevefan

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    From the link you provided is this:

    The meaning of the phrase originates from the concept that out of the union of the original Thirteen Colonies emerged a new single nation.[8] It is emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak on the Great Seal of the United States.[9][10]
     
    So if by diversity you mean a Star Wars cantina, then I'd say no. It is not quite pro-diversity.
    , @Anonymous
    "But that doesn’t accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying."

    Probably because you're an ignoramus, haven't read any of the extensive writings of the founding fathers, and don't realize that liberty is self-determination for them and their posterity, as opposed to being under the heel of a foreign tyrant. If America "went communist" then that would seem to be either self determination if popularly supported (not going to happen among heritage americans), or a domestic tyrant, which they also warned of. Either way you should probably grow up and stop fetishizing your idea of what the founding fathers believed; besides the fact that you're dead wrong, let's say they were actually anti-racists who wanted racial integration (if you were to overlook the fact that many of them were owners of african slaves), you'd still eventually have to join us in reality and cope with the fact that racial equalitarianism and and progressivism is a miserably failed ideology; that the races aren't equal, that ethnic self interest exists, and that multiracial societies are ultimately doomed to collapse, whether or not the founding fathers believed otherwise.

    "E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?"

    No
    , @Stacy235l

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    No.

    The Founding Fathers were referring to themselves and their posterity as One(Unum), having descended from the Many(Pluribus) that had settled and built the American colonies. The One that was already formed, had just liberated and was building the United States.

    , @Crawfurdmuir
    The "pluribus" in the motto were not diverse peoples. E pluribus unum clearly refers to the several states, of which were made one Union.

    In the Wikipedia article linked, a sketch of arms proposed by Pierre Eugène du Simitiere in 1776 for the new country shows the arms of the thirteen colonies quartered on one shield with this motto on an escrol underneath. This was apparently its first appearance in connection with an American emblem. It is noted that the motto has thirteen letters (one for each colony).

    , @Stephen Marle
    Retconning the Great Seal?

    Your linked Wikipedia article explains the origin and meaning of "E Pluribus Unum." Next time, read before you link.

    "The motto E Pluribus Unum, emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak, expresses the union of the 13 States."

    This is from the original State Department source for the Wikipedia article.

    https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/27807.pdf

    You'll also notice the original design: 13 colony seals above the motto, the many to be united as one.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SealOfTheUS_Prototype.png

    , @syonredux

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.
     
    When Powell made that statement, Britain was nearly 100% White British. I'm pretty sure that he would not have been quite so willing to fight for a Muslim majority Britain....

    If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.
     
    I'm pretty sure that a communist USA's population would be majority non-European....which would mean that the there would be no posterity to fight for....

    BTW How come no one here never mentions ‘E Pluribus Unum’ which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    Um, no. See, that translates as "out of many, one." And the oneness to they were referring was political in nature: out of 13 colonies/states, one nation.
    , @guest
    "E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?"

    No.

    As I said in a recent thread, a pro-diversity motto would be: "out of many, many."

    "If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go communist"

    Against outsiders, yes. But I'd like to think we'd be busy killing eachother. Like our posterity did in that civil war thingy.

    "that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death--seemed to be saying"

    You're foolish, you know that? Don't take slogans too seriously. Americans didn't set up false idols like Liberty, though some of them fetishized it.

    They were willing to risk their lives to get out of a regime that frankly wasn't very oppressive. But they wouldn't have thought it worth everyone dying to preserve any idea. The nation was supposed to persist, not disappear in a puff of smoke if some people didn't get their way.

    , @Mr. Anon

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    No. It meant that out of thirteen colonies, which themselves were not that "diverse" by modern standards, one nation was made. It does not mean "Send more Somalis!"
    , @bomag

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity
     
    It means like minded people unite so as to be stronger in repelling threats.

    Now we are divided and weakened and on course to be displaced by people who will remove that slogan from consideration.
    , @nigel

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

     

    You are conflating two entirely different notions of what a country means.

    When Enoch Powell was talking about Britain, everyone at the time knew he was talking about the British people. A people, a nation, can survive a generation or three of bad economic decisions. As long as the people remain in control of their own country, they will eventually correct themselves and build a society that benefits their particular temperament as a people.

    The founding fathers built America to benefit their posterity just as they claimed. The descendants of those founders created a new nation, a new people. And yes, if we as part of that people choose communism or socialism we will reap the benefits of that choice. It doesn't mean we aren't worth are fighting for as a people. My people may make mistakes, but they are still my people. I'm not a rootless cosmopolitan.

    You are conflating the traditional meaning of nation as a people with the modern notion that a nation is just a legally defined economic zone to be administered and populated as the elites see fit. I have no loyalty to that idea of a nation.
    , @Dieter Kief

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.

     

    I'd hold, that Powell made this statement in order to emphasise, how much he was willing to fight for Britain - and how much he hoped, that those on the left would act alike.

    (IOW: His is clearly a counterfactual statement. - Otherwise, he might well have spoken differently).
    , @henry bowman
    Out of many states one nation, you can not really think your retconning of America is going to work in the age of the Internet, right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    The Emma Lasarus Statue of Liberty poem is the Zeroth Amendment, so I guess that makes the Great Seal Latin epigram the Minus First Amendment?

    The Minus Second Amendment would then be Benjamin Franklin’s “Guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days.”

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

    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.
     
    What I’d tune in for...

    “Now here to discuss the Iran sanctions and Ambassador Nikki Haley’s comments today is Brother Nathanael.”
    , @Massimo Heitor

    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.
     
    Please Sailer, do it! Your donations will double!
    , @anonymous
    Tucker appears to be stepping further and further into iSteve territory--which carries the danger of stepping further and further into the crosshairs of the #MeToo crowd. In any event, he beats Breaking News Hannity by a mile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Luke Lea says:

    The individual, his rights and responsibilities in relation to himself and his immediate family, his nearest neighbors, his city and his country as a whole, as they are understood in the laws and traditions of the culture and civilization he lives in. Or something like that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. syonredux says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat
    Couldn't people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    Couldn’t people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    It has been conclusively demonstrated that the American idea only works on American soil. Therefore, everybody who wants to experience that idea must live here. There’s no point in arguing; it’s science.

    Read More
    • LOL: Abe
    • Replies: @Bugg
    Magic dirt on a continental scale.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    No, not at all, to me. “Out of many, one” means that anybody different assimilates to the culture of America. I realize this is not an anti-immigration position either, but it’s not pro-diversity. The people that push diversity want no assimilation to happen (the way it goes now, in fact).

    They want these light-bulb-headed Somalians over here, these studious introverted Chinese sitting there, these Indians in gowns with dots on their foreheads over there, and those towel-headed guys there speaking some expectorant-based-dialect with their black-mummified girlfriends all to be hanging out at the coffee shops having a good old diverse time, as the normal Americans just put up with it. It’s kind of fun if all that’s only 2 dozen people in a city of 200,000, and the innumerate people that don’t get out much really imagine that this is about what we have.

    I would never fight for a Communist government if there were a way out. It’s much better to stop them from internally taking over early on. It’s not THAT early in America. If “my people” truly become Communists, they are dead to me, and I would rather adopt a new “my people”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    It's actually much more specific than that. "E pluribus unum" was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It's become the most overworked phrase since, "All men are created equal."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Cardiology is just an idea too but people tend to be kind of picky when they need heart surgery.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. On this, I defer to the authority of my 6th grade civics teacher: a“government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    That's a great line. Like "To quote Willem Dafoe in The Last Temptation Of Christ, forgive them, for they know not what they do.".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. istevefan says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    From the link you provided is this:

    The meaning of the phrase originates from the concept that out of the union of the original Thirteen Colonies emerged a new single nation.[8] It is emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak on the Great Seal of the United States.[9][10]

    So if by diversity you mean a Star Wars cantina, then I’d say no. It is not quite pro-diversity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe, averaged
    Hey, what was wrong with the Star Wars cantina?

    Oh right, the shooting, killling, and scumbags.
    , @guest
    Our possible future, as articulated by Sir Alec Guiness (slightly modified):

    "The United States of America. You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Tom Wolfe has a regularly-recurring image in several of his books of a man with smooth jowls emerging above an immaculate spread collar like toothpaste being squeezed from a tube. He had Tucker Carlson in mind I believe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alfa158
    No, Tucker was still a kid back then. Wolfe was using Ted Kennedy, who was famous for his jowls among other things, as the model for the decadent Beltway mover and shaker.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Thomas says:

    It’s looking like they’re going to force a government shutdown over this “idea.” Lindsey Grahamnesty is showing his true colors now, saying he won’t vote for a CR because it doesn’t provide enough for the military without a DACA fix (but, really of course, because it doesn’t provide a DACA amnesty).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    It’s looking like they’re going to force a government shutdown over this “idea.”
     
    If the Democrats and their Republican running-dogs want to shut down the government, let them:

    1.) A government shut-down won't be so bad (not that it was so bad the last time) in a Republican administration. They won't be telling people who stop outside of Yosemite to get a look at the view: move along, there's a government shutdown, El Capitan is closed, you can't look at it.

    2.) If the Democrats want to run next November on shutting down the government for a bunch of foreigners, let them. They can explain to their voters why the one thing they're really willing to go to the mat for are illegal aliens.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    “But that doesn’t accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.”

    Probably because you’re an ignoramus, haven’t read any of the extensive writings of the founding fathers, and don’t realize that liberty is self-determination for them and their posterity, as opposed to being under the heel of a foreign tyrant. If America “went communist” then that would seem to be either self determination if popularly supported (not going to happen among heritage americans), or a domestic tyrant, which they also warned of. Either way you should probably grow up and stop fetishizing your idea of what the founding fathers believed; besides the fact that you’re dead wrong, let’s say they were actually anti-racists who wanted racial integration (if you were to overlook the fact that many of them were owners of african slaves), you’d still eventually have to join us in reality and cope with the fact that racial equalitarianism and and progressivism is a miserably failed ideology; that the races aren’t equal, that ethnic self interest exists, and that multiracial societies are ultimately doomed to collapse, whether or not the founding fathers believed otherwise.

    “E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?”

    No

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Stacy235l says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    No.

    The Founding Fathers were referring to themselves and their posterity as One(Unum), having descended from the Many(Pluribus) that had settled and built the American colonies. The One that was already formed, had just liberated and was building the United States.

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


    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    No. Pro-diversity would be the opposite. Instead of “Out of many, one” that would be “Out of one, many” E Unum Pluribus

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    The “pluribus” in the motto were not diverse peoples. E pluribus unum clearly refers to the several states, of which were made one Union.

    In the Wikipedia article linked, a sketch of arms proposed by Pierre Eugène du Simitiere in 1776 for the new country shows the arms of the thirteen colonies quartered on one shield with this motto on an escrol underneath. This was apparently its first appearance in connection with an American emblem. It is noted that the motto has thirteen letters (one for each colony).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Indeed, seen in context, the phrase means the opposite of what is commonly interpreted today: from these 13 states, from this founding stock, a new nation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Retconning the Great Seal?

    Your linked Wikipedia article explains the origin and meaning of “E Pluribus Unum.” Next time, read before you link.

    “The motto E Pluribus Unum, emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak, expresses the union of the 13 States.”

    This is from the original State Department source for the Wikipedia article.

    https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/27807.pdf

    You’ll also notice the original design: 13 colony seals above the motto, the many to be united as one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Tiny Duck
    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/01/17/after-guest-calls-out-his-racism-tucker-carlson-has-meltdown-yours/219092

    Proving again that all you need to trigger a RW snowflake is accurately calling them out.

    He used the “r” word guys, argument’s over.

    Seriously, you don’t see how much that sounds like “Witch!!!!’”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat
    Couldn't people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    I think we should get to tax anyone, no matter where they live, if they share our ideals. They’re Americans, whether they like it or not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @istevefan

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    From the link you provided is this:

    The meaning of the phrase originates from the concept that out of the union of the original Thirteen Colonies emerged a new single nation.[8] It is emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak on the Great Seal of the United States.[9][10]
     
    So if by diversity you mean a Star Wars cantina, then I'd say no. It is not quite pro-diversity.

    Hey, what was wrong with the Star Wars cantina?

    Oh right, the shooting, killling, and scumbags.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Not to mention the terrible music.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @LincolnHateFacts
    On this, I defer to the authority of my 6th grade civics teacher: a“government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

    That’s a great line. Like “To quote Willem Dafoe in The Last Temptation Of Christ, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. syonredux says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.

    When Powell made that statement, Britain was nearly 100% White British. I’m pretty sure that he would not have been quite so willing to fight for a Muslim majority Britain….

    If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    I’m pretty sure that a communist USA’s population would be majority non-European….which would mean that the there would be no posterity to fight for….

    BTW How come no one here never mentions ‘E Pluribus Unum’ which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    Um, no. See, that translates as “out of many, one.” And the oneness to they were referring was political in nature: out of 13 colonies/states, one nation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Daniel H says:
    @Tiny Duck
    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/01/17/after-guest-calls-out-his-racism-tucker-carlson-has-meltdown-yours/219092

    Proving again that all you need to trigger a RW snowflake is accurately calling them out.

    >>Tucker Carlson is a racist

    We’re all racists now, Tiny.

    Read More
    • Agree: The Alarmist
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    This is recent. Young Tucker was a boring parrot of standard right wing thinking back in those days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bugg
    During the Oprah boomlet, Bill Kristol offered some high praise for Gayle King's good buddy. Carlson noted this by prefacing it that Kristol had briefly torn himself away from spoiling to invade Iran to praise Stedman Graham's beard. Carlson has burned and then nuked any bridge he had to Conservatism Inc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Dan Hayes says:

    Steve,

    According to the New Yorker:

    “”You can’t tuck the Tuck” is, among other things, a way of affirming that Carlson is a white guy who isn’t afraid to stand up for himself.”

    That’s quite an affirmation, especially in light of its source!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    My favorite quote about Tucker: "He has a problem getting guests for the same reason pigs avoid the slaughterhouse."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he’d just be a retread of establishment republican talking points—especially with the O’Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart’s torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left’s game of making R’s the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It’s been amusing to watch—his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald’s mental problems was surreal–but I still don’t trust the cuck; he’s been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I’m fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Perpetually32
    On the other hand, Stewart was bitch-slapped by time and poor genetics: as the kids would put it, he seems old AF. His act is about as fresh as a Jerry Lewis telethon.
    , @candid_observer
    Now, it is Tucker Carlson whose ideas and arguments everybody follows, and Jon Stewart who is wandering in the wilderness.

    This has to be one of the most satisfying Last Laughs in media history.

    , @Dieter Kief

    I’m fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.
     
    The other day, somebody said, he wished, Thomas Pynchon would read a certain post. Now I follow in the footsteps of this somebody (D Pinsen) - yesterday, or the day before: -

    - This qoute of yours above would make for a decent plot point in a possibly pretty Faustian Pynchon novel about our current state of mind.

    (Some of the characters of this novel would resemble reversed (or maybe even better: immersed?!) versions of Houdini, I'd assume - I imagine a character, who's overwhelmed by his ablitity to bind nobody else than - him - - himself - a virtuoso brother of Till Eulenspiegel and Don Quchotte).

    ok, ok - I'm only fantasising - no pun intended - "peace brother", please, etc. pp., "only peace 'n' piece" (TheFabolous Furry Freak Brothers) ...

    (My last remark shows me (=reveals - to me), just how strong this paranoia-matrix really is - - - he, h', h'... - "we're all prisoners here, of our own device" /The Eagles, who's Hotel California is pretty Pynchonite stuff anyhow... -ohh, ohhhh....).

    Thomas Pynchon - If you please - In the city- - - - of Lost Angeles (Colosseum - this song of them is so good - and so present, now that I think of it, even though I haven't heard it in this millenium - not even once, I swear, oh yeah, oh yeah...

    (Interrupted by Them Ol' Cosmic Blues Again, Mama . . . bzzzzz ....bzzzzz...).

    , @The Millennial Falcon

    but I still don’t trust the cuck; he’s been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.
     
    Tucker crossed the Rubicon with that Politico piece he wrote on Trump in January 2016: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572

    It was a great, great piece and starts off with an anecdote that suggests his maturation after that Bonfire of the Hannities moment with Stewart.

    The most important part of the piece was lighting the conservative establishment on fire - Tucker was the first swamp creature to do so, IIRC. Really called them on the carpet.

    The Anton Flight 93 piece got all the attention, but that Carlson piece was the best piece of pro-Trump punditry in the race.
    , @Mr. Anon
    The change in Carlson's thinking started some time ago and is, I think, genuine. Like Ann Coulter did, he came to see the neo-con agenda as disastrous for the country, and recognized that immigration was turning the country into one where any kind of conservative governance would no longer be possible.

    One of the best things he did on his show was start bringing on more people to interview. Most FOX shows consist of FOX news personalities interviewing other FOX News personalities (The other cable networks don't seem to be any different). How many times do we need to hear the opinion of Charles Krauthammer or John Bolton (the evil-looking Captain Kangaroo)? Carlson brought on new people - people who weren't on contract to FOX - professors and authors who presumably knew something about their area of expertise, rather than just pundits. He even had James Howard Kunstler on his show, which is a big stretch for FOX.

    , @Clyde
    You can't cuck the Tuck! Anyone wanting to see good Tucker videos. Go to youtube and search >> cuck tuck https://www.bing.com/search?pc=COSP&ptag=D112817-A9FCDBB39EF&form=CONBDF&conlogo=CT3335799&q=You+can%27t+cuck+the+Tuck
    , @lavoisier
    But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

    The idea or portrait of a lying, traitorous, scumbag.
    , @TangoMan
    Remember Gucci Little Piggy's blog? He shut it down when he went to work for the Daily Caller, run by Tucker. Tucker hired him even though he wasn't writing standard Republican fare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    America = Idea = Diversity = Democracy = Brazil.

    Brazil is a democracy with diversity. So, it must be America too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Tiny Duck
    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/01/17/after-guest-calls-out-his-racism-tucker-carlson-has-meltdown-yours/219092

    Proving again that all you need to trigger a RW snowflake is accurately calling them out.

    I love you, you’re perfect, don’t ever change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Thomas says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat
    Couldn't people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    Heartiste made the same point.

    “If America is an idea, why can’t we just send a copy of that idea to shithole countries so they can build their own cities on the hill?”

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/01/13/shithole-nationalism/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. BB753 says:

    If not a nation, is America a good or a bad idea?

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

    It’s not smart to base a nation on an idea. It’s like basing your budget on your screw-up brother’s promise to pay you back for all that money he borrowed years ago. Maybe it happens and maybe it doesn’t. In the case of your I.O.U. nation, not coming through has severe consequences. If your brother doesn’t pay you back, you’ll still see him at Thanksgiving.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat
    Couldn't people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    When Invade fails to bring democracy to a shithole, Invite picks up the tab.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Whiskey says: • Website

    Call it Passive-Aggressive Imperialism. Not being willing to man up and simply conquer and run s-hole countries because they are well hell holes, and run them for and by the benefit of the conquerors with the side note that the living standard and life quality of the conquered will also go up (unless they were conquered by the Japanese, Belgians, or Germans).

    The whole “America is an idea” is just wimpy passive-aggressive imperialism.

    Read More
    • Agree: The Anti-Gnostic
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million "we just won't talk about for a while." They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status can be used as leverage to do away with chain migration and the diversity lottery, and to fund Trump’s border wall.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen Marle
    "The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status..."

    Their situation is not precarious. A DACA person would have to have really bad luck to get deported.

    There are 700,000 of them. Do the math. Using ICE to round up that many people would take more years than FDR was in office.

    The only way to get them out is to make the American Dream into the American Nightmare for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don't see that happening in the near future.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anonymom says:

    “…not defined by its people…”

    And yet our Constitution begins “We the People…”

    Graham is a traitor, serving exploitative business interests.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @SimpleSong
    I generally hate TV talking heads, but I gotta say, Tucker is a talented guy. Or he has a talented staff, or both. He has good people; all you need are good people, the rest sorts itself out, and it is nice to see that he preaches what he practices.

    His talent is aligned with a common sense position now, which makes him look like a lot better than he did, say, 15 years ago.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SimpleSong
    Yeah, I guess he's reached the age where he feels comfortable trusting in common sense. 15 years ago, not so much. He must have spent some time in the wilderness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. guest says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    “E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?”

    No.

    As I said in a recent thread, a pro-diversity motto would be: “out of many, many.”

    “If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go communist”

    Against outsiders, yes. But I’d like to think we’d be busy killing eachother. Like our posterity did in that civil war thingy.

    “that doesn’t accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death–seemed to be saying”

    You’re foolish, you know that? Don’t take slogans too seriously. Americans didn’t set up false idols like Liberty, though some of them fetishized it.

    They were willing to risk their lives to get out of a regime that frankly wasn’t very oppressive. But they wouldn’t have thought it worth everyone dying to preserve any idea. The nation was supposed to persist, not disappear in a puff of smoke if some people didn’t get their way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. guest says:
    @istevefan

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    From the link you provided is this:

    The meaning of the phrase originates from the concept that out of the union of the original Thirteen Colonies emerged a new single nation.[8] It is emblazoned across the scroll and clenched in the eagle’s beak on the Great Seal of the United States.[9][10]
     
    So if by diversity you mean a Star Wars cantina, then I'd say no. It is not quite pro-diversity.

    Our possible future, as articulated by Sir Alec Guiness (slightly modified):

    “The United States of America. You’ll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.”

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

    This was the sort of basic, fundamental stuff that I don’t seem to recall being discussed during the 2006, 2007, or 2013 amnesty debates. Back then it was all about jobs, economics, and whatever.

    Say what you will about Trump – he is inflammatory enough – but he is getting open borders pols to admit what they truly believe, and he has opened up space for more articulate conservatives to explain why those pols and media hicks are full of shit.

    Sure, America is an “idea” that belongs to everyone – just like Harry Reid’s and Mitt Romney’s and Dianne Feinstein’s brokerage accounts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Say what you will about Trump – he is inflammatory enough – but he is getting open borders pols to admit what they truly believe, and he has opened up space for more articulate conservatives to explain why those pols and media [hacks] are full of shit.
     
    The media tried to nail Trump for "hate speech", while inadvertently exposing what Steve calls "hate facts". But the subject matter that sparked this suggests a potentially catchier neologism for Trump's real talk: "Haiti speech".
    , @Berty
    I think it really helps that McCain is on his deathbed, Orrin Hatch is senile, and Flake has been humiliated, leaving the only passionate GOP advocate for amnesty to be the ugly intensely unlikable Lindsey Graham.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Mr. Anon says:
    @Thomas
    It's looking like they're going to force a government shutdown over this "idea." Lindsey Grahamnesty is showing his true colors now, saying he won't vote for a CR because it doesn't provide enough for the military without a DACA fix (but, really of course, because it doesn't provide a DACA amnesty).

    It’s looking like they’re going to force a government shutdown over this “idea.”

    If the Democrats and their Republican running-dogs want to shut down the government, let them:

    1.) A government shut-down won’t be so bad (not that it was so bad the last time) in a Republican administration. They won’t be telling people who stop outside of Yosemite to get a look at the view: move along, there’s a government shutdown, El Capitan is closed, you can’t look at it.

    2.) If the Democrats want to run next November on shutting down the government for a bunch of foreigners, let them. They can explain to their voters why the one thing they’re really willing to go to the mat for are illegal aliens.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Crawfurdmuir
    The "pluribus" in the motto were not diverse peoples. E pluribus unum clearly refers to the several states, of which were made one Union.

    In the Wikipedia article linked, a sketch of arms proposed by Pierre Eugène du Simitiere in 1776 for the new country shows the arms of the thirteen colonies quartered on one shield with this motto on an escrol underneath. This was apparently its first appearance in connection with an American emblem. It is noted that the motto has thirteen letters (one for each colony).

    Indeed, seen in context, the phrase means the opposite of what is commonly interpreted today: from these 13 states, from this founding stock, a new nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I'm all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission. No German '48ers, Jews or other 19th-century latecomers need apply. A big downside is I think we would get stuck with Lindsey Graham.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Mr. Anon says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

    No. It meant that out of thirteen colonies, which themselves were not that “diverse” by modern standards, one nation was made. It does not mean “Send more Somalis!”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I agree "Send more Somalis" is not a very good new national motto. I suggest "Save the whales".

    We still hunt and kill whales most of whose meat ends up in cans of dog food. I love dogs so I'm not advocating abolishing dog food. But there is a better source of virtually free meat for pet food that does not require the slaughter of whales.

    I'm speaking of course of illegal aliens. If and when we capture someone trying to break into our nation by climbing our soon-to-be-built border wall, we should slay them and can them for pet food.

    Repeat after me - "Save the whales".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. It’s really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    It’s really difficult not to hate Lindsey Graham.
     
    No, it’s not really difficult not to hate Lindsey Graham, it is impossible. He and McCain are traitors pretending to act in the interest of America.
    , @Daniel H
    >>It’s really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    What motivates Lindsey Graham? I think we must consider homosexual rage. The dude can't hide the gay, probably been affecting this aspect his entire life and was probably taunted and shamed for it since a young age. It's actually sad that he can't suppress the gay or come out in the open, but the fact of the matter justifies policy that excludes closeted (or even open) homosexuals from position of authority, influence and responsibility in government.

    When I graduated from college the NSA recruited on campus. Intrigued, I signed up for an interview. One of the first questions out of the stone-faced, NSA recruiter's mouth was whether I was homosexual or ever had a homosexual experience. I spontaneously giggled, and he looked at me, without breaking his stone face, and said, "Do you think that this is funny?". I apologized and said that it was an unexpected question, I lost my poise. Anyway, I guess I did well enough in interview to be considered for a second round. To prepare me for the second round, the interviewer handed a printout of a reading list that he wanted me to consult before further interviews. He stated that it was policy that the books on the reading list were available at every library. So I checked out the reading list. One of the books dealt with case studies (could have been fiction, for all I know) on how they turned homosexual Soviet functionaries by blackmail. Some of the approached functionaries didn't care and told intelligence to go to hell, but the book asserted that some were turned. Struck me as weird, cruel, unfair, but that's how the game is played. So what is the lesson? Obviously, homosexuals are a security risk. We know it. Our adversaries know it. This has been known for a long time. Part of the reason for the security risk, I believe, is the repressed rage against a society/country that has scorned them and treated gays unfairly. Weren't all or most of the Cambridge 5 spy ring upper class, connected, gay Brits? But still, they hated their country.

    Who knows what makes Lindsey Graham tick, but, whatever, he is untrustworthy. We cannot be certain that he has the good interests of the American people in mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. eah says:

    OT

    The BBC is pretty much spearheading (no pun at the expense of aboriginals intended) the campaign to unperson Margaret Court by renaming Margaret Court Arena due to her views on homosexuality and sex change freakery aka transgenderism — a kind of sports ‘watsoning’ — here they laughably feature some nobody female tennis player’s ambivalent view on it:

    Australian Open 2018: Laura Robson suggests renaming Margaret Court Arena

    “It’s a tough one because she achieved so much. I would kind of lean towards renaming it,” said 23-year-old Robson.

    OK.

    Here’s a nice touch:

    Robson, ranked 228 in the world, wore a rainbow hair band in the 2012 Australia Open in support of equal rights…A ball boy from that match messaged Robson on Twitter this week to say how much her stance meant to him.

    So was the “ball boy” perhaps a “ball girl” back in 2012? Who knows — but Margaret Court must be unpersoned for the sake of the children.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. @Dave Pinsen
    The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status can be used as leverage to do away with chain migration and the diversity lottery, and to fund Trump's border wall.

    “The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status…”

    Their situation is not precarious. A DACA person would have to have really bad luck to get deported.

    There are 700,000 of them. Do the math. Using ICE to round up that many people would take more years than FDR was in office.

    The only way to get them out is to make the American Dream into the American Nightmare for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don’t see that happening in the near future.

    Read More
    • Agree: Coemgen
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The MSM is already playing up the stories of what -- two, three teenagers in tears because they might have to go back to their own countries. If we didn't know better we'd be amazed at how much mileage the MSM can get out of just two or three stories.

    As others here have noted, if uprooting yourself from "the country you know" and moving to another one is so deeply traumatic, then why are we promoting so much of it in the other direction?

    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don’t see that happening in the near future.
     
    I read a similar sentiment on this blog with great frequency regarding the impossibility of Trump's election, prior to the election.

    I'll bet your definition of 'near' is actually 'now.'
    , @Alden
    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Mr. Anon says:

    If America is merely an idea, then what idea is it? People who believe that America-as-idea stuff all seem to have some particular idea, or particular set of ideas, they consider America to be. They might not all agree – Lindsey Grahams’ idea might be different from Chuck Schumers’ – but they all have one. And implicit in their claim that America is an idea – is the notion that you must believe that idea to truly be american.

    But, we are supposed to be a country that values freedom. And what is more central to freedom than freedom of thought. If America is an idea, then I have every right to imagine it to be any damned idea I want, whether Lindsey Graham or Chuck Schumer likes it or not. Maybe my idea of America is that it should be a country where slavery should be legal, or piracy, or it should be a theocracy or an absolute monarchy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    I've never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea? When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you're near 90% white you don't have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Faraday's Bobcat
    Couldn't people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?

    I don’t know why we don’t more often point out the absolutely definitive evidence against “muh Constitution” arguments:

    the worst shitholes, however you want to choose them from the Soviet Union to the failed states of Africa to the genocidal warmongers of Europe, have fantastic constitutions. Any country you hate, just name it and find a perfectly nice sounding Constitution.

    We are a people. The Constitution is something we decided to put on paper to better organize the government which exists to serve us, the nation. Not the other way around.

    The Constitution didn’t write us, we wrote the Constitution. (hat tip to Malcolm Little for getting me down to one line)

    Something else we should point out is that rhetoric about how people are not really people paves the way for attempts at genocide. No people, no crime. Case closed!

    Read More
    • Replies: @henry bowman
    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/01/18/america-is-a-people-not-an-idea/

    barowed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Wilkey
    This was the sort of basic, fundamental stuff that I don't seem to recall being discussed during the 2006, 2007, or 2013 amnesty debates. Back then it was all about jobs, economics, and whatever.

    Say what you will about Trump - he is inflammatory enough - but he is getting open borders pols to admit what they truly believe, and he has opened up space for more articulate conservatives to explain why those pols and media hicks are full of shit.

    Sure, America is an "idea" that belongs to everyone - just like Harry Reid's and Mitt Romney's and Dianne Feinstein's brokerage accounts.

    Say what you will about Trump – he is inflammatory enough – but he is getting open borders pols to admit what they truly believe, and he has opened up space for more articulate conservatives to explain why those pols and media [hacks] are full of shit.

    The media tried to nail Trump for “hate speech”, while inadvertently exposing what Steve calls “hate facts”. But the subject matter that sparked this suggests a potentially catchier neologism for Trump’s real talk: “Haiti speech”.

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

    Since Steve, Ann Coulter, and John Derbyshire aren’t allowed to have their own shows, Tucker Carlson is about the best we can hope for. Sigh.. I was just imagining a show with all of them on it together. Could actually make me start watching television again.

    Read More
    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Anonym
    That would be awesome. I would totally watch it, at least once. Maybe have Miller on there as a guest.
    , @anonymouslee
    TV is over; it's now only being watched by senile boomers.

    Behold, the world's...seventh most important graph: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxUG-XnXEAAO1t2.jpg

    Their main medium of controlling the message and just like that it's gone, over, finished. That is one reason why they've lately become so hysterical.

    It's utterly absurd to watch, say, Bill Kristol talking to James Carville about what "they" should do about running the country. It's like watching a homeless person pantomime sitting down for tea with an invisible Queen of England. Look, mama, I put on my serious tie and im using my big boy voice to pretend im running the world! Utterly insane and they will never forgive Trump for proving it.

    We should be MUCH more concerned about how they've moved on to try suppressing the internet. Our enemies discovered we slaughter them in the world of really free speech; I thought they were more in on the joke but these idiots like Thomas Friedman actually believed they have elite stuff and not just elite position. Well, the internet has answered that empirical question and the results have been cataclysmic for entitled media brats.

    What I'm saying is we didn't need to hope they would "let" us on the internet; we were just doing it and winning. Now they want to make the internet like their TV: fake news gaslighting us behind a locked gate.

    I'm shocked the shuttering of Anglins site wasn't a bigger story. NEVER before had anyone dreamed of getting someone "kicked off the internet"; the idea would have been considered incoherent on its face. Our supposedly pro-free speech media has mostly praised the attempts to violently suppress speech in this case.

    Anyone with any kind of platform who hasn't gone to bat for the Daily Stormer on this is an idiot. It has nothing to do with whether you "like" Anglin because he won't be the last. You can't let them draw the line in front of him because once they have a line they will move it. Forward. And forward. And forward.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. wren says:

    Once there was a city on a hill and it was told “You are the light of the world! A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden!”

    And it was rising up to God and it said “All men are created equal! They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights!”

    And to make sure no one missed it, it said “Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me!”

    And this city on the hill had sinned and God sent a great flood.

    Brownie, Heckuva job!

    And more punishment was meted out! A new leader arrived. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice!!!

    The city demonstrated pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth, but the leader said “That’s not who we are!”

    As punishment God sent the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, and said “Let diversity be your strength!”

    And he further said “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
    8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
    9 Therefore is the name of it called The United States of America; because the LORD did there confound the language!

    And all they had left were the tired, poor, huddled, wretched, homeless!

    But that is all they needed, because the city was just an idea!!!

    It had become a shithole!

    But God was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world!

    The end.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    Well done.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Realist says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    “Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.”

    Totally agree. Many of the idiot libs he has on are repeat performers. He needs to get some new dumb ass libs….there are plenty of them. One of the acts on recently looks like Howdy Doody’s grand daughter with brain to match.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Berty says:
    @Wilkey
    This was the sort of basic, fundamental stuff that I don't seem to recall being discussed during the 2006, 2007, or 2013 amnesty debates. Back then it was all about jobs, economics, and whatever.

    Say what you will about Trump - he is inflammatory enough - but he is getting open borders pols to admit what they truly believe, and he has opened up space for more articulate conservatives to explain why those pols and media hicks are full of shit.

    Sure, America is an "idea" that belongs to everyone - just like Harry Reid's and Mitt Romney's and Dianne Feinstein's brokerage accounts.

    I think it really helps that McCain is on his deathbed, Orrin Hatch is senile, and Flake has been humiliated, leaving the only passionate GOP advocate for amnesty to be the ugly intensely unlikable Lindsey Graham.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ChrisZ
    I was going to remark how strange it is that Graham is considered the pre-eminent spokesman (-person?) of the Republican Party in the senate. But when you put it the way you do, Berty, it’s clearer to me that he’s just the vestigial relic of the former generation of leaders. I assume he’s the survivor because he’s younger (?) than those others you mentioned. But he’s really of their class, and their heyday is a remote memory.
    , @jonomd
    "Orrin Hatch is senile"

    I just read this little gem about Hatch last night:

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

    "President Bill Clinton nominated her as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on June 14, 1993, to fill the seat vacated by retiring Justice Byron White. Ginsburg was recommended to Clinton by then-U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno[12] after a suggestion by Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch"

    **Sigh**. With Republicans like this, do we even need to worry about the Democrats?
    , @prusmc
    The only difficulty is that if Graham is the only vocal proponent of anmisty in the GOP the other three are votes for it. That is 4 plus 49 democrats makes 53 to 47. If a few others such as Collins, Portman, Gardener, Tillis, Burr, Corker and Rubio do not vote with the demos. Can't count on the House of Representatives to hold back the tide. Throw in Senators Toomey, Sasse, Scott and Johnson and it is close to 2/3 rds.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Realist says:

    Tucker is the best commentator on Fox, but he has the problem of throwing his idiot guests a bone, by giving some credence to their inane views. He should go on the attack and give them no quarter….concede nothing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  60. Amasius says:

    My question is this: Who are these people voting for Lindsey Graham? In South Carolina of all places? It’s unfrigginbelievable, I mean what the hell?

    Same goes for Paul Ryan and Juan McCain.

    Read More
    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. bomag says:
    @Anonymous
    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million "we just won't talk about for a while." They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    Why are they still here…

    There is a significant infrastructure that has been built up around immigration, and the task involves dismantling this infrastructure.

    Consider what this support/enabling group consists of:

    1) half the House and Senate
    2) a large chunk of the federal judiciary
    3) half or better of your state and local politicians
    4) a large and growing number of lawyers that work in immigration law
    5) Eighty percent of the media
    6) a large number of NGOs and charities work to mainline immigrants and refugees into the country
    7) the usual business interests
    8) the citizenry either brainwashed; friends of above groups; the ethnic and “change” advocates that have seized on immigration as a weapon
    9) foreign countries and their infrastructure that has been built up to send minions abroad in service to remittance/population release/staking out more of the globe for their brand; (Europe’s no help here, with its quest to eradicate itself, but it also has become a scary example to avoid)

    and more.

    A huge dismantling task.

    Read More
    • Agree: Charles Pewitt
    • Replies: @Alden
    I’d say go after # 7, the employers. That is the big draw. The employers of illegals have recruiters bringing in illegal workers. The employers even have 800 numbers in Central America to make it easier for prospective illegals to call the recruiters.

    And of course as soon as one illegal gets a job, he becomes the HR department. If more workers are needed, employer tells him to call his home village.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Yes, Tucker is great.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn’t as bright as Tucker Carlson.

    Lou, in the mid aughts while at CNN, was operating under a different zeitgeist than exists today. Strikes me as rather unfair to say he “wasn’t as bright”. The time wasn’t right (ripe?) for the movement– the masses were quite content taking cash-out mortgages and living above their means.

    Case in point: Tucker himself was on CNN around the same time doing the show Crossfire. Why didn’t he head up an immigration restriction movement then? Had a great platform. Up until the last year, Liberals loved to post the clip of when Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire and “destroyed” Tucker Carlson, claiming it led to his departure from CNN. Pretty funny how that isn’t brought up anymore.

    Another factor unrelated to intelligence is work politics– what will their bosses allow them to harp on? Then they were both at CNN, now they’re at FOX and FOX Business.

    And one last factor is social media/internet culture. This brings out the best arguments from around the web. Tucker’s staff can easily pick out great arguments/talking points for him. There were blogs 12-15 years ago, but there is so much more now, and then best stuff gets collated and upvoted/repeated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bartok

    Tucker’s staff can easily pick out great arguments/talking points for him. There were blogs 12-15 years ago, but there is so much more now, and then best stuff gets collated and upvoted/repeated.
     
    I've said that Unz.com is radicalizing the olds and /pol/ the kiddies, but with William Shatner and Paul Nehlen both confirmed /pol/acks, it may well be the fountainhead of the new right.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. bomag says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity

    It means like minded people unite so as to be stronger in repelling threats.

    Now we are divided and weakened and on course to be displaced by people who will remove that slogan from consideration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Fox News has really stepped up and is playing the Fourth Estate role that you would hope for from a free press. Maybe the whole “Russia Collusion” hysteria has been a blessing in disguise, because that is what really got the Hannity/Carlson axis rolling and at war with the Deep State. There just was not time to weaponize phrases like “Putin-lover” and “pawn of the Kremlin” the way “racist” and “xenophobe” have been. Now the battle lines are drawn and the conflict is spilling over to the immigration debate. Tucker has gone full Alt-Right and Hannity and Ingraham are not far behind. This is going to get really interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @vx37
    I don't see how you can say Hannity is near Alt-Right. I catch a few minutes of him now and then on the car radio and it's just the same Bush era Republican Party horse-race BS. All Hillary scandals and no real basic substance. I listened to Rush for a few now and then too, and the other day he actually mentioned the left's hatred of white people as one of their motivations for, I believe, supporting open borders. What makes a cuck a cuck isn't that he's not pro-white, it's that he refuses to call out the left's murderous, genocidal hatred of white people. None of these people are out of the cuckstream (tm) yet, and won't be until they follow the people out. They can't and won't lead.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Stephen Marle
    "The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status..."

    Their situation is not precarious. A DACA person would have to have really bad luck to get deported.

    There are 700,000 of them. Do the math. Using ICE to round up that many people would take more years than FDR was in office.

    The only way to get them out is to make the American Dream into the American Nightmare for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don't see that happening in the near future.

    The MSM is already playing up the stories of what — two, three teenagers in tears because they might have to go back to their own countries. If we didn’t know better we’d be amazed at how much mileage the MSM can get out of just two or three stories.

    As others here have noted, if uprooting yourself from “the country you know” and moving to another one is so deeply traumatic, then why are we promoting so much of it in the other direction?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Luke Lea says:

    How about America is an idea and an ID, in the form of a biometric Social Security Card?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. I’m amazed Carlson was on CNN as late as 2005 and PMSNBC as late as 2008 … both were well into BDS by those dates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. anonguy says:

    Sick of winning yet?

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-pay-38-billion-in-repatriation-tax-plans-new-u-s-campus-1516215419

    Money quote:

    Mr. Cook touted the plans as building on Apple’s support for the U.S. economy. “We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible,” he said in a statement.

    2018 is going to rock. Don’t sweat the midterms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonguy
    Another tell that things are going in a positive direction will be when Americans stop dressing in gunny sacks like they do now.

    https://compote.slate.com/images/247d5d7d-b8d8-4764-8664-6c3506c9192b.jpeg
    , @Alfa158
    I had long proposed cutting a sort of amnesty deal on those offshore holdings, where corporations would get a break in the tax rate in exchange for bringing the money back onshore. The article doesn’t seem to indicate that there were any special concessions made. I wonder if this was inspired by the recent cut in the corporate tax rate, and Apple has decided to take advantage of the lowered rate while it lasts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. anonguy says:
    @anonguy
    Sick of winning yet?

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-pay-38-billion-in-repatriation-tax-plans-new-u-s-campus-1516215419

    Money quote:


    Mr. Cook touted the plans as building on Apple’s support for the U.S. economy. “We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible,” he said in a statement.
     
    2018 is going to rock. Don't sweat the midterms.

    Another tell that things are going in a positive direction will be when Americans stop dressing in gunny sacks like they do now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Nick Diaz says:

    Steve Sailer:

    “Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea.”

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it’s territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it’s Constitution, and in it’s traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it’s civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Before throwing quite so many stones, you need to brush up on history, basic logic, and yes--grammar and punctuation. You may call this nitpicking but as is, your prose is tendentious without being coherent.
    , @Paul Yarbles

    The idea of a nation is defined in it’s Constitution, and in it’s traditions.
     
    And these are supported by what? Ideas?

    Nick, if we removed all the people currently living in the United States and replaced them with, say, people currently living in China or Afghanistan, then surely you must see that our Constitution would be interpreted in a vastly different way and our traditions thrown out the window.

    It's the same with the less extreme but still ridiculously high rates of immigration that we have today. The country changes very quickly. Traditions disappear at light speed. Many of the people living here today also grew up here and don't want their country to change so rapidly. It's a matter of too much, too soon. Does this make them bad people?
    , @Coag
    America the body politic was founded explicitly and implicitly as a nation with hegemonic English-language European culture, a largely European population, and “acting white” (in the parlance of our urban fellow citizens) as being normative. Any other “political” or “juridical” ideas derive exclusively from this prime and essential idea and are secondary to it. The nation grew with (largely European) immigrants who submitted to this hegemony, and in our wars hundreds of thousands of farm boys were willing to die for the glory of home and hearth, not for strange jurisprudences.

    To take your metaphor further Nick, Lindsey Graham is a sick individual, and the nation of America that has turned away from its steady founding principles in order to become a Balkan ethnic menagerie is like a sick, schizophrenic patient.
    , @Coemgen
    The "American Idea" is the rule-of-law. There's nothing in the U.S. Constitution to suggest that the U.S. is a "nation of immigrants."

    Immigration to the U.S. was encouraged during the 19th century to populate depopulated areas of the U.S. (cf, standing army) and also to provide labor for the industrial revolution.

    The U.S. no longer has depopulated territories.

    There is no industrial revolution that requires immigrant labor.

    The U.S. would likely be better off reducing its population thereby reducing our carbon footprint and reducing burdens on water supplies, etc.

    The only reason Democrats, elitists, globalist, etc. want immigration is to divide (i.e., diversify) and conquer the native population of the U.S. The native, nationalist population stands in the way of globalism.

    Aside, isn't it interesting that nationalism is often associated with Nazism but socialism and "propagandism" aren't. Although Nazi isn't a portmanteau of propaganda, "propagandism" is a far greater defining characteristic of Nazism than either nationalism or socialism. Lots of countries have nationalism, socialism, and ethnocentrism but they're just not that effective at getting their message out.

    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    Ideas are post hoc constructs; they have no existence outside the people holding them in their heads. People make countries: Liberia has a scrupulously rights-oriented charter; it's still a shithole.
    , @Yak-15
    This is demonstrably false gibberish. A nation is its people. The geographical boundaries and the institutions that govern that country are determined by who populates the nation. The borders, ideas and social outcomes of a country are secondary to the people that inhabit the nation because the former are constructs of the population. Absent white people and their civil institutions, Tijuana can never be San Diego though both share similar ideal areas.

    This is because people create, maintain and vote for those institutions that govern a society. Given a new set of people, those National organizations change to suit the demands of those neo-denizens and their rulers. This is an iron-clad law of reality.

    Liberia took the same constitution and same ideals that America was founded upon and it floundered into a nightmare. Though the ideas and the political entity of that nation were made in the image of America, they devolved into the modern construction that is shithole Liberia. This is because those American ideas could not work given the people that lived within Liberia and also did not reflect the Liberians choices of governing political, economic and civil institutions.

    If the Liberian people were moved elsewhere, they would choose similar outcomes. The best evidence of this assertion are the squalid, violent coastal cities of Brazil and coastal Central America occupied by west Africans like Recife, Natal, Salvador, etc. Further evidence of this is seen in the orderly, totalitarian state of Singapore populated mostly by ethnic Chinese. Singapore populated and governed by Malays would look more akin to Malacca, Padang or Jakarta. A mix of these population outcomes is seen in Kuala Lumpur.

    Likewise, attempts to coerce modern Greece to adopt a Northern European economic system have drowned under the weight of the choices of the people that inhabit Greece. Absent a dictatorship, a foreign economic or political system will fail if it is not the choice of the people.

    People make the nation

    , @peterike

    The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

     

    Nick, it's nice to see you agree that "race is a social construct" and "gender is a social construct" are quite obviously nonsense.
    , @Mr. Anon

    The idea of a nation is defined in it’s Constitution, and in it’s traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it’s civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country.
     
    No, America was defined by the (primarily) anglo-saxon people who founded it. It was regulated by its laws, like this one:

    United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

    http://www.indiana.edu/%7Ekdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html
     

    , @Anon
    "Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth."

    I love being lectured on what my country is by a European foreigner who has repeatedly attacked it on this board. I'm sure you have America's best interest at heart when you advocate nation killing immigration.

    And what percentage of those immigrants were non-European?
    , @ic1000
    > Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Nick Diaz, your posts have no great respect for the truth. As an idea. Remember your comments about opiates a couple of weeks back, when you presented some ‘alternative facts’ about fentanyl?

    So maybe these statements about immigration are true, or truthy, although outright false is also in play. I’m not going to check.

    Absolutely terrible.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. I wasn’t familiar with Tucker’s earlier tv career because I don’t watch that much tv. I’ve known about him for years though. Tucker regularly appeared on the Bubba the Love Sponge radio show for many years. Yes, I am admitting that I listened to the Bubba the Love Sponge show. He still might, but I don’t listen to it anymore. Bubba is the Tampa Bay radio show host who taped his wife with Hulk Hogan, indirectly causing the downfall of Gawker. It appeared that Tucker and Bubba had a genuine friendship, and Tucker would visit him when he was in Florida. He came across as friendly, self-deprecating, and intellectually honest, and would engage in conversations about politics, culture, guns, sex, his family, or whatever, never declining to discuss anything.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. anonguy says:

    Tucker was the only mainstream journalist that displayed the slightest interest in or fairness towards the Ron Paul/Liberty movement in 2007-2008 rather than dismissing them all as loons.

    Sure, Ron Paul was a deeply flawed candidate, esp. with the Lew Rockwell cohort and such, but he and his ideas had been around forever. Tucker perceived that at least some of the popularity Paul & his ideas were getting was indication of growing political alienation that couldn’t find expression elsewhere.

    Whether one agreed with Paul or not, it was a phenomena worth examining with an open mind, i.e., why is this happening, which Tucker did rather than going full Pravda slander mode like the rest of the MSM did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. IHTG says:
    @Anonymous
    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million "we just won't talk about for a while." They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    No, “future immigrants” are the most pressing issue. As Steve says, the first thing you do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Anonym says:
    @Anonymous
    Since Steve, Ann Coulter, and John Derbyshire aren't allowed to have their own shows, Tucker Carlson is about the best we can hope for. Sigh.. I was just imagining a show with all of them on it together. Could actually make me start watching television again.

    That would be awesome. I would totally watch it, at least once. Maybe have Miller on there as a guest.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    Before throwing quite so many stones, you need to brush up on history, basic logic, and yes–grammar and punctuation. You may call this nitpicking but as is, your prose is tendentious without being coherent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Chrisnonymous
    Indeed, seen in context, the phrase means the opposite of what is commonly interpreted today: from these 13 states, from this founding stock, a new nation.

    I’m all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission. No German ’48ers, Jews or other 19th-century latecomers need apply. A big downside is I think we would get stuck with Lindsey Graham.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    I’m all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission.
     
    I've often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a "livre d'or" like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants.

    The old constitution of Virginia, which prevailed in the time of Jefferson, restricted the franchise to freeholders, but made an exception to this for all veterans of the Revolution and their descendants, who were entitled to the franchise regardless of the property qualification. I think they had the right idea.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Bugg says:
    @syonredux

    Couldn’t people in other countries just adopt our ideas and stay put?
     
    It has been conclusively demonstrated that the American idea only works on American soil. Therefore, everybody who wants to experience that idea must live here. There's no point in arguing; it's science.

    Magic dirt on a continental scale.

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

    The GOP controls Congress and Lindsay Graham negotiates an immigration bill with Dems. Trump knowing what he wants but is not mired in details invites guys who agree with him, Cotton & Goodlatte.

    These guys know policy and proceed to breakdown Lindsey’s deal. Trump hits the roof, Lindsay was trying to pull a fast one and is now exposed. He then asks Lindsay how many Republicans actually support it. Lindsay doesn’t even know he pitches the bill yesterday to GOP Senators only 6 agree. Even if McConnell allowed it to the floor to a vote it would not pass.

    Lindsay Graham is a bad joke on the country and for conservatives.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Lindsey Graham (R-Democratic Party).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Bugg says:
    @oddsbodkins
    This is recent. Young Tucker was a boring parrot of standard right wing thinking back in those days.

    During the Oprah boomlet, Bill Kristol offered some high praise for Gayle King’s good buddy. Carlson noted this by prefacing it that Kristol had briefly torn himself away from spoiling to invade Iran to praise Stedman Graham’s beard. Carlson has burned and then nuked any bridge he had to Conservatism Inc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    On the other hand, Stewart was bitch-slapped by time and poor genetics: as the kids would put it, he seems old AF. His act is about as fresh as a Jerry Lewis telethon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Impolitic
    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    What I’d tune in for…

    “Now here to discuss the Iran sanctions and Ambassador Nikki Haley’s comments today is Brother Nathanael.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    The idea of a nation is defined in it’s Constitution, and in it’s traditions.

    And these are supported by what? Ideas?

    Nick, if we removed all the people currently living in the United States and replaced them with, say, people currently living in China or Afghanistan, then surely you must see that our Constitution would be interpreted in a vastly different way and our traditions thrown out the window.

    It’s the same with the less extreme but still ridiculously high rates of immigration that we have today. The country changes very quickly. Traditions disappear at light speed. Many of the people living here today also grew up here and don’t want their country to change so rapidly. It’s a matter of too much, too soon. Does this make them bad people?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. ChrisZ says:
    @Berty
    I think it really helps that McCain is on his deathbed, Orrin Hatch is senile, and Flake has been humiliated, leaving the only passionate GOP advocate for amnesty to be the ugly intensely unlikable Lindsey Graham.

    I was going to remark how strange it is that Graham is considered the pre-eminent spokesman (-person?) of the Republican Party in the senate. But when you put it the way you do, Berty, it’s clearer to me that he’s just the vestigial relic of the former generation of leaders. I assume he’s the survivor because he’s younger (?) than those others you mentioned. But he’s really of their class, and their heyday is a remote memory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Berty
    Graham is younger but the primary reason is that since at least 2000 his entire career has consisted on following McCain around and agreeing with everything he says and does. And much like his benefactor he's always mugging for the cameras and obnoxiously inserting himself into every possible debate. The key difference is that while McCain was loved by the media and was capable of making decent-sounding quotes, Graham isn't and always gives the impression of a nasty asshole. It's clear Trump was not willing to concede the high ground to Graham by his inclusion of Perdue and Cotton and Lindsey couldn't handle it at all. It was beautiful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Coag says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    America the body politic was founded explicitly and implicitly as a nation with hegemonic English-language European culture, a largely European population, and “acting white” (in the parlance of our urban fellow citizens) as being normative. Any other “political” or “juridical” ideas derive exclusively from this prime and essential idea and are secondary to it. The nation grew with (largely European) immigrants who submitted to this hegemony, and in our wars hundreds of thousands of farm boys were willing to die for the glory of home and hearth, not for strange jurisprudences.

    To take your metaphor further Nick, Lindsey Graham is a sick individual, and the nation of America that has turned away from its steady founding principles in order to become a Balkan ethnic menagerie is like a sick, schizophrenic patient.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Chrisnonymous
    It's really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    It’s really difficult not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    No, it’s not really difficult not to hate Lindsey Graham, it is impossible. He and McCain are traitors pretending to act in the interest of America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Stephen Marle
    "The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status..."

    Their situation is not precarious. A DACA person would have to have really bad luck to get deported.

    There are 700,000 of them. Do the math. Using ICE to round up that many people would take more years than FDR was in office.

    The only way to get them out is to make the American Dream into the American Nightmare for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don't see that happening in the near future.

    for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don’t see that happening in the near future.

    I read a similar sentiment on this blog with great frequency regarding the impossibility of Trump’s election, prior to the election.

    I’ll bet your definition of ‘near’ is actually ‘now.’

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Coemgen says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    The “American Idea” is the rule-of-law. There’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution to suggest that the U.S. is a “nation of immigrants.”

    Immigration to the U.S. was encouraged during the 19th century to populate depopulated areas of the U.S. (cf, standing army) and also to provide labor for the industrial revolution.

    The U.S. no longer has depopulated territories.

    There is no industrial revolution that requires immigrant labor.

    The U.S. would likely be better off reducing its population thereby reducing our carbon footprint and reducing burdens on water supplies, etc.

    The only reason Democrats, elitists, globalist, etc. want immigration is to divide (i.e., diversify) and conquer the native population of the U.S. The native, nationalist population stands in the way of globalism.

    Aside, isn’t it interesting that nationalism is often associated with Nazism but socialism and “propagandism” aren’t. Although Nazi isn’t a portmanteau of propaganda, “propagandism” is a far greater defining characteristic of Nazism than either nationalism or socialism. Lots of countries have nationalism, socialism, and ethnocentrism but they’re just not that effective at getting their message out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

    The Peter Principle.

    Then again, if the exception proves the rule, the Senator is at great risk of disproving it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    The Peter Principle--I like that. Works on different levels.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. songbird says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    It is amazing to think that Dobbs was ever on CNN or Tucker at MSNBC, for that matter.

    They were probably good for ratings, and there is a sort of logic to playing to different groups in different timeslots, but still I wonder if management changed. Or maybe just became more radicalized.

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

    Brevity is the soul of wit (and a compelling argument), and Tucker is much more articulate and convincing than I’ll ever be, but if there’s one more point I wish Tucker had made it’s the contradiction between the Left’s belief in diversity and their belief that America is just an idea.

    The Left believes that differences matter, but also believes that America is simply an idea. An “idea” sounds fun and interesting and possibly exhilarating, but what they really mean is that America is a system – an organization – into which you could plug any random set of (DIVERSE!) people (let’s call them “organization men”) and get the same result, the diversity of the people in question being irrelevant.

    If diversity doesn’t meaningfully change the outcome, then why do we need it? And if it can change the outcome then why aren’t we allowed to question whether the outcome could be worse? Or maybe not worse, but just different in a way the original group of people would not prefer?

    Anyone who’s ever had to manage a workforce can tell you that differences matter – that the “cogs” which comprise the system alter it’s performance. The cogs aren’t interchangeable. Diversifying your cogs (especially with Central American or Brazilian cogs) doesn’t necessarily improve the system or make it perform better.

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @vx37
    The left went nuts when Trump said a Mexican judge was biased (which he was) but constantly tell us we need minorities on the bench to bring a "different perspective", i.e., biased judgements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Mr. Anon
    If America is merely an idea, then what idea is it? People who believe that America-as-idea stuff all seem to have some particular idea, or particular set of ideas, they consider America to be. They might not all agree - Lindsey Grahams' idea might be different from Chuck Schumers' - but they all have one. And implicit in their claim that America is an idea - is the notion that you must believe that idea to truly be american.

    But, we are supposed to be a country that values freedom. And what is more central to freedom than freedom of thought. If America is an idea, then I have every right to imagine it to be any damned idea I want, whether Lindsey Graham or Chuck Schumer likes it or not. Maybe my idea of America is that it should be a country where slavery should be legal, or piracy, or it should be a theocracy or an absolute monarchy.

    I’ve never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea? When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you’re near 90% white you don’t have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @wren
    Once there was a city on a hill and it was told "You are the light of the world! A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden!"

    And it was rising up to God and it said "All men are created equal! They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights!"

    And to make sure no one missed it, it said "Give me your tired, your poor,
    Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
    The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
    Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me!"

    And this city on the hill had sinned and God sent a great flood.

    Brownie, Heckuva job!

    And more punishment was meted out! A new leader arrived. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice!!!

    The city demonstrated pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth, but the leader said "That's not who we are!"

    As punishment God sent the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, and said "Let diversity be your strength!"

    And he further said "Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
    8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
    9 Therefore is the name of it called The United States of America; because the LORD did there confound the language!

    And all they had left were the tired, poor, huddled, wretched, homeless!

    But that is all they needed, because the city was just an idea!!!

    It had become a shithole!

    But God was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world!

    The end.

    Well done.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    Ideas are post hoc constructs; they have no existence outside the people holding them in their heads. People make countries: Liberia has a scrupulously rights-oriented charter; it’s still a shithole.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Desiderius
    But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

    The Peter Principle.

    Then again, if the exception proves the rule, the Senator is at great risk of disproving it.

    The Peter Principle–I like that. Works on different levels.

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

    Tucker rocks! don’t Fu*k with the Tuck. Cardenas his alderman guest last night, who Tucker called a “loathsome racist” with Cardenas snarling out his ‘ blue eyes and blonde hair’ comment which reminds you of Rolling Stones Erdely with her comment about the “overwhelmingly blonde students” at Uva.
    Like blonde hair and blue eyes are marks of leper.
    There is no pleasing these people. They want you to die if you are White, to disappear forever but leave the assets. But barring that, at best you will provide the government services for the POC, the way it works in Ssouth Africa and California now.
    In South Africa in a country of roughly 60 million people, less than 4 million pay tax and almost 90 percent of them are white.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Now having stated those facts, here's Sailer to tell you that citizenism is a viable alternative.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Travis says:
    @Anonymous
    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million "we just won't talk about for a while." They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    the current administration is having trouble deporting convicted criminal aliens….

    The DACA recipients will never be deported, even if DACA is ruled unconstitutional tomorrow. This is one reason the democrats are not willing to compromise with Trump and fund the wall or end the diversity Lottery.

    Ending the Diversity Lottery would produce better results than the wall, keeping out more muslims than the so-called muslim ban and keeping out people from shithole nations.

    Ending the Diversity Lottery and funding the wall would be a good compromise in return for granting residency to 800,000 Mexicans. The Diversity Lottery brings in 25,000 Africans each year and 9,000 Asian muslims each year….the 30,000 muslims admitted each year via the diversity lottery then sponsor 3 family members…The diversity Lottery is the main reason our muslim population has doubled since 2001.

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

    OT: Obama is learning that for South Side residents, the answer to the question “how much is enough” will always be just a little bit more. Rahm deserves bonus points for saying that opening a branch of the Chicago Public library at the President Center could be transformative for the neighborhood.

    https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/protesters-demanding-obama-sign-community-benefits-agreement-make-voices-heard/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. Alden says:
    @Stephen Marle
    "The idea is that the DACA extension is expiring soon, so the precariousness of their status..."

    Their situation is not precarious. A DACA person would have to have really bad luck to get deported.

    There are 700,000 of them. Do the math. Using ICE to round up that many people would take more years than FDR was in office.

    The only way to get them out is to make the American Dream into the American Nightmare for them, no jobs, for instance, full eVerify. I don't see that happening in the near future.

    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.
     
    Oh yes they will, and for the same reason they don't pay employees in cash.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.
     
    I've seen signs up in some of our airport's Caribou Coffees saying they use it. They were posted at about the boundary between the public areas and the kitchen, so who was meant to see them is anyone's guess.

    The foreign-born working in the Caribous and Starbucks there are nearly all East African, and can be assumed legal, at least on paper, and speak passable English. They dominate Starbucks' staff, but half of Caribou's are stereotypical Minnesota kids. Local businesses have a reputation to keep up, too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. No self-respecting idea would submit to such lowly embodiment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. Alfa158 says:
    @anonymous-antiskynetist
    Tom Wolfe has a regularly-recurring image in several of his books of a man with smooth jowls emerging above an immaculate spread collar like toothpaste being squeezed from a tube. He had Tucker Carlson in mind I believe.

    No, Tucker was still a kid back then. Wolfe was using Ted Kennedy, who was famous for his jowls among other things, as the model for the decadent Beltway mover and shaker.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. Yak-15 says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    This is demonstrably false gibberish. A nation is its people. The geographical boundaries and the institutions that govern that country are determined by who populates the nation. The borders, ideas and social outcomes of a country are secondary to the people that inhabit the nation because the former are constructs of the population. Absent white people and their civil institutions, Tijuana can never be San Diego though both share similar ideal areas.

    This is because people create, maintain and vote for those institutions that govern a society. Given a new set of people, those National organizations change to suit the demands of those neo-denizens and their rulers. This is an iron-clad law of reality.

    Liberia took the same constitution and same ideals that America was founded upon and it floundered into a nightmare. Though the ideas and the political entity of that nation were made in the image of America, they devolved into the modern construction that is shithole Liberia. This is because those American ideas could not work given the people that lived within Liberia and also did not reflect the Liberians choices of governing political, economic and civil institutions.

    If the Liberian people were moved elsewhere, they would choose similar outcomes. The best evidence of this assertion are the squalid, violent coastal cities of Brazil and coastal Central America occupied by west Africans like Recife, Natal, Salvador, etc. Further evidence of this is seen in the orderly, totalitarian state of Singapore populated mostly by ethnic Chinese. Singapore populated and governed by Malays would look more akin to Malacca, Padang or Jakarta. A mix of these population outcomes is seen in Kuala Lumpur.

    Likewise, attempts to coerce modern Greece to adopt a Northern European economic system have drowned under the weight of the choices of the people that inhabit Greece. Absent a dictatorship, a foreign economic or political system will fail if it is not the choice of the people.

    People make the nation

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Alfa158 says:
    @anonguy
    Sick of winning yet?

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-to-pay-38-billion-in-repatriation-tax-plans-new-u-s-campus-1516215419

    Money quote:


    Mr. Cook touted the plans as building on Apple’s support for the U.S. economy. “We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible,” he said in a statement.
     
    2018 is going to rock. Don't sweat the midterms.

    I had long proposed cutting a sort of amnesty deal on those offshore holdings, where corporations would get a break in the tax rate in exchange for bringing the money back onshore. The article doesn’t seem to indicate that there were any special concessions made. I wonder if this was inspired by the recent cut in the corporate tax rate, and Apple has decided to take advantage of the lowered rate while it lasts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. How long till the SJW crowd starts organizing an advertiser boycott against Tucker?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. Alden says:
    @bomag

    Why are they still here...
     
    There is a significant infrastructure that has been built up around immigration, and the task involves dismantling this infrastructure.

    Consider what this support/enabling group consists of:

    1) half the House and Senate
    2) a large chunk of the federal judiciary
    3) half or better of your state and local politicians
    4) a large and growing number of lawyers that work in immigration law
    5) Eighty percent of the media
    6) a large number of NGOs and charities work to mainline immigrants and refugees into the country
    7) the usual business interests
    8) the citizenry either brainwashed; friends of above groups; the ethnic and "change" advocates that have seized on immigration as a weapon
    9) foreign countries and their infrastructure that has been built up to send minions abroad in service to remittance/population release/staking out more of the globe for their brand; (Europe's no help here, with its quest to eradicate itself, but it also has become a scary example to avoid)

    and more.

    A huge dismantling task.

    I’d say go after # 7, the employers. That is the big draw. The employers of illegals have recruiters bringing in illegal workers. The employers even have 800 numbers in Central America to make it easier for prospective illegals to call the recruiters.

    And of course as soon as one illegal gets a job, he becomes the HR department. If more workers are needed, employer tells him to call his home village.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    Now, it is Tucker Carlson whose ideas and arguments everybody follows, and Jon Stewart who is wandering in the wilderness.

    This has to be one of the most satisfying Last Laughs in media history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. I am simply amazed at the sheer quantity of talk today about immigration, both about the specific policies and about the underlying philosophy.

    The media’s obsession with Trump really is backfiring. Of course, 90% of its stories are negative, but what is likely more important is that the amount of news coverage Trump gets is, according to a recent study, 3X the coverage Obama got at comparable stages in his Presidency.

    You can’t ignore a guy with coverage like that. Everything he says people will pay attention to. That should be the last thing the media and the Dems would want, but they can’t stop themselves.

    This is how much discussion we’re getting on immigration just one year into Trump’s Presidency. Think of how much more we’ll get in total before the end of his first term. It’s likely to be a very different zeitgeist at that point, I’d think.

    Read More
    • Agree: wren
    • Replies: @CJ

    You can’t ignore a guy with coverage like that. Everything he says people will pay attention to. That should be the last thing the media and the Dems would want, but they can’t stop themselves.
     
    I've never seen (a) this amount of media coverage of a President and (b) public interest in the coverage. The media went crazy with both JFK and Bill Clinton, but not even they match the Trump obsession. In a landscape where news channels are lucky to tread water ratings-wise, you could probably launch a new channel following All Donald, All The Time and it would soon be #1.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. 320 million New Zealanders might not be so bad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Janus
    @Simon in London

    320 million New Zealanders would have to contain a mighty contingent of sheep.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Didn’t Graham once defend the Confederate flag in SC? “This is part of who we are” he allegedly said. I guess by “we” he meant code jockeys from Mumbai.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  110. jonomd says:
    @Berty
    I think it really helps that McCain is on his deathbed, Orrin Hatch is senile, and Flake has been humiliated, leaving the only passionate GOP advocate for amnesty to be the ugly intensely unlikable Lindsey Graham.

    “Orrin Hatch is senile”

    I just read this little gem about Hatch last night:

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

    “President Bill Clinton nominated her as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on June 14, 1993, to fill the seat vacated by retiring Justice Byron White. Ginsburg was recommended to Clinton by then-U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno[12] after a suggestion by Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch”

    **Sigh**. With Republicans like this, do we even need to worry about the Democrats?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JollyOldSoul
    Yeah, Hatch turned cuckoo long, long ago. What sealed the deal for me was when he did an interview while running for president where he revealed to the reporter that he was wearing a necklace with a menorah or something on it. How effing big of a crazy ass-kissing cuckoo bird does a White Anglo-Saxon Mormon have to be to wear a symbol of a completely different religion.

    Oh, and do you wanna know who we have to thank for even having the concept of the DREAM Act? That was Orrin Hatch's bright little idea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. ATTENTION STEVE SAILER: I am aware that I have used this video repeatedly, but it’s a keeper and highly relevant and I am on camera using the only Matt Fong joke/reference in the history of the New Hampshire presidential primary. This video is from Dave Weigel. Moderate it on through!

    Lindsey Graham says that the United States is just an idea. This notion that America is just an “idea” is the foundational line of globaloney nonsense from the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Lindsey Graham is a nasty little whore for the Neo-Conservatives and the American Empire profiteers. Lindsey Graham is a Baby Boomer Cuckservative who will not fight for the best interests of the European Christian ancestral core of the United States. Lindsey Graham puts the interests of foreigners, Israel and the globalizers ahead of the interests of the United States as a whole.

    Watch Lindsey Graham respond to my 2015 town hall question on immigration, national identity and foreign policy by saying that “I believe it is our God-given requirement to help those who struggle for their freedom” and “I believe in America as an idea” in this video:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    QUOTE: Lindsey Graham is a nasty little whore for the Neo-Conservatives and the American Empire profiteers.

    Anyone with "Miss Graham's," er, personal tastes would be well advised not to cross his handlers.

    Federal and state laws relating to carnal congress with minors remain surprisingly illiberal in 2018.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Jake says:

    If America is ‘an idea,’ then people truly are interchangeable.

    Let the Elites put that to the test. Let them pay white deplorables to leave. If 12 million of us – non-rich white Gentiles who are not Liberal and are at least nominally Christian – leave this ‘idea,’ and we are replaced by 3 million Numinous Negroes from Haiti and Jamaica (as citizens of the Americas, they will assimilate very easily), 3 million Mexicans/Central Americans (see above for their easy, natural assimilation), 3 million brown Mohammedans (because according to 75% or more of Jews, if we do not give Affirmative Action to Mohammedans we are just itching to gas Jews), and 3 million East Asians.

    If the US makes that investment that proves its faith in the nation as an ‘idea,’ then America will become a Rainbow Paradise.

    Many fewer white Gentiles – leaving only the gay ones and atheist ones and socialist ones and thoroughly Judaizing Evangelical ones – and many more blacks and browns will prove the issue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    They will never, ever agree to a plan which lessens or eliminates the suffering of white people. So your scheme, however attractive we personally may find it, is a non-starter.
    , @vx37
    There's a much simpler test that I advocate: white boycott of the military, or at least the Army and Marines. Surely they would be improved by Idea Americans, and surely Idea Americans are itching to fight Washington's imperial wars. That last bit is a joke, of course, only stupid white people are dumb enough to itch to fight for a system eager to eliminate them. The Pillsbury Doughboy is self-ovening.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Impolitic
    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    Please Sailer, do it! Your donations will double!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    I’m fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    The other day, somebody said, he wished, Thomas Pynchon would read a certain post. Now I follow in the footsteps of this somebody (D Pinsen) – yesterday, or the day before: –

    - This qoute of yours above would make for a decent plot point in a possibly pretty Faustian Pynchon novel about our current state of mind.

    (Some of the characters of this novel would resemble reversed (or maybe even better: immersed?!) versions of Houdini, I’d assume – I imagine a character, who’s overwhelmed by his ablitity to bind nobody else than – him – – himself – a virtuoso brother of Till Eulenspiegel and Don Quchotte).

    ok, ok – I’m only fantasising – no pun intended – “peace brother”, please, etc. pp., “only peace ‘n’ piece” (TheFabolous Furry Freak Brothers) …

    (My last remark shows me (=reveals – to me), just how strong this paranoia-matrix really is – – – he, h’, h’… – “we’re all prisoners here, of our own device” /The Eagles, who’s Hotel California is pretty Pynchonite stuff anyhow… -ohh, ohhhh….).

    Thomas Pynchon – If you please – In the city- – – – of Lost Angeles (Colosseum – this song of them is so good – and so present, now that I think of it, even though I haven’t heard it in this millenium – not even once, I swear, oh yeah, oh yeah…

    (Interrupted by Them Ol’ Cosmic Blues Again, Mama . . . bzzzzz ….bzzzzz…).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Tucker’s show’s problem is that he has the same few idiots on to argue with.
    He needs to expand the idiot list.
    It is quite shocking to see how unintellectual and stupid the other side is.
    After a while, it is just not entertaining.

    The other night he had on Heather Macdonald, Victor Davis Hanson, and Mark Steyn.
    Pretty good stuff, but maybe too highbrow for that time slot.
    Plus those guests (except for maybe Mark Steyn) need longer time slots to be effective.

    Too bad. I like him.Tucker gets it on immigration. He’s a decent debater. Hope he makes it with few tweaks of the format.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EdwardM
    Agree. There's the bubblehead Cathy Areu, who is a frequent guest on the show and others on Fox News. The first couple of times she was on I literally thought she was a fake commentator designed to serve as a caricature of the ethnic, feminist, leftist position. She would nod in agreement with all of Tucker's strawman and reductio ad absurdum statements, as if she wasn't getting the joke.

    I realize now, of course, that she is in earnest. Despite being pretty (or at least one can imagine she was pretty 5-10 years ago), he should retire her. He has a lot of low-grade liberal guests whose profile doesn't warrant their presence on such a platform. Better when he illustrates the stupidity of higher-profile, more influential guests like Max Boot. Perhaps such guests won't agree to be on the show, whereas more obscure ones figure that the publicity will at least be worthwhile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. peterike says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Nick, it’s nice to see you agree that “race is a social construct” and “gender is a social construct” are quite obviously nonsense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Pat Boyle says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    I used to worry about Bill O’Reilly. He was the biggest thing in Cable News – Broadcast News too. But Bill was getting on in years. I couldn’t see a successor anywhere in sight. Hannity was too partisan and Kelly would soon self immolate. Who could anchor the whole news evening the way O’Reilly did for what? twenty years?

    Then Fox News which had always had a ton of beautiful women on camera ran into a storm of male biology. Now it wasn’t enough to be smart and hard working you had to also be a monk. Who could they get who could look but not touch? And since Fox had defined its strategy as moderately conservative and almost all of the prospective male anchors from other networks were rabid crypto-Marxists, it looked hopeless.

    There was a period of confusion and disorganization and out of the chaos emerged Tucker Carlson whom we had seen knocking around the news for years but whom we thought of as just a “pretty boy” news reader a sort of male eye candy air-head.

    But God must like Fox because Carlson is a happy surprise second only to the surprise of Donald Trump. Carlson’s interviews are routinely taped and shown on YouTube. O’Reilly always praised his own interviewing abilities. But Carlson is better, much better and the public seems to know it.

    First of all O’Reilly always struggled to get major political celebrities to come on his show. He complained about it all the time. But it’s easy to understand why. O’Reilly viewed an interview as a zero sum game. The interviewee was expected to lose. Or big Bill might blow a fuse and scream at the guest. And of course O’Reilly had his stable of sycophantic comedians and acolytes who never challenged him. Finally it was usually clear that the guests who did consent to submit to one of his interviews also often hated his guts. With Bill there was lots of psychodrama but with Carlson there is more actual news.

    Everyone likes Tucker and those that don’t are still careful to be scrupulously polite. Tucker’s guest dare not be obnoxious because Tucker is so polite and fair minded if they succumb to their darker impulses and try to savage him verbally, they will look like an ass on national TV.

    So it worked out just fine for Fox. Carlson elevates the tone of the main Fox News evening news show and simultaneously has more substantive guests and discussions than heretofore.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @anonguy
    I never understood the appeal of O'Reilly. He made my skin crawl every time I saw him, the few times I could bear it. I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Dave Pinsen
    His talent is aligned with a common sense position now, which makes him look like a lot better than he did, say, 15 years ago.

    Yeah, I guess he’s reached the age where he feels comfortable trusting in common sense. 15 years ago, not so much. He must have spent some time in the wilderness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Bill B. says:

    OT

    This may become a famous – notorious – interview with Jordan Peterson and is worth watching simply to marvel at the bone-headed nothingness of one of Britain’s star interviewers. She has nothing but her own smugness; he is sharp, cool and logical.

    (Apologies if this has already been posted.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    That was hilarious. The interviewer probably didn't realize how stupid that made her look; indeed, I'm quite sure that she felt that she showed him.
    , @guest
    "It's an experiment"

    Gynocracy has never been tried, therefore we don't know whether it wouldn't be more successful than male-built and -run civilization. What could possibly go wrong?

    Whenever the "we've got nothing to compare it to" (it being the cutrent lrvel of female achievement) argument gets trotted out, I wonder how long a record would be required for us to judge. Should we observe a hands-off policy between the sexes, enforced "equality," or pure fem-dom, how long before they admit men are superior at running things (outside motherhood and sewing circles)? 20 centuries? Eternity?

    It's apparent we'll never admit the Race Gap might originate in nature, despite God-knows how much effort. Nevertheless, we'll wait like orthodox communists wait for the workers to finally rise against their exploiters: unto the crack of doom.
    , @Dieter Kief
    Clip is great, thanks!

    --I just - ehe - noticed - in a comment on a lengthy article about Peterson in the current Journal of Higher Education, that Peterson praises THE BELL CURVE - just like Steve Sailer.
    -
    - - - Comment got removed.

    Can you imgine this: They have to acknowledge, that Peterson has enormous numbers of readers and listeners all over the world - by they can't accept, that in a tiny comment (ok - a few hundred words, ok) somebody says something about this pretty obvious fact, that Peterson indeed praises THE BELL CURVE?!?

    -I conclude as often, lately: These are the times of the miracles and wonders!

    (And this can't go on like this, I hope - people might eventually even stop to laugh about those gatekeepers - where's the Kafka of our times, to write the dark and funny novel they all deserve - ehh - Thomas Pynchon, just in case you read this post of mine too, and as you might have read Dave Pinsen's post yesterday and my other one adressed at you today - what's up??!!...the requests won't stop, a it seems - this yould be your turn now, couldn't it - or maybe: It is?! Is it?!!).

    , @Vinteuil
    Brilliant performance by Jordan Peterson - the wisdom of Solomon & the patience of Job. I would have been climbing over the table to throttle that cloth-eared bint by about five minutes in.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    but I still don’t trust the cuck; he’s been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    Tucker crossed the Rubicon with that Politico piece he wrote on Trump in January 2016: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572

    It was a great, great piece and starts off with an anecdote that suggests his maturation after that Bonfire of the Hannities moment with Stewart.

    The most important part of the piece was lighting the conservative establishment on fire – Tucker was the first swamp creature to do so, IIRC. Really called them on the carpet.

    The Anton Flight 93 piece got all the attention, but that Carlson piece was the best piece of pro-Trump punditry in the race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    "Bonfire of the Hanitties" is brilliant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Mr. Anon says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    The idea of a nation is defined in it’s Constitution, and in it’s traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it’s civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country.

    No, America was defined by the (primarily) anglo-saxon people who founded it. It was regulated by its laws, like this one:

    United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law to support the Constitution of the United States, which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer, and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. And the children of such person so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: Provided also, that no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid, except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

    http://www.indiana.edu/%7Ekdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html

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

    Looks like Bret Stephens has been reading the comments section!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/18/opinion/jews-immigration-america.html

    Subversion? During the campaign, Donald Trump said at a New Hampshire rally that Syrian refugees “could make the Trojan horse look like peanuts.” His campaign then infamously called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

    Similar charges have long been leveled at Jews. Henry Ford accused Jews of causing the First World War. A generation later, famed aviator Charles Lindbergh charged Jews with trying to inveigle the United States into war. Lindbergh was the leading champion in his day of “America First.” Still later, Jewish “neocons” somehow became the shadowy instigators of America’s wars in the Middle East.

    That last part may not be the exact point he was intending to make.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Shorter Stephens: If Jews can assimilate, why can't Haitians?
    , @anonymouslee
    lol.

    is stephens suggesting we can't explain the steps of his "somehow" in detail?

    and he forgot one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_spies
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Mr. Anon says:
    @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    The change in Carlson’s thinking started some time ago and is, I think, genuine. Like Ann Coulter did, he came to see the neo-con agenda as disastrous for the country, and recognized that immigration was turning the country into one where any kind of conservative governance would no longer be possible.

    One of the best things he did on his show was start bringing on more people to interview. Most FOX shows consist of FOX news personalities interviewing other FOX News personalities (The other cable networks don’t seem to be any different). How many times do we need to hear the opinion of Charles Krauthammer or John Bolton (the evil-looking Captain Kangaroo)? Carlson brought on new people – people who weren’t on contract to FOX – professors and authors who presumably knew something about their area of expertise, rather than just pundits. He even had James Howard Kunstler on his show, which is a big stretch for FOX.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymouslee
    Tucker said something interesting about his neo-con mistake that many people wouldn't have admitted.

    I'm paraphrasing but he said the mistake he made was not basing his position on what he actually felt the stronger arguments were. Instead, he had "listened to someone much smarter than me" and decided his instincts must be wrong.

    (he didn't name the person and im not sure if we're supposed to know who he means--someone like Hitchens who was formidable at cocktail parties or does he think someone in the administration like wolfowitz is smart? It'd be interesting to know who they sent out to convince smart, sincere people like Tucker who didn't just want to be bought)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Tucker Carlson has 1.49 million followers on Twitter. Wow. TV grabs the eyeballs. TV must be recaptured by White Core American Patriots when the time comes.

    2015 Tweet:

    Tucker Carlson Suggests Ending Muslim Immigration To Protect America

    Mass Immigration Brings Terrorism To America

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  125. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    Looks like Bret Stephens has been reading the comments section!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/18/opinion/jews-immigration-america.html


    Subversion? During the campaign, Donald Trump said at a New Hampshire rally that Syrian refugees “could make the Trojan horse look like peanuts.” His campaign then infamously called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

    Similar charges have long been leveled at Jews. Henry Ford accused Jews of causing the First World War. A generation later, famed aviator Charles Lindbergh charged Jews with trying to inveigle the United States into war. Lindbergh was the leading champion in his day of “America First.” Still later, Jewish “neocons” somehow became the shadowy instigators of America’s wars in the Middle East.
     

    That last part may not be the exact point he was intending to make.

    Shorter Stephens: If Jews can assimilate, why can’t Haitians?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Slightly less short: "Hey, guess what? Since you let us in, that means you now have to let every other person in the world in! But surely, it wasn't a mistake to let us in, right?"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    America is about the idea of equality. We can achieve this ideal by bringing in millions of poor foreigners. They are willing to work cheaply, driving down wages for the poor and middle classes while increasing profits for the donor class. This is how equality is created.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. prusmc says:
    @Berty
    I think it really helps that McCain is on his deathbed, Orrin Hatch is senile, and Flake has been humiliated, leaving the only passionate GOP advocate for amnesty to be the ugly intensely unlikable Lindsey Graham.

    The only difficulty is that if Graham is the only vocal proponent of anmisty in the GOP the other three are votes for it. That is 4 plus 49 democrats makes 53 to 47. If a few others such as Collins, Portman, Gardener, Tillis, Burr, Corker and Rubio do not vote with the demos. Can’t count on the House of Representatives to hold back the tide. Throw in Senators Toomey, Sasse, Scott and Johnson and it is close to 2/3 rds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Anonymous
    Since Steve, Ann Coulter, and John Derbyshire aren't allowed to have their own shows, Tucker Carlson is about the best we can hope for. Sigh.. I was just imagining a show with all of them on it together. Could actually make me start watching television again.

    TV is over; it’s now only being watched by senile boomers.

    Behold, the world’s…seventh most important graph:

    Their main medium of controlling the message and just like that it’s gone, over, finished. That is one reason why they’ve lately become so hysterical.

    It’s utterly absurd to watch, say, Bill Kristol talking to James Carville about what “they” should do about running the country. It’s like watching a homeless person pantomime sitting down for tea with an invisible Queen of England. Look, mama, I put on my serious tie and im using my big boy voice to pretend im running the world! Utterly insane and they will never forgive Trump for proving it.

    We should be MUCH more concerned about how they’ve moved on to try suppressing the internet. Our enemies discovered we slaughter them in the world of really free speech; I thought they were more in on the joke but these idiots like Thomas Friedman actually believed they have elite stuff and not just elite position. Well, the internet has answered that empirical question and the results have been cataclysmic for entitled media brats.

    What I’m saying is we didn’t need to hope they would “let” us on the internet; we were just doing it and winning. Now they want to make the internet like their TV: fake news gaslighting us behind a locked gate.

    I’m shocked the shuttering of Anglins site wasn’t a bigger story. NEVER before had anyone dreamed of getting someone “kicked off the internet”; the idea would have been considered incoherent on its face. Our supposedly pro-free speech media has mostly praised the attempts to violently suppress speech in this case.

    Anyone with any kind of platform who hasn’t gone to bat for the Daily Stormer on this is an idiot. It has nothing to do with whether you “like” Anglin because he won’t be the last. You can’t let them draw the line in front of him because once they have a line they will move it. Forward. And forward. And forward.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dr kill
    + 1000.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Pat Boyle says:
    @Mr. Anon

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    No. It meant that out of thirteen colonies, which themselves were not that "diverse" by modern standards, one nation was made. It does not mean "Send more Somalis!"

    I agree “Send more Somalis” is not a very good new national motto. I suggest “Save the whales”.

    We still hunt and kill whales most of whose meat ends up in cans of dog food. I love dogs so I’m not advocating abolishing dog food. But there is a better source of virtually free meat for pet food that does not require the slaughter of whales.

    I’m speaking of course of illegal aliens. If and when we capture someone trying to break into our nation by climbing our soon-to-be-built border wall, we should slay them and can them for pet food.

    Repeat after me – “Save the whales”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    A Modest Proposal, Mr. Boyle.
    , @Mr. Anon
    Whales. That's so 80s. People have moved on.

    Just have a "Battle Whale Meat" on Iron Chef and the foodies and hipsters would be buying the stuff like it was uncured bacon or wagyu beef.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Mr. Anon
    The change in Carlson's thinking started some time ago and is, I think, genuine. Like Ann Coulter did, he came to see the neo-con agenda as disastrous for the country, and recognized that immigration was turning the country into one where any kind of conservative governance would no longer be possible.

    One of the best things he did on his show was start bringing on more people to interview. Most FOX shows consist of FOX news personalities interviewing other FOX News personalities (The other cable networks don't seem to be any different). How many times do we need to hear the opinion of Charles Krauthammer or John Bolton (the evil-looking Captain Kangaroo)? Carlson brought on new people - people who weren't on contract to FOX - professors and authors who presumably knew something about their area of expertise, rather than just pundits. He even had James Howard Kunstler on his show, which is a big stretch for FOX.

    Tucker said something interesting about his neo-con mistake that many people wouldn’t have admitted.

    I’m paraphrasing but he said the mistake he made was not basing his position on what he actually felt the stronger arguments were. Instead, he had “listened to someone much smarter than me” and decided his instincts must be wrong.

    (he didn’t name the person and im not sure if we’re supposed to know who he means–someone like Hitchens who was formidable at cocktail parties or does he think someone in the administration like wolfowitz is smart? It’d be interesting to know who they sent out to convince smart, sincere people like Tucker who didn’t just want to be bought)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt

    I’m paraphrasing but he said the mistake he made was not basing his position on what he actually felt the stronger arguments were. Instead, he had “listened to someone much smarter than me” and decided his instincts must be wrong.

     

    God bless Tucker Carlson, but there might have been financial and career considerations regarding his stance on prior positions on certain issues. Listening to people much "smarter" than you are and ditching your own instincts is a question of having the guts and personal intransigence to favor your own God-given nose for what is right and true.

    The Iraq War was a debacle from the get-go. The conception and planning of the Iraq War was a nasty mess; the Neo-Conservatives treasonously cooked up the Iraq War to advance the foreign policy goals of Israel.

    Mass immigration has been harming the United States since the 1965 Immigration Act kicked in. Some would argue that letting the ancestors of the Neo-Conservatives into the United States in the 1890-1924 great wave was a mistake.

    The United States is a European Christian nation.

    Those who believe, like Sam Huntington did, that the United States is a British Protestant nation have a damn good case too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @anon
    Looks like Bret Stephens has been reading the comments section!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/18/opinion/jews-immigration-america.html


    Subversion? During the campaign, Donald Trump said at a New Hampshire rally that Syrian refugees “could make the Trojan horse look like peanuts.” His campaign then infamously called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.”

    Similar charges have long been leveled at Jews. Henry Ford accused Jews of causing the First World War. A generation later, famed aviator Charles Lindbergh charged Jews with trying to inveigle the United States into war. Lindbergh was the leading champion in his day of “America First.” Still later, Jewish “neocons” somehow became the shadowy instigators of America’s wars in the Middle East.
     

    That last part may not be the exact point he was intending to make.

    lol.

    is stephens suggesting we can’t explain the steps of his “somehow” in detail?

    and he forgot one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_spies

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. e says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Lou Dobbs went from CNN to Fox, now has his own daily show on Fox Business Network and is still a fierce critic of our immigration policies. Further, he was on the Trump Train from almost day one, maybe even Day 1, just can’t recall.

    He stood tall against all the Manhattanites and Wall Street global shills through it all. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump didn’t get much of his stuff from watching Lou back in the day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. CJ says:
    @candid_observer
    I am simply amazed at the sheer quantity of talk today about immigration, both about the specific policies and about the underlying philosophy.

    The media's obsession with Trump really is backfiring. Of course, 90% of its stories are negative, but what is likely more important is that the amount of news coverage Trump gets is, according to a recent study, 3X the coverage Obama got at comparable stages in his Presidency.

    You can't ignore a guy with coverage like that. Everything he says people will pay attention to. That should be the last thing the media and the Dems would want, but they can't stop themselves.

    This is how much discussion we're getting on immigration just one year into Trump's Presidency. Think of how much more we'll get in total before the end of his first term. It's likely to be a very different zeitgeist at that point, I'd think.

    You can’t ignore a guy with coverage like that. Everything he says people will pay attention to. That should be the last thing the media and the Dems would want, but they can’t stop themselves.

    I’ve never seen (a) this amount of media coverage of a President and (b) public interest in the coverage. The media went crazy with both JFK and Bill Clinton, but not even they match the Trump obsession. In a landscape where news channels are lucky to tread water ratings-wise, you could probably launch a new channel following All Donald, All The Time and it would soon be #1.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Dave Weigel covered Lindsey Graham’s March 2015 visit to New Hampshire when Graham was preparing for the presidential primary. The town hall was held at a private location with a roaring fire that was roasting the room.

    At this town hall type meeting, I had the chance to ask Lindsey Graham about American national identity, immigration and foreign policy. These topics ended up being the ones that Trump tapped into to win the GOP nomination and the presidency.

    Dave Weigel wrote this in 2015:

    As the heat rises—literally—Graham scouts for hostile questions. Charles Pewitt, a town-hall regular who wants to grill the next president about immigration, butts into a Graham explanation of why reform wouldn’t depress wages. When Graham finishes that answer, he points right at Pewitt, who asks a wordy question about whether Graham thinks America is a coherent nation or some polyglot theory.

    “The rhetoric that you’re hearing today has been spoken in the past,” says Graham, scanning past Pewitt to his fellow skeptics in the crowd. “Any of you Irish? Well, your ancestors ran into signs that said No Irish Need Apply. Any Chinese people here? Well, one day maybe we’ll get some Chinese Republicans in New Hampshire. I hope so. You had to cut your ponytail off.” Graham walks back and forth in front of the fireplace, arms folded behind his back.

    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

    The cornpone and insta-friendliness of the campaign trail suits Graham. He’s got something pleasant to say to everyone who sticks around—even to Pewitt, whom he finds again and thanks for the “passion” of his question.

    “I didn’t want to avoid him,” explains Graham. “He’s got a point of view that’s legitimate. Obviously, I’m in another spot. I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-03-10/in-new-hampshire-lindsey-graham-retools-the-straight-talk-express

    Read More
    • Replies: @Coemgen
    He forgot to add (in genial manner), "Are you an American citizen? Then get out of the way. We've got someone to take your place! Vote Graham!"
    , @Anonymous
    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

    but ideas dont do that for poor women with children. to make that sentence parse we have to add in the premise of an identity (idea=welfare gibs) of which most people are unaware.


    granted, its been a long time since our mainstream politicians had any ideas besides squeezing white american workers so perhaps thats where the confusion came from.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    "I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

    LOL--add that to the long list of things Lindsey Graham is wrong about.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. nigel says:
    @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    You are conflating two entirely different notions of what a country means.

    When Enoch Powell was talking about Britain, everyone at the time knew he was talking about the British people. A people, a nation, can survive a generation or three of bad economic decisions. As long as the people remain in control of their own country, they will eventually correct themselves and build a society that benefits their particular temperament as a people.

    The founding fathers built America to benefit their posterity just as they claimed. The descendants of those founders created a new nation, a new people. And yes, if we as part of that people choose communism or socialism we will reap the benefits of that choice. It doesn’t mean we aren’t worth are fighting for as a people. My people may make mistakes, but they are still my people. I’m not a rootless cosmopolitan.

    You are conflating the traditional meaning of nation as a people with the modern notion that a nation is just a legally defined economic zone to be administered and populated as the elites see fit. I have no loyalty to that idea of a nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clyde
    Agree 100%.
    , @Dieter Kief

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.

     

    I'd hold, that Powell made this statement in order to emphasise, how much he was willing to fight for Britain - and how much he hoped, that the lest would act alike.

    (IOW: His is clearly a counterfactual statement. - Otherwise, he might well have spoken (and acted) differently).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Ed
    The GOP controls Congress and Lindsay Graham negotiates an immigration bill with Dems. Trump knowing what he wants but is not mired in details invites guys who agree with him, Cotton & Goodlatte.

    These guys know policy and proceed to breakdown Lindsey’s deal. Trump hits the roof, Lindsay was trying to pull a fast one and is now exposed. He then asks Lindsay how many Republicans actually support it. Lindsay doesn’t even know he pitches the bill yesterday to GOP Senators only 6 agree. Even if McConnell allowed it to the floor to a vote it would not pass.

    Lindsay Graham is a bad joke on the country and for conservatives.

    Lindsey Graham (R-Democratic Party).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Shorter Stephens: If Jews can assimilate, why can't Haitians?

    Slightly less short: “Hey, guess what? Since you let us in, that means you now have to let every other person in the world in! But surely, it wasn’t a mistake to let us in, right?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Lawrence Auster made that point eloquently:

    I ask again the question that I first asked in Huddled Clichés in 1997, and more recently at VFR, in response to the extraordinary statements coming from Jews and Jewish organizations that Jews are required by their Jewishness and their immigration history to believe in open borders:

    If America had known when admitting Jewish immigrants between 1880 and 1920 that the descendants of those immigrants would oppose America’s right to have any future control over immigration, would America have admitted those immigrants in the first place?

    As a descendant of Eastern Europe Jews, I never would have imagined that to be descended from immigrants requires a person to have more allegiance to future prospective immigrants than to America; nor would most European-Americans who are descended from 19th and early 20th century immigrants imagine such a thing. But many Jews, as well as many Catholics, think otherwise. They think that because they come from immigrants, their sacred mission in the universe is to crusade for open borders and deny any ability on America’s part to have any say about who comes into this country.

    I say that this is a legitimate point to make to the open-borders Jews and Catholics. “Was this part of the deal when your grandparents were admitted into America? That the fact that America let your grandparents into this country requires you to subvert America’s national existence? In that case, your grandparents shouldn’t have been admitted in the first place.” If people started saying these things to the open-borders Jews and Catholics, it would shock at least some of them into realizing how offensive their position is to other Americans, and they would shut up.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

    Oh, I know, I know!

    .
    .
    .

    prostitution

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tulip
    The idea of Lindsey Graham is. . .

    enthusiastically standing next to John Podesta at a pizza party.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Berty says:
    @ChrisZ
    I was going to remark how strange it is that Graham is considered the pre-eminent spokesman (-person?) of the Republican Party in the senate. But when you put it the way you do, Berty, it’s clearer to me that he’s just the vestigial relic of the former generation of leaders. I assume he’s the survivor because he’s younger (?) than those others you mentioned. But he’s really of their class, and their heyday is a remote memory.

    Graham is younger but the primary reason is that since at least 2000 his entire career has consisted on following McCain around and agreeing with everything he says and does. And much like his benefactor he’s always mugging for the cameras and obnoxiously inserting himself into every possible debate. The key difference is that while McCain was loved by the media and was capable of making decent-sounding quotes, Graham isn’t and always gives the impression of a nasty asshole. It’s clear Trump was not willing to concede the high ground to Graham by his inclusion of Perdue and Cotton and Lindsey couldn’t handle it at all. It was beautiful.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @anonymouslee
    Tucker said something interesting about his neo-con mistake that many people wouldn't have admitted.

    I'm paraphrasing but he said the mistake he made was not basing his position on what he actually felt the stronger arguments were. Instead, he had "listened to someone much smarter than me" and decided his instincts must be wrong.

    (he didn't name the person and im not sure if we're supposed to know who he means--someone like Hitchens who was formidable at cocktail parties or does he think someone in the administration like wolfowitz is smart? It'd be interesting to know who they sent out to convince smart, sincere people like Tucker who didn't just want to be bought)

    I’m paraphrasing but he said the mistake he made was not basing his position on what he actually felt the stronger arguments were. Instead, he had “listened to someone much smarter than me” and decided his instincts must be wrong.

    God bless Tucker Carlson, but there might have been financial and career considerations regarding his stance on prior positions on certain issues. Listening to people much “smarter” than you are and ditching your own instincts is a question of having the guts and personal intransigence to favor your own God-given nose for what is right and true.

    The Iraq War was a debacle from the get-go. The conception and planning of the Iraq War was a nasty mess; the Neo-Conservatives treasonously cooked up the Iraq War to advance the foreign policy goals of Israel.

    Mass immigration has been harming the United States since the 1965 Immigration Act kicked in. Some would argue that letting the ancestors of the Neo-Conservatives into the United States in the 1890-1924 great wave was a mistake.

    The United States is a European Christian nation.

    Those who believe, like Sam Huntington did, that the United States is a British Protestant nation have a damn good case too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @The Millennial Falcon

    but I still don’t trust the cuck; he’s been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.
     
    Tucker crossed the Rubicon with that Politico piece he wrote on Trump in January 2016: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-is-shocking-vulgar-and-right-213572

    It was a great, great piece and starts off with an anecdote that suggests his maturation after that Bonfire of the Hannities moment with Stewart.

    The most important part of the piece was lighting the conservative establishment on fire - Tucker was the first swamp creature to do so, IIRC. Really called them on the carpet.

    The Anton Flight 93 piece got all the attention, but that Carlson piece was the best piece of pro-Trump punditry in the race.

    “Bonfire of the Hanitties” is brilliant.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. anonguy says:
    @Pat Boyle
    I used to worry about Bill O'Reilly. He was the biggest thing in Cable News - Broadcast News too. But Bill was getting on in years. I couldn't see a successor anywhere in sight. Hannity was too partisan and Kelly would soon self immolate. Who could anchor the whole news evening the way O'Reilly did for what? twenty years?

    Then Fox News which had always had a ton of beautiful women on camera ran into a storm of male biology. Now it wasn't enough to be smart and hard working you had to also be a monk. Who could they get who could look but not touch? And since Fox had defined its strategy as moderately conservative and almost all of the prospective male anchors from other networks were rabid crypto-Marxists, it looked hopeless.

    There was a period of confusion and disorganization and out of the chaos emerged Tucker Carlson whom we had seen knocking around the news for years but whom we thought of as just a "pretty boy" news reader a sort of male eye candy air-head.

    But God must like Fox because Carlson is a happy surprise second only to the surprise of Donald Trump. Carlson's interviews are routinely taped and shown on YouTube. O'Reilly always praised his own interviewing abilities. But Carlson is better, much better and the public seems to know it.

    First of all O'Reilly always struggled to get major political celebrities to come on his show. He complained about it all the time. But it's easy to understand why. O'Reilly viewed an interview as a zero sum game. The interviewee was expected to lose. Or big Bill might blow a fuse and scream at the guest. And of course O'Reilly had his stable of sycophantic comedians and acolytes who never challenged him. Finally it was usually clear that the guests who did consent to submit to one of his interviews also often hated his guts. With Bill there was lots of psychodrama but with Carlson there is more actual news.

    Everyone likes Tucker and those that don't are still careful to be scrupulously polite. Tucker's guest dare not be obnoxious because Tucker is so polite and fair minded if they succumb to their darker impulses and try to savage him verbally, they will look like an ass on national TV.

    So it worked out just fine for Fox. Carlson elevates the tone of the main Fox News evening news show and simultaneously has more substantive guests and discussions than heretofore.

    I never understood the appeal of O’Reilly. He made my skin crawl every time I saw him, the few times I could bear it. I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    >>I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    O'Reilly may be an evil, sociopathic man, but for a time he was OUR (the right's) evil sociopath. That makes all the difference.
    , @dr kill
    He seems to have the complexion of the Nazi scientist in that Indiana Jones flick who gets melted at the end by the Ark of the Covenant. Never trust a 60 y o with acne.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Coemgen says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    Dave Weigel covered Lindsey Graham's March 2015 visit to New Hampshire when Graham was preparing for the presidential primary. The town hall was held at a private location with a roaring fire that was roasting the room.

    At this town hall type meeting, I had the chance to ask Lindsey Graham about American national identity, immigration and foreign policy. These topics ended up being the ones that Trump tapped into to win the GOP nomination and the presidency.

    Dave Weigel wrote this in 2015:

    As the heat rises—literally—Graham scouts for hostile questions. Charles Pewitt, a town-hall regular who wants to grill the next president about immigration, butts into a Graham explanation of why reform wouldn’t depress wages. When Graham finishes that answer, he points right at Pewitt, who asks a wordy question about whether Graham thinks America is a coherent nation or some polyglot theory.

     


    “The rhetoric that you’re hearing today has been spoken in the past,” says Graham, scanning past Pewitt to his fellow skeptics in the crowd. “Any of you Irish? Well, your ancestors ran into signs that said No Irish Need Apply. Any Chinese people here? Well, one day maybe we’ll get some Chinese Republicans in New Hampshire. I hope so. You had to cut your ponytail off.” Graham walks back and forth in front of the fireplace, arms folded behind his back.

     


    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

     


    The cornpone and insta-friendliness of the campaign trail suits Graham. He’s got something pleasant to say to everyone who sticks around—even to Pewitt, whom he finds again and thanks for the “passion” of his question.

     


    “I didn’t want to avoid him,” explains Graham. “He’s got a point of view that’s legitimate. Obviously, I’m in another spot. I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

     

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-03-10/in-new-hampshire-lindsey-graham-retools-the-straight-talk-express

    He forgot to add (in genial manner), “Are you an American citizen? Then get out of the way. We’ve got someone to take your place! Vote Graham!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    Dave Weigel covered Lindsey Graham's March 2015 visit to New Hampshire when Graham was preparing for the presidential primary. The town hall was held at a private location with a roaring fire that was roasting the room.

    At this town hall type meeting, I had the chance to ask Lindsey Graham about American national identity, immigration and foreign policy. These topics ended up being the ones that Trump tapped into to win the GOP nomination and the presidency.

    Dave Weigel wrote this in 2015:

    As the heat rises—literally—Graham scouts for hostile questions. Charles Pewitt, a town-hall regular who wants to grill the next president about immigration, butts into a Graham explanation of why reform wouldn’t depress wages. When Graham finishes that answer, he points right at Pewitt, who asks a wordy question about whether Graham thinks America is a coherent nation or some polyglot theory.

     


    “The rhetoric that you’re hearing today has been spoken in the past,” says Graham, scanning past Pewitt to his fellow skeptics in the crowd. “Any of you Irish? Well, your ancestors ran into signs that said No Irish Need Apply. Any Chinese people here? Well, one day maybe we’ll get some Chinese Republicans in New Hampshire. I hope so. You had to cut your ponytail off.” Graham walks back and forth in front of the fireplace, arms folded behind his back.

     


    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

     


    The cornpone and insta-friendliness of the campaign trail suits Graham. He’s got something pleasant to say to everyone who sticks around—even to Pewitt, whom he finds again and thanks for the “passion” of his question.

     


    “I didn’t want to avoid him,” explains Graham. “He’s got a point of view that’s legitimate. Obviously, I’m in another spot. I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

     

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-03-10/in-new-hampshire-lindsey-graham-retools-the-straight-talk-express

    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

    but ideas dont do that for poor women with children. to make that sentence parse we have to add in the premise of an identity (idea=welfare gibs) of which most people are unaware.

    granted, its been a long time since our mainstream politicians had any ideas besides squeezing white american workers so perhaps thats where the confusion came from.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Clyde says:
    @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    You can’t cuck the Tuck! Anyone wanting to see good Tucker videos. Go to youtube and search >> cuck tuck https://www.bing.com/search?pc=COSP&ptag=D112817-A9FCDBB39EF&form=CONBDF&conlogo=CT3335799&q=You+can%27t+cuck+the+Tuck

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Janus says:
    @Simon in London
    320 million New Zealanders might not be so bad.

    320 million New Zealanders would have to contain a mighty contingent of sheep.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @Pat Boyle
    I agree "Send more Somalis" is not a very good new national motto. I suggest "Save the whales".

    We still hunt and kill whales most of whose meat ends up in cans of dog food. I love dogs so I'm not advocating abolishing dog food. But there is a better source of virtually free meat for pet food that does not require the slaughter of whales.

    I'm speaking of course of illegal aliens. If and when we capture someone trying to break into our nation by climbing our soon-to-be-built border wall, we should slay them and can them for pet food.

    Repeat after me - "Save the whales".

    A Modest Proposal, Mr. Boyle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Clyde says:
    @nigel

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

     

    You are conflating two entirely different notions of what a country means.

    When Enoch Powell was talking about Britain, everyone at the time knew he was talking about the British people. A people, a nation, can survive a generation or three of bad economic decisions. As long as the people remain in control of their own country, they will eventually correct themselves and build a society that benefits their particular temperament as a people.

    The founding fathers built America to benefit their posterity just as they claimed. The descendants of those founders created a new nation, a new people. And yes, if we as part of that people choose communism or socialism we will reap the benefits of that choice. It doesn't mean we aren't worth are fighting for as a people. My people may make mistakes, but they are still my people. I'm not a rootless cosmopolitan.

    You are conflating the traditional meaning of nation as a people with the modern notion that a nation is just a legally defined economic zone to be administered and populated as the elites see fit. I have no loyalty to that idea of a nation.

    Agree 100%.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Daniel H says:
    @anonguy
    I never understood the appeal of O'Reilly. He made my skin crawl every time I saw him, the few times I could bear it. I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    >>I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    O’Reilly may be an evil, sociopathic man, but for a time he was OUR (the right’s) evil sociopath. That makes all the difference.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    Did you really think of O'Reilly as a man of the right? I could never figure out what he was, other than an unprincipled blowhard.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Yep, they ought to draw a random name out of the Orangeburg, SC phone book and send that person to Washington to replace the Pillsbury Bottom Boy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  151. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    According to the New Yorker:

    ""You can't tuck the Tuck" is, among other things, a way of affirming that Carlson is a white guy who isn't afraid to stand up for himself."

    That's quite an affirmation, especially in light of its source!

    My favorite quote about Tucker: “He has a problem getting guests for the same reason pigs avoid the slaughterhouse.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. eah says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  153. @Bill B.
    OT

    This may become a famous - notorious - interview with Jordan Peterson and is worth watching simply to marvel at the bone-headed nothingness of one of Britain's star interviewers. She has nothing but her own smugness; he is sharp, cool and logical.

    (Apologies if this has already been posted.)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54&list=WL&index=2

    That was hilarious. The interviewer probably didn’t realize how stupid that made her look; indeed, I’m quite sure that she felt that she showed him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    From the article:

    Yet he found much to admire in the most murderous ideology of the 20th century, responsible for tens of millions of deaths from the killing fields of Cambodia to the gulags of Murmansk.

    If you’re Jewish in America, chances are there’s at least one Uncle Bern somewhere in your family tree. As the scholar Ruth Wisse noted last year in Tablet magazine, Jewish intellectual life in the 1930s and 40s was largely defined by one’s stance toward one thing: The Party.
     
    I know it's old news. And I know everyone here has heard it a thousand times before.

    But if Hitler had gassed every single Jewish person in the world at the time, it still would not have been "tens of millions" of people.

    And yet, these same people are the ones who freak out if you deviate from the narrative even a little bit today.

    A tiny handful of others — including atomic spies Julius Rosenberg, David Greenglass, Harry Gold and Morton Sobell — betrayed America’s most important military secrets to Stalinist Russia and did incalculable damage to the country and the world.

    Here’s a thought experiment: Would the United States have been better off if it had banned Jewish immigration sometime in the late 19th century, so that the immigrant parents of Rosenberg and Sobell had never set foot here?
     
    Well, yeah. I think that goes without saying. If they had done that, then people like Bret Stephens wouldn't be here, with their constant demands that we turn the US into Brazil and Europe into Afghanistan. So what if we wouldn't have Facebook?

    In 1914, Edward Alsworth Ross, the famous progressive sociologist from the University of Wisconsin, called Jews “moral cripples” whose “tribal spirit intensified by social isolation prompts them to rush to the rescue of the caught rascal of their own race.”
     
    I mean... I don't really know what to say here...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. guest says:
    @Bill B.
    OT

    This may become a famous - notorious - interview with Jordan Peterson and is worth watching simply to marvel at the bone-headed nothingness of one of Britain's star interviewers. She has nothing but her own smugness; he is sharp, cool and logical.

    (Apologies if this has already been posted.)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54&list=WL&index=2

    “It’s an experiment”

    Gynocracy has never been tried, therefore we don’t know whether it wouldn’t be more successful than male-built and -run civilization. What could possibly go wrong?

    Whenever the “we’ve got nothing to compare it to” (it being the cutrent lrvel of female achievement) argument gets trotted out, I wonder how long a record would be required for us to judge. Should we observe a hands-off policy between the sexes, enforced “equality,” or pure fem-dom, how long before they admit men are superior at running things (outside motherhood and sewing circles)? 20 centuries? Eternity?

    It’s apparent we’ll never admit the Race Gap might originate in nature, despite God-knows how much effort. Nevertheless, we’ll wait like orthodox communists wait for the workers to finally rise against their exploiters: unto the crack of doom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Coemgen

    Gynocracy has never been tried
     
    Probably more correctly stated: There is no evidence of a successful "gynocracy."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. @Bill B.
    OT

    This may become a famous - notorious - interview with Jordan Peterson and is worth watching simply to marvel at the bone-headed nothingness of one of Britain's star interviewers. She has nothing but her own smugness; he is sharp, cool and logical.

    (Apologies if this has already been posted.)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54&list=WL&index=2

    Clip is great, thanks!

    –I just – ehe – noticed – in a comment on a lengthy article about Peterson in the current Journal of Higher Education, that Peterson praises THE BELL CURVE – just like Steve Sailer.
    -
    - – – Comment got removed.

    Can you imgine this: They have to acknowledge, that Peterson has enormous numbers of readers and listeners all over the world – by they can’t accept, that in a tiny comment (ok – a few hundred words, ok) somebody says something about this pretty obvious fact, that Peterson indeed praises THE BELL CURVE?!?

    -I conclude as often, lately: These are the times of the miracles and wonders!

    (And this can’t go on like this, I hope – people might eventually even stop to laugh about those gatekeepers – where’s the Kafka of our times, to write the dark and funny novel they all deserve – ehh – Thomas Pynchon, just in case you read this post of mine too, and as you might have read Dave Pinsen’s post yesterday and my other one adressed at you today – what’s up??!!…the requests won’t stop, a it seems – this yould be your turn now, couldn’t it – or maybe: It is?! Is it?!!).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. OT

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42738709

    “Buses used to transport Apple employees to their offices have been attacked, with windows smashed, possibly by people using pellet guns.

    There have been several such attacks on the morning and evening commutes to and from Apple headquarters in the Californian city of Cupertino.

    Some news outlets report that the firm has sent an email to employees, saying buses are now being rerouted.

    Local news website SFGate reported that a Google bus had also been targeted.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  158. @nigel

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its ‘posterity’ you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

     

    You are conflating two entirely different notions of what a country means.

    When Enoch Powell was talking about Britain, everyone at the time knew he was talking about the British people. A people, a nation, can survive a generation or three of bad economic decisions. As long as the people remain in control of their own country, they will eventually correct themselves and build a society that benefits their particular temperament as a people.

    The founding fathers built America to benefit their posterity just as they claimed. The descendants of those founders created a new nation, a new people. And yes, if we as part of that people choose communism or socialism we will reap the benefits of that choice. It doesn't mean we aren't worth are fighting for as a people. My people may make mistakes, but they are still my people. I'm not a rootless cosmopolitan.

    You are conflating the traditional meaning of nation as a people with the modern notion that a nation is just a legally defined economic zone to be administered and populated as the elites see fit. I have no loyalty to that idea of a nation.

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.

    I’d hold, that Powell made this statement in order to emphasise, how much he was willing to fight for Britain – and how much he hoped, that the lest would act alike.

    (IOW: His is clearly a counterfactual statement. – Otherwise, he might well have spoken (and acted) differently).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it.

    I’d hold, that Powell made this statement in order to emphasise, how much he was willing to fight for Britain – and how much he hoped, that those on the left would act alike.

    (IOW: His is clearly a counterfactual statement. – Otherwise, he might well have spoken differently).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Impolitic
    Tucker is the most iSteve-y TV host ever. He should have you on. I could see you becoming a regular, ala Mark Steyn.

    Tucker appears to be stepping further and further into iSteve territory–which carries the danger of stepping further and further into the crosshairs of the #MeToo crowd. In any event, he beats Breaking News Hannity by a mile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    >Tucker getting MeTooed
    They tried that and he beat them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. lavoisier says: • Website
    @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

    The idea or portrait of a lying, traitorous, scumbag.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jake
    If America is 'an idea,' then people truly are interchangeable.

    Let the Elites put that to the test. Let them pay white deplorables to leave. If 12 million of us - non-rich white Gentiles who are not Liberal and are at least nominally Christian - leave this 'idea,' and we are replaced by 3 million Numinous Negroes from Haiti and Jamaica (as citizens of the Americas, they will assimilate very easily), 3 million Mexicans/Central Americans (see above for their easy, natural assimilation), 3 million brown Mohammedans (because according to 75% or more of Jews, if we do not give Affirmative Action to Mohammedans we are just itching to gas Jews), and 3 million East Asians.

    If the US makes that investment that proves its faith in the nation as an 'idea,' then America will become a Rainbow Paradise.

    Many fewer white Gentiles - leaving only the gay ones and atheist ones and socialist ones and thoroughly Judaizing Evangelical ones - and many more blacks and browns will prove the issue.

    They will never, ever agree to a plan which lessens or eliminates the suffering of white people. So your scheme, however attractive we personally may find it, is a non-starter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. EdwardM says:
    @pepperinmono
    Tucker's show's problem is that he has the same few idiots on to argue with.
    He needs to expand the idiot list.
    It is quite shocking to see how unintellectual and stupid the other side is.
    After a while, it is just not entertaining.

    The other night he had on Heather Macdonald, Victor Davis Hanson, and Mark Steyn.
    Pretty good stuff, but maybe too highbrow for that time slot.
    Plus those guests (except for maybe Mark Steyn) need longer time slots to be effective.

    Too bad. I like him.Tucker gets it on immigration. He's a decent debater. Hope he makes it with few tweaks of the format.

    Agree. There’s the bubblehead Cathy Areu, who is a frequent guest on the show and others on Fox News. The first couple of times she was on I literally thought she was a fake commentator designed to serve as a caricature of the ethnic, feminist, leftist position. She would nod in agreement with all of Tucker’s strawman and reductio ad absurdum statements, as if she wasn’t getting the joke.

    I realize now, of course, that she is in earnest. Despite being pretty (or at least one can imagine she was pretty 5-10 years ago), he should retire her. He has a lot of low-grade liberal guests whose profile doesn’t warrant their presence on such a platform. Better when he illustrates the stupidity of higher-profile, more influential guests like Max Boot. Perhaps such guests won’t agree to be on the show, whereas more obscure ones figure that the publicity will at least be worthwhile.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. lavoisier says: • Website

    That Lindsey Graham continues to be elected to higher office is as much an indictment against the intelligence of the voter as is the continued election of John McCain or Paul Ryan.

    When are the voters going to be held responsible for putting these traitorous scumbags in power again and again and again???

    And in a so called red state like South Carolina?

    What the hell is happening in South Carolina and Arizona?

    Whatever it is, it is bad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @IHTG
    What is happening, my friend...is white nationalism. Yes, white nationalism.

    In these southern Red States that have large minorities - blacks in South Carolina's case, Hispanics in Arizona's - the Republicans need whites to bloc-vote for them in order to win elections. And usually they do! For an example of what happens when they don't, see the recent Alabama special election.

    But shockingly, what you get when 80% of whites vote for the same party and overwhelm the minority vote is not some hard right-wing ideological nationalist. Instead you get a milquetoast moderate, because that's what it takes to appeal to as many white people as possible. If you want to win, you can't afford to offend any white person. And white people - all people, really - have a spectrum of ideologies.

    Racial cohesion leads to ideological muddling. This is a big problem with the concept of racial nationalism in a diverse country, one that is largely unrecognized by its adherents.

    , @Jack Hanson
    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.

    Its why Russel Pearce went from leading McCain to dropping behind nearly double digits in the span of a week: because the McCain campaign went and promised the moon and sun to the Mormons for their support, and away we went.

    Since then McCain and Graham have employed a "splitter strategy" where sudden,oh you have several candidates no one has heard of before (local veteran, local businessman, or local doctor are all popular) who endorse positions to the right of the incumbent but jusssst a bit to the Left or the same as the challenger. More often than not these people have zero political careers, but somehow manage to have quite a war chest and a team of political operators.

    So a 7 point deficit becomes a 2 or 1 point squeaker, and then these people fade into the wilderness. Kelli Ward had several fellow challengers who were fire and fury during the campaign, but have vanished ever since.

    Also: Sheriff Joe needs to enjoy retirement. He has no business splitting the Ward vote.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. pyrrhus says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Tucker is an amazing improvement on the Obama loving cuck that was Bill O’Reilly…Fox surely could not have intended that, could it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Alastair Trumpington
    Steve,

    I believe this may be of interest to you.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/18/opinion/jews-immigration-america.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

    From the article:

    Yet he found much to admire in the most murderous ideology of the 20th century, responsible for tens of millions of deaths from the killing fields of Cambodia to the gulags of Murmansk.

    If you’re Jewish in America, chances are there’s at least one Uncle Bern somewhere in your family tree. As the scholar Ruth Wisse noted last year in Tablet magazine, Jewish intellectual life in the 1930s and 40s was largely defined by one’s stance toward one thing: The Party.

    I know it’s old news. And I know everyone here has heard it a thousand times before.

    But if Hitler had gassed every single Jewish person in the world at the time, it still would not have been “tens of millions” of people.

    And yet, these same people are the ones who freak out if you deviate from the narrative even a little bit today.

    A tiny handful of others — including atomic spies Julius Rosenberg, David Greenglass, Harry Gold and Morton Sobell — betrayed America’s most important military secrets to Stalinist Russia and did incalculable damage to the country and the world.

    Here’s a thought experiment: Would the United States have been better off if it had banned Jewish immigration sometime in the late 19th century, so that the immigrant parents of Rosenberg and Sobell had never set foot here?

    Well, yeah. I think that goes without saying. If they had done that, then people like Bret Stephens wouldn’t be here, with their constant demands that we turn the US into Brazil and Europe into Afghanistan. So what if we wouldn’t have Facebook?

    In 1914, Edward Alsworth Ross, the famous progressive sociologist from the University of Wisconsin, called Jews “moral cripples” whose “tribal spirit intensified by social isolation prompts them to rush to the rescue of the caught rascal of their own race.”

    I mean… I don’t really know what to say here…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. IHTG says:
    @lavoisier
    That Lindsey Graham continues to be elected to higher office is as much an indictment against the intelligence of the voter as is the continued election of John McCain or Paul Ryan.

    When are the voters going to be held responsible for putting these traitorous scumbags in power again and again and again???

    And in a so called red state like South Carolina?

    What the hell is happening in South Carolina and Arizona?

    Whatever it is, it is bad.

    What is happening, my friend…is white nationalism. Yes, white nationalism.

    In these southern Red States that have large minorities – blacks in South Carolina’s case, Hispanics in Arizona’s – the Republicans need whites to bloc-vote for them in order to win elections. And usually they do! For an example of what happens when they don’t, see the recent Alabama special election.

    But shockingly, what you get when 80% of whites vote for the same party and overwhelm the minority vote is not some hard right-wing ideological nationalist. Instead you get a milquetoast moderate, because that’s what it takes to appeal to as many white people as possible. If you want to win, you can’t afford to offend any white person. And white people – all people, really – have a spectrum of ideologies.

    Racial cohesion leads to ideological muddling. This is a big problem with the concept of racial nationalism in a diverse country, one that is largely unrecognized by its adherents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If you have a stable, cohesive polity, you get Eisenhower-Stevenson elections.
    , @anonymouslee
    just the opposite: we can't have real politics until we get our country back. opposing white nationalism is giving up our right to political autonomy.

    white population is going down, approaching 50%. when it starts going below even that, what kind of political freedom do you imagine whites will have? take a look at California for your answer: what you get is a single party on all of the big issues and ethnic cleansing of middle class whites. the elite maintain some autonomy by controlling local real estate/development laws, etc. as Steve has discussed and they're allowed to do this and have their wealthy micro-utopias because theyre rich enough to buy the "people" off and still be rich. Non-wealthy white people left long ago for Oregon or Colorado or Arizona or Texas. LA public schools are 14% white. California is not America.

    Guess what won't be America anymore when Florida, Texas, Georgia, Virginia and the Carolinas fall permanently into the blue column? 10 points if you answered "Uhh...America?"

    We are facing nothing less than the death of our nation. Screaming "extremism is irrational!" at me won't change the reality. Sometimes events are extreme and those judged by history as cool-headed, far-sighted, rational, and wise are the people who take decisive action as soon as possible.

    I'm an extremist about not driving a car into the grand canyon, too.

    I'm not an extremist on tax policy or drug laws or many other political topic in a real, functioning nation.

    The world is a complex place and there are different answers to different questions. Existence of your people and their nation isn't the time for finding a middle ground.


    Let me be clear: citizenism IS Lindsey Grahamism because it is *functionally identical* though conceptually distinct. There is just no difference in outcome. Lindsey Graham believes magic dirt will turn immigrants into Americans and citizenism believes magical rhetoric will get minorities to consider whiteys interests when they vote. "Just start thinking of yourself as American first and not [black/Mexican/Jewish" is not a strategy; it is madness.

    Sheer madness from exactly the same well Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, George W. Bush are drawing from. It is the insane, crazy, suicidal establishment religious dogma that is contradicted by all of the empirical evidence: race doesn't matter or race can be transcended if we will the social engineering. Steve mocks liberal delusions of social engineering away the racial gap (much less doing it with rhetoric). Why is he suggesting the same thing, if only we put Steve Sailer in charge of political messaging?

    The clock is ticking. White population declines every single day. Precisely when and how will citizenism save us? Please show your work. When whites are 55%? 51%? How about 40? You think the 60% non-white majority will treat the white minority fairly because of their great respect for muh Constitution?

    It's time to wake up. Things are already moving in certain directions (white babies were a minority in 2017) and you can't be neutral on a moving train. Ask a Rhodesian--oh wait
    , @Moses

    And white people – all people, really – have a spectrum of ideologies.
     
    You're technically correct, of course, but in reality White people are the most politically diverse group by far. Blacks, Hispanics and Asians reliably vote >2/3 Democrat. Black women voted a whopping 94% for Clinton.

    Look no further than the 2016 Presidential election breakdown (1st % is Clinton, 2nd is Trump):

    Whites: 37%, 58%
    Blacks: 88%, 8%
    Hispanics: 65%, 29%

    Source: https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/

    Clearly, there are racial differences in politics that persist over generations. Just as clearly, the Democratic strategy of flooding the USA with non-White voters will cement them in permanent majority over a deeply racially fractured electorate.

    Seems to be a recipe for increasing racial friction. I don't think it will end well.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Vinteuil says:
    @Bill B.
    OT

    This may become a famous - notorious - interview with Jordan Peterson and is worth watching simply to marvel at the bone-headed nothingness of one of Britain's star interviewers. She has nothing but her own smugness; he is sharp, cool and logical.

    (Apologies if this has already been posted.)


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54&list=WL&index=2

    Brilliant performance by Jordan Peterson – the wisdom of Solomon & the patience of Job. I would have been climbing over the table to throttle that cloth-eared bint by about five minutes in.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Daniel H says:
    @Chrisnonymous
    It's really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    >>It’s really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    What motivates Lindsey Graham? I think we must consider homosexual rage. The dude can’t hide the gay, probably been affecting this aspect his entire life and was probably taunted and shamed for it since a young age. It’s actually sad that he can’t suppress the gay or come out in the open, but the fact of the matter justifies policy that excludes closeted (or even open) homosexuals from position of authority, influence and responsibility in government.

    When I graduated from college the NSA recruited on campus. Intrigued, I signed up for an interview. One of the first questions out of the stone-faced, NSA recruiter’s mouth was whether I was homosexual or ever had a homosexual experience. I spontaneously giggled, and he looked at me, without breaking his stone face, and said, “Do you think that this is funny?”. I apologized and said that it was an unexpected question, I lost my poise. Anyway, I guess I did well enough in interview to be considered for a second round. To prepare me for the second round, the interviewer handed a printout of a reading list that he wanted me to consult before further interviews. He stated that it was policy that the books on the reading list were available at every library. So I checked out the reading list. One of the books dealt with case studies (could have been fiction, for all I know) on how they turned homosexual Soviet functionaries by blackmail. Some of the approached functionaries didn’t care and told intelligence to go to hell, but the book asserted that some were turned. Struck me as weird, cruel, unfair, but that’s how the game is played. So what is the lesson? Obviously, homosexuals are a security risk. We know it. Our adversaries know it. This has been known for a long time. Part of the reason for the security risk, I believe, is the repressed rage against a society/country that has scorned them and treated gays unfairly. Weren’t all or most of the Cambridge 5 spy ring upper class, connected, gay Brits? But still, they hated their country.

    Who knows what makes Lindsey Graham tick, but, whatever, he is untrustworthy. We cannot be certain that he has the good interests of the American people in mind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill B.
    The most louche of the Cambridge spies - Guy Burgess - was widely considered 'harmless' and unlikely to be a Russian spy because, when drunk as he frequently was, he would tell people that he was a Russian spy. The general feeling was that no Russian spy would say he was a Russian spy.

    Might this line of reasoning also apply to Lindsey Graham et al - they can't possibly be anti-American because no true traitor would be so blatant in advocating the dissolving of heritage America?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. New definition of ethnic cleansing:

    Trump Ends Protections for El Salvador

    Q. Do you see this as a form of ethnic cleansing?

    A. It is clearly an effort, as I said, to slow down the emergence of a new majority.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2018/01/18/trump-ends-protections-for-el-salvador/

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    It is interesting, right-wing pundits say that it is the Democrats who want to allow these immigrants to come because they want to turn them into Democratic voters. This is so ridiculous.
     
    Apparently, the fact that Democrats have been openly bragging for a decade about how they are doing this exact thing doesn't make it any less ridiculous.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @conatus
    Tucker rocks! don't Fu*k with the Tuck. Cardenas his alderman guest last night, who Tucker called a "loathsome racist" with Cardenas snarling out his ' blue eyes and blonde hair' comment which reminds you of Rolling Stones Erdely with her comment about the "overwhelmingly blonde students" at Uva.
    Like blonde hair and blue eyes are marks of leper.
    There is no pleasing these people. They want you to die if you are White, to disappear forever but leave the assets. But barring that, at best you will provide the government services for the POC, the way it works in Ssouth Africa and California now.
    In South Africa in a country of roughly 60 million people, less than 4 million pay tax and almost 90 percent of them are white.

    Now having stated those facts, here’s Sailer to tell you that citizenism is a viable alternative.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kevin C.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. J.Ross says: • Website
    @anonymous
    Tucker appears to be stepping further and further into iSteve territory--which carries the danger of stepping further and further into the crosshairs of the #MeToo crowd. In any event, he beats Breaking News Hannity by a mile.

    >Tucker getting MeTooed
    They tried that and he beat them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @for-the-record
    New definition of ethnic cleansing:

    Trump Ends Protections for El Salvador

    Q. Do you see this as a form of ethnic cleansing?

    A. It is clearly an effort, as I said, to slow down the emergence of a new majority.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2018/01/18/trump-ends-protections-for-el-salvador/
     

    It is interesting, right-wing pundits say that it is the Democrats who want to allow these immigrants to come because they want to turn them into Democratic voters. This is so ridiculous.

    Apparently, the fact that Democrats have been openly bragging for a decade about how they are doing this exact thing doesn’t make it any less ridiculous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @lavoisier
    That Lindsey Graham continues to be elected to higher office is as much an indictment against the intelligence of the voter as is the continued election of John McCain or Paul Ryan.

    When are the voters going to be held responsible for putting these traitorous scumbags in power again and again and again???

    And in a so called red state like South Carolina?

    What the hell is happening in South Carolina and Arizona?

    Whatever it is, it is bad.

    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.

    Its why Russel Pearce went from leading McCain to dropping behind nearly double digits in the span of a week: because the McCain campaign went and promised the moon and sun to the Mormons for their support, and away we went.

    Since then McCain and Graham have employed a “splitter strategy” where sudden,oh you have several candidates no one has heard of before (local veteran, local businessman, or local doctor are all popular) who endorse positions to the right of the incumbent but jusssst a bit to the Left or the same as the challenger. More often than not these people have zero political careers, but somehow manage to have quite a war chest and a team of political operators.

    So a 7 point deficit becomes a 2 or 1 point squeaker, and then these people fade into the wilderness. Kelli Ward had several fellow challengers who were fire and fury during the campaign, but have vanished ever since.

    Also: Sheriff Joe needs to enjoy retirement. He has no business splitting the Ward vote.

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier

    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.
     
    Ok, I get it with the Boomers--early onset dementia--and the CoC Republicans--greed--but what is wrong with the Mormons??

    Is it that magic underwear??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Coemgen says:
    @guest
    "It's an experiment"

    Gynocracy has never been tried, therefore we don't know whether it wouldn't be more successful than male-built and -run civilization. What could possibly go wrong?

    Whenever the "we've got nothing to compare it to" (it being the cutrent lrvel of female achievement) argument gets trotted out, I wonder how long a record would be required for us to judge. Should we observe a hands-off policy between the sexes, enforced "equality," or pure fem-dom, how long before they admit men are superior at running things (outside motherhood and sewing circles)? 20 centuries? Eternity?

    It's apparent we'll never admit the Race Gap might originate in nature, despite God-knows how much effort. Nevertheless, we'll wait like orthodox communists wait for the workers to finally rise against their exploiters: unto the crack of doom.

    Gynocracy has never been tried

    Probably more correctly stated: There is no evidence of a successful “gynocracy.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Daniel H
    >>I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    O'Reilly may be an evil, sociopathic man, but for a time he was OUR (the right's) evil sociopath. That makes all the difference.

    Did you really think of O’Reilly as a man of the right? I could never figure out what he was, other than an unprincipled blowhard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Man of the Right in comparison to much of the rest of the MSM, okay. But that's a world's tallest midget sorta thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    “Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.”

    I love being lectured on what my country is by a European foreigner who has repeatedly attacked it on this board. I’m sure you have America’s best interest at heart when you advocate nation killing immigration.

    And what percentage of those immigrants were non-European?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @IHTG
    What is happening, my friend...is white nationalism. Yes, white nationalism.

    In these southern Red States that have large minorities - blacks in South Carolina's case, Hispanics in Arizona's - the Republicans need whites to bloc-vote for them in order to win elections. And usually they do! For an example of what happens when they don't, see the recent Alabama special election.

    But shockingly, what you get when 80% of whites vote for the same party and overwhelm the minority vote is not some hard right-wing ideological nationalist. Instead you get a milquetoast moderate, because that's what it takes to appeal to as many white people as possible. If you want to win, you can't afford to offend any white person. And white people - all people, really - have a spectrum of ideologies.

    Racial cohesion leads to ideological muddling. This is a big problem with the concept of racial nationalism in a diverse country, one that is largely unrecognized by its adherents.

    If you have a stable, cohesive polity, you get Eisenhower-Stevenson elections.

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. guest says:
    @Harry Baldwin
    Did you really think of O'Reilly as a man of the right? I could never figure out what he was, other than an unprincipled blowhard.

    Man of the Right in comparison to much of the rest of the MSM, okay. But that’s a world’s tallest midget sorta thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Jack Hanson
    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.

    Its why Russel Pearce went from leading McCain to dropping behind nearly double digits in the span of a week: because the McCain campaign went and promised the moon and sun to the Mormons for their support, and away we went.

    Since then McCain and Graham have employed a "splitter strategy" where sudden,oh you have several candidates no one has heard of before (local veteran, local businessman, or local doctor are all popular) who endorse positions to the right of the incumbent but jusssst a bit to the Left or the same as the challenger. More often than not these people have zero political careers, but somehow manage to have quite a war chest and a team of political operators.

    So a 7 point deficit becomes a 2 or 1 point squeaker, and then these people fade into the wilderness. Kelli Ward had several fellow challengers who were fire and fury during the campaign, but have vanished ever since.

    Also: Sheriff Joe needs to enjoy retirement. He has no business splitting the Ward vote.

    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.

    Ok, I get it with the Boomers–early onset dementia–and the CoC Republicans–greed–but what is wrong with the Mormons??

    Is it that magic underwear??

    Read More
    • Replies: @Coemgen

    what is wrong with the Mormons??
     
    Are Mormons "globalists?"
    , @Jack Hanson
    How do you think Flake got the nod to be the next Senator?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Coemgen says:
    @lavoisier

    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.
     
    Ok, I get it with the Boomers--early onset dementia--and the CoC Republicans--greed--but what is wrong with the Mormons??

    Is it that magic underwear??

    what is wrong with the Mormons??

    Are Mormons “globalists?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several "refugee" warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Charles Pewitt
    Dave Weigel covered Lindsey Graham's March 2015 visit to New Hampshire when Graham was preparing for the presidential primary. The town hall was held at a private location with a roaring fire that was roasting the room.

    At this town hall type meeting, I had the chance to ask Lindsey Graham about American national identity, immigration and foreign policy. These topics ended up being the ones that Trump tapped into to win the GOP nomination and the presidency.

    Dave Weigel wrote this in 2015:

    As the heat rises—literally—Graham scouts for hostile questions. Charles Pewitt, a town-hall regular who wants to grill the next president about immigration, butts into a Graham explanation of why reform wouldn’t depress wages. When Graham finishes that answer, he points right at Pewitt, who asks a wordy question about whether Graham thinks America is a coherent nation or some polyglot theory.

     


    “The rhetoric that you’re hearing today has been spoken in the past,” says Graham, scanning past Pewitt to his fellow skeptics in the crowd. “Any of you Irish? Well, your ancestors ran into signs that said No Irish Need Apply. Any Chinese people here? Well, one day maybe we’ll get some Chinese Republicans in New Hampshire. I hope so. You had to cut your ponytail off.” Graham walks back and forth in front of the fireplace, arms folded behind his back.

     


    “America, to me, is an idea that makes a woman walk across the desert with her children.”

     


    The cornpone and insta-friendliness of the campaign trail suits Graham. He’s got something pleasant to say to everyone who sticks around—even to Pewitt, whom he finds again and thanks for the “passion” of his question.

     


    “I didn’t want to avoid him,” explains Graham. “He’s got a point of view that’s legitimate. Obviously, I’m in another spot. I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

     

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-03-10/in-new-hampshire-lindsey-graham-retools-the-straight-talk-express

    “I think I’ve earned his respect if nothing else.”

    LOL–add that to the long list of things Lindsey Graham is wrong about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @anon
    Slightly less short: "Hey, guess what? Since you let us in, that means you now have to let every other person in the world in! But surely, it wasn't a mistake to let us in, right?"

    Lawrence Auster made that point eloquently:

    I ask again the question that I first asked in Huddled Clichés in 1997, and more recently at VFR, in response to the extraordinary statements coming from Jews and Jewish organizations that Jews are required by their Jewishness and their immigration history to believe in open borders:

    If America had known when admitting Jewish immigrants between 1880 and 1920 that the descendants of those immigrants would oppose America’s right to have any future control over immigration, would America have admitted those immigrants in the first place?

    As a descendant of Eastern Europe Jews, I never would have imagined that to be descended from immigrants requires a person to have more allegiance to future prospective immigrants than to America; nor would most European-Americans who are descended from 19th and early 20th century immigrants imagine such a thing. But many Jews, as well as many Catholics, think otherwise. They think that because they come from immigrants, their sacred mission in the universe is to crusade for open borders and deny any ability on America’s part to have any say about who comes into this country.

    I say that this is a legitimate point to make to the open-borders Jews and Catholics. “Was this part of the deal when your grandparents were admitted into America? That the fact that America let your grandparents into this country requires you to subvert America’s national existence? In that case, your grandparents shouldn’t have been admitted in the first place.” If people started saying these things to the open-borders Jews and Catholics, it would shock at least some of them into realizing how offensive their position is to other Americans, and they would shut up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill B.
    A pity Mr Auster is not still with us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. DRA says:
    @Anonymous
    I already think even the opponents to these immigration proposals by the establishment have gotten way off track. Who cares about DACA and future immigrants, when the most pressing issue is that there are 12 million illegals in the country (including DACA). Why are they still here, living in housing, working at jobs, using financial institutions, a year after Donald Trump was elected?

    DACA kids and illegal criminals are not the issue. The issue is illegal aliens as a whole. Do not allow that 12 million to be carved up, criminals bad, DACAs good, the other 10 million "we just won't talk about for a while." They all must go.

    Deportations should have started with the employed middle-class illegals and the law-school student DACAs, and then proceded down the scale to the criminals.

    But deportations only get you a trickle. Employment, housing, and bank accounts should be targeted. Source countries should be assisted in receiving the returnees. In some cases we should just pay them to leave, as Canada has been known to do.

    By this time many DACA “children” have children, who are American Citizens by birth. Don’t see us deporting the parents of minor children and putting them in foster care.

    And I don’t even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often. Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    And I don’t even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often.
     
    It came to us from a Supreme Court decision, and it can go the same way. Don't let the robes hit you on the way out.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.
     
    It is not only a sin, it is a losing strategy.
    , @anonymouslee
    We know boomers lack the heart to do anything that needs to be done.

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve's childhood.

    I saw what that did to my own father. Well gee golly, he feels kind of guilty about winning the lottery by being born (he says he's quoting Warren Buffet with that gem) in America! He thinks everyone should have what we had! So he's happy to trash the paradise built for him by his ancestors.

    I am somewhat less sanguine about boomers booming. (What did Steve say about patrimony?) Those of you who are older have no idea what it's like to listen to rhetoric about your privilege while being abused for being born a white male. You may disagree with the rhetoric but you can't know what it's like living it from birth. And boomer "men" let this happen with a smirk and a shrug about how it's true that "we" always got everything so it's only right for everyone else to get a turn and for white men to be available for cathartic beatings. Note that "we" weren't born when "we" experienced white male privilege that we need to now atone for.

    And note, crucially, when boomer "men" gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn't give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer "men" at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Coemgen

    what is wrong with the Mormons??
     
    Are Mormons "globalists?"

    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several “refugee” warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several “refugee” warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.
     
    Hey, highly-armed desert rats serving polygamous prophets gotta stick together.
    , @Coemgen
    Hm, Mormons are globalists. That explains a lot... Jeez, don't people realize that globalism is imperialism "on steroids?"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @Tiny Duck
    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2018/01/17/after-guest-calls-out-his-racism-tucker-carlson-has-meltdown-yours/219092

    Proving again that all you need to trigger a RW snowflake is accurately calling them out.

    Tucker Carlson is a racist

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @DRA
    By this time many DACA "children" have children, who are American Citizens by birth. Don't see us deporting the parents of minor children and putting them in foster care.

    And I don't even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often. Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.

    And I don’t even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often.

    It came to us from a Supreme Court decision, and it can go the same way. Don’t let the robes hit you on the way out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @J.Ross
    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several "refugee" warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.

    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several “refugee” warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.

    Hey, highly-armed desert rats serving polygamous prophets gotta stick together.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    You will never meet so many Mormons (and Native Americans) as in the military. We can never purge them. If they ever proved to be a threat as a group we're stuck. However, you also meet a lot of ex-Mormons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Alden
    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.

    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.

    Oh yes they will, and for the same reason they don’t pay employees in cash.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. dr kill says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    I'm really amazed that this guy is still on TV, or even youtube, for that matter.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn't as bright as Tucker Carlson. I recall Dobbs completely backed off at some point, I guess to stay on TV (CNN, I think).

    Videos of Tucker Carlson make my day, as long as I can shake off the stupidity of whomever he is debating arguing with.

    Seems I remember TC and that Willie Geist fellow on the same show. Seems one grew up and one didn’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Reg Cæsar

    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several “refugee” warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.
     
    Hey, highly-armed desert rats serving polygamous prophets gotta stick together.

    You will never meet so many Mormons (and Native Americans) as in the military. We can never purge them. If they ever proved to be a threat as a group we’re stuck. However, you also meet a lot of ex-Mormons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. dr kill says:
    @anonymouslee
    TV is over; it's now only being watched by senile boomers.

    Behold, the world's...seventh most important graph: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxUG-XnXEAAO1t2.jpg

    Their main medium of controlling the message and just like that it's gone, over, finished. That is one reason why they've lately become so hysterical.

    It's utterly absurd to watch, say, Bill Kristol talking to James Carville about what "they" should do about running the country. It's like watching a homeless person pantomime sitting down for tea with an invisible Queen of England. Look, mama, I put on my serious tie and im using my big boy voice to pretend im running the world! Utterly insane and they will never forgive Trump for proving it.

    We should be MUCH more concerned about how they've moved on to try suppressing the internet. Our enemies discovered we slaughter them in the world of really free speech; I thought they were more in on the joke but these idiots like Thomas Friedman actually believed they have elite stuff and not just elite position. Well, the internet has answered that empirical question and the results have been cataclysmic for entitled media brats.

    What I'm saying is we didn't need to hope they would "let" us on the internet; we were just doing it and winning. Now they want to make the internet like their TV: fake news gaslighting us behind a locked gate.

    I'm shocked the shuttering of Anglins site wasn't a bigger story. NEVER before had anyone dreamed of getting someone "kicked off the internet"; the idea would have been considered incoherent on its face. Our supposedly pro-free speech media has mostly praised the attempts to violently suppress speech in this case.

    Anyone with any kind of platform who hasn't gone to bat for the Daily Stormer on this is an idiot. It has nothing to do with whether you "like" Anglin because he won't be the last. You can't let them draw the line in front of him because once they have a line they will move it. Forward. And forward. And forward.

    + 1000.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. dr kill says:
    @anonguy
    I never understood the appeal of O'Reilly. He made my skin crawl every time I saw him, the few times I could bear it. I really felt he was an evil, sociopathic man.

    He seems to have the complexion of the Nazi scientist in that Indiana Jones flick who gets melted at the end by the Ark of the Covenant. Never trust a 60 y o with acne.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @DRA
    By this time many DACA "children" have children, who are American Citizens by birth. Don't see us deporting the parents of minor children and putting them in foster care.

    And I don't even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often. Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.

    Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.

    It is not only a sin, it is a losing strategy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Alden
    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.

    The problem with E-verify is that the employers won’t use it.

    I’ve seen signs up in some of our airport’s Caribou Coffees saying they use it. They were posted at about the boundary between the public areas and the kitchen, so who was meant to see them is anyone’s guess.

    The foreign-born working in the Caribous and Starbucks there are nearly all East African, and can be assumed legal, at least on paper, and speak passable English. They dominate Starbucks’ staff, but half of Caribou’s are stereotypical Minnesota kids. Local businesses have a reputation to keep up, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. ic1000 says:
    @Nick Diaz
    Steve Sailer:

    "Perhaps Lindsey Graham is not a person, just an idea."

    What a terrible comparison. The difference, of course, is that a person is a very precisely defined entity, defined as the physical and personality characteristics of a human being, and cannot be an idea except in metaphorical/allegorical terms.

    Conversely, a nation is not only a physical entity defined as it's territory, but also an abstract juridical/political entity. Because it is an abstract juridical construct on top of being a geographical construct, it can absolutely be an idea, unlike a person. The idea of a nation is defined in it's Constitution, and in it's traditions. America has always been a nation defined by it's civil liberties and individual rights, and by being an immigrant country. Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Absolutely terrible, Sailer. Please try again.

    > Immigration has always been at the heart of America as an idea, since for more than 150 years until the early 2oth century, immigration contributed even more than birth to the population growth.

    Nick Diaz, your posts have no great respect for the truth. As an idea. Remember your comments about opiates a couple of weeks back, when you presented some ‘alternative facts’ about fentanyl?

    So maybe these statements about immigration are true, or truthy, although outright false is also in play. I’m not going to check.

    Absolutely terrible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Lurker says:
    @Joe, averaged
    Hey, what was wrong with the Star Wars cantina?

    Oh right, the shooting, killling, and scumbags.

    Not to mention the terrible music.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @jonomd
    "Orrin Hatch is senile"

    I just read this little gem about Hatch last night:

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

    "President Bill Clinton nominated her as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court on June 14, 1993, to fill the seat vacated by retiring Justice Byron White. Ginsburg was recommended to Clinton by then-U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno[12] after a suggestion by Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch"

    **Sigh**. With Republicans like this, do we even need to worry about the Democrats?

    Yeah, Hatch turned cuckoo long, long ago. What sealed the deal for me was when he did an interview while running for president where he revealed to the reporter that he was wearing a necklace with a menorah or something on it. How effing big of a crazy ass-kissing cuckoo bird does a White Anglo-Saxon Mormon have to be to wear a symbol of a completely different religion.

    Oh, and do you wanna know who we have to thank for even having the concept of the DREAM Act? That was Orrin Hatch’s bright little idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. Bill B. says:
    @Daniel H
    >>It’s really diffict not to hate Lindsey Graham.

    What motivates Lindsey Graham? I think we must consider homosexual rage. The dude can't hide the gay, probably been affecting this aspect his entire life and was probably taunted and shamed for it since a young age. It's actually sad that he can't suppress the gay or come out in the open, but the fact of the matter justifies policy that excludes closeted (or even open) homosexuals from position of authority, influence and responsibility in government.

    When I graduated from college the NSA recruited on campus. Intrigued, I signed up for an interview. One of the first questions out of the stone-faced, NSA recruiter's mouth was whether I was homosexual or ever had a homosexual experience. I spontaneously giggled, and he looked at me, without breaking his stone face, and said, "Do you think that this is funny?". I apologized and said that it was an unexpected question, I lost my poise. Anyway, I guess I did well enough in interview to be considered for a second round. To prepare me for the second round, the interviewer handed a printout of a reading list that he wanted me to consult before further interviews. He stated that it was policy that the books on the reading list were available at every library. So I checked out the reading list. One of the books dealt with case studies (could have been fiction, for all I know) on how they turned homosexual Soviet functionaries by blackmail. Some of the approached functionaries didn't care and told intelligence to go to hell, but the book asserted that some were turned. Struck me as weird, cruel, unfair, but that's how the game is played. So what is the lesson? Obviously, homosexuals are a security risk. We know it. Our adversaries know it. This has been known for a long time. Part of the reason for the security risk, I believe, is the repressed rage against a society/country that has scorned them and treated gays unfairly. Weren't all or most of the Cambridge 5 spy ring upper class, connected, gay Brits? But still, they hated their country.

    Who knows what makes Lindsey Graham tick, but, whatever, he is untrustworthy. We cannot be certain that he has the good interests of the American people in mind.

    The most louche of the Cambridge spies – Guy Burgess – was widely considered ‘harmless’ and unlikely to be a Russian spy because, when drunk as he frequently was, he would tell people that he was a Russian spy. The general feeling was that no Russian spy would say he was a Russian spy.

    Might this line of reasoning also apply to Lindsey Graham et al – they can’t possibly be anti-American because no true traitor would be so blatant in advocating the dissolving of heritage America?

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Does anyone doubt that about McCain? Whether NVA or ISIS, has McCain ever met an enemy of the United States he couldn't work with?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. bartok says:
    @anon
    Yes, Tucker is great.

    Lou Dobbs back some years ago was known as an immigration patriot, but he wasn’t as bright as Tucker Carlson.
     
    Lou, in the mid aughts while at CNN, was operating under a different zeitgeist than exists today. Strikes me as rather unfair to say he "wasn't as bright". The time wasn't right (ripe?) for the movement-- the masses were quite content taking cash-out mortgages and living above their means.

    Case in point: Tucker himself was on CNN around the same time doing the show Crossfire. Why didn't he head up an immigration restriction movement then? Had a great platform. Up until the last year, Liberals loved to post the clip of when Jon Stewart appeared on Crossfire and "destroyed" Tucker Carlson, claiming it led to his departure from CNN. Pretty funny how that isn't brought up anymore.

    Another factor unrelated to intelligence is work politics-- what will their bosses allow them to harp on? Then they were both at CNN, now they're at FOX and FOX Business.

    And one last factor is social media/internet culture. This brings out the best arguments from around the web. Tucker's staff can easily pick out great arguments/talking points for him. There were blogs 12-15 years ago, but there is so much more now, and then best stuff gets collated and upvoted/repeated.

    Tucker’s staff can easily pick out great arguments/talking points for him. There were blogs 12-15 years ago, but there is so much more now, and then best stuff gets collated and upvoted/repeated.

    I’ve said that Unz.com is radicalizing the olds and /pol/ the kiddies, but with William Shatner and Paul Nehlen both confirmed /pol/acks, it may well be the fountainhead of the new right.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. Bill B. says:
    @Harry Baldwin
    Lawrence Auster made that point eloquently:

    I ask again the question that I first asked in Huddled Clichés in 1997, and more recently at VFR, in response to the extraordinary statements coming from Jews and Jewish organizations that Jews are required by their Jewishness and their immigration history to believe in open borders:

    If America had known when admitting Jewish immigrants between 1880 and 1920 that the descendants of those immigrants would oppose America’s right to have any future control over immigration, would America have admitted those immigrants in the first place?

    As a descendant of Eastern Europe Jews, I never would have imagined that to be descended from immigrants requires a person to have more allegiance to future prospective immigrants than to America; nor would most European-Americans who are descended from 19th and early 20th century immigrants imagine such a thing. But many Jews, as well as many Catholics, think otherwise. They think that because they come from immigrants, their sacred mission in the universe is to crusade for open borders and deny any ability on America’s part to have any say about who comes into this country.

    I say that this is a legitimate point to make to the open-borders Jews and Catholics. “Was this part of the deal when your grandparents were admitted into America? That the fact that America let your grandparents into this country requires you to subvert America’s national existence? In that case, your grandparents shouldn’t have been admitted in the first place.” If people started saying these things to the open-borders Jews and Catholics, it would shock at least some of them into realizing how offensive their position is to other Americans, and they would shut up.
     

    A pity Mr Auster is not still with us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon

    A pity Mr. Auster is not still with us.
     
    I agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Bill B.
    The most louche of the Cambridge spies - Guy Burgess - was widely considered 'harmless' and unlikely to be a Russian spy because, when drunk as he frequently was, he would tell people that he was a Russian spy. The general feeling was that no Russian spy would say he was a Russian spy.

    Might this line of reasoning also apply to Lindsey Graham et al - they can't possibly be anti-American because no true traitor would be so blatant in advocating the dissolving of heritage America?

    Does anyone doubt that about McCain? Whether NVA or ISIS, has McCain ever met an enemy of the United States he couldn’t work with?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @IHTG
    What is happening, my friend...is white nationalism. Yes, white nationalism.

    In these southern Red States that have large minorities - blacks in South Carolina's case, Hispanics in Arizona's - the Republicans need whites to bloc-vote for them in order to win elections. And usually they do! For an example of what happens when they don't, see the recent Alabama special election.

    But shockingly, what you get when 80% of whites vote for the same party and overwhelm the minority vote is not some hard right-wing ideological nationalist. Instead you get a milquetoast moderate, because that's what it takes to appeal to as many white people as possible. If you want to win, you can't afford to offend any white person. And white people - all people, really - have a spectrum of ideologies.

    Racial cohesion leads to ideological muddling. This is a big problem with the concept of racial nationalism in a diverse country, one that is largely unrecognized by its adherents.

    just the opposite: we can’t have real politics until we get our country back. opposing white nationalism is giving up our right to political autonomy.

    white population is going down, approaching 50%. when it starts going below even that, what kind of political freedom do you imagine whites will have? take a look at California for your answer: what you get is a single party on all of the big issues and ethnic cleansing of middle class whites. the elite maintain some autonomy by controlling local real estate/development laws, etc. as Steve has discussed and they’re allowed to do this and have their wealthy micro-utopias because theyre rich enough to buy the “people” off and still be rich. Non-wealthy white people left long ago for Oregon or Colorado or Arizona or Texas. LA public schools are 14% white. California is not America.

    Guess what won’t be America anymore when Florida, Texas, Georgia, Virginia and the Carolinas fall permanently into the blue column? 10 points if you answered “Uhh…America?”

    We are facing nothing less than the death of our nation. Screaming “extremism is irrational!” at me won’t change the reality. Sometimes events are extreme and those judged by history as cool-headed, far-sighted, rational, and wise are the people who take decisive action as soon as possible.

    I’m an extremist about not driving a car into the grand canyon, too.

    I’m not an extremist on tax policy or drug laws or many other political topic in a real, functioning nation.

    The world is a complex place and there are different answers to different questions. Existence of your people and their nation isn’t the time for finding a middle ground.

    Let me be clear: citizenism IS Lindsey Grahamism because it is *functionally identical* though conceptually distinct. There is just no difference in outcome. Lindsey Graham believes magic dirt will turn immigrants into Americans and citizenism believes magical rhetoric will get minorities to consider whiteys interests when they vote. “Just start thinking of yourself as American first and not [black/Mexican/Jewish” is not a strategy; it is madness.

    Sheer madness from exactly the same well Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, George W. Bush are drawing from. It is the insane, crazy, suicidal establishment religious dogma that is contradicted by all of the empirical evidence: race doesn’t matter or race can be transcended if we will the social engineering. Steve mocks liberal delusions of social engineering away the racial gap (much less doing it with rhetoric). Why is he suggesting the same thing, if only we put Steve Sailer in charge of political messaging?

    The clock is ticking. White population declines every single day. Precisely when and how will citizenism save us? Please show your work. When whites are 55%? 51%? How about 40? You think the 60% non-white majority will treat the white minority fairly because of their great respect for muh Constitution?

    It’s time to wake up. Things are already moving in certain directions (white babies were a minority in 2017) and you can’t be neutral on a moving train. Ask a Rhodesian–oh wait

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. Mr. Anon says:
    @Pat Boyle
    I agree "Send more Somalis" is not a very good new national motto. I suggest "Save the whales".

    We still hunt and kill whales most of whose meat ends up in cans of dog food. I love dogs so I'm not advocating abolishing dog food. But there is a better source of virtually free meat for pet food that does not require the slaughter of whales.

    I'm speaking of course of illegal aliens. If and when we capture someone trying to break into our nation by climbing our soon-to-be-built border wall, we should slay them and can them for pet food.

    Repeat after me - "Save the whales".

    Whales. That’s so 80s. People have moved on.

    Just have a “Battle Whale Meat” on Iron Chef and the foodies and hipsters would be buying the stuff like it was uncured bacon or wagyu beef.

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

    Liberia was founded in 1847 by freed American slaves. Their constitution is a virtual replica of America’s. Their flag is virtually identical to America’s. Presumably, the founders carried the “Idea of America” with them from America.

    Yet Liberia turned out to be squalid, corrupt, war-torn and desperately poor. It remains so today. Not to mention it’s been the epicenter of multiple ebola virus outbreaks.

    They have the same “Idea” as America, but turned out totally different. Weird.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  206. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bill B.
    A pity Mr Auster is not still with us.

    A pity Mr. Auster is not still with us.

    I agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. @DRA
    By this time many DACA "children" have children, who are American Citizens by birth. Don't see us deporting the parents of minor children and putting them in foster care.

    And I don't even see US talking about getting rid of birthright citizenship very often. Jerry Pournelle often advised not to despair, as doing so is a sin.

    We know boomers lack the heart to do anything that needs to be done.

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve’s childhood.

    I saw what that did to my own father. Well gee golly, he feels kind of guilty about winning the lottery by being born (he says he’s quoting Warren Buffet with that gem) in America! He thinks everyone should have what we had! So he’s happy to trash the paradise built for him by his ancestors.

    I am somewhat less sanguine about boomers booming. (What did Steve say about patrimony?) Those of you who are older have no idea what it’s like to listen to rhetoric about your privilege while being abused for being born a white male. You may disagree with the rhetoric but you can’t know what it’s like living it from birth. And boomer “men” let this happen with a smirk and a shrug about how it’s true that “we” always got everything so it’s only right for everyone else to get a turn and for white men to be available for cathartic beatings. Note that “we” weren’t born when “we” experienced white male privilege that we need to now atone for.

    And note, crucially, when boomer “men” gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn’t give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer “men” at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.

    Read More
    • LOL: IHTG
    • Replies: @Moses

    And note, crucially, when boomer “men” gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn’t give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer “men” at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.
     
    1,000 times this.^

    When I was in grad school we had big time executives visit, speak and do brown-bag lunches with students. I attended a lunch with the ex-CEO of Lucent Technologies, Henry Schacht.

    People tend to speak frankly at small, private gatherings of grad students. I'll never forget Schact's holier-than-thou pontificating about how important it was to give hiring preferences to women and minorities in Corporate America.

    I thought "Hey, jerk, you got yours and now you're making it harder for me to get mine? If there was any "oppressing" I didn't do it! And not only that, you're grandstanding about your virtue without it costing you a dime? Why didn't you resign at the pinnacle of your career and give your plumb CEO job to a woman or minority? Screw you!"

    You might say that was the beginning of my awakening. There's a special place in hell reserved for cucks.

    , @Moses

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve’s childhood.

     

    This is an important and, I believe, prescient insight.

    A whole generation of young White men are and will come of age in a time when many institutions in our society are set up to humiliate and browbeat them at every turn, both publicly and privately. (Just watch any random TV commercial featuring a husband and wife. Endure any university "critical theory" class. Pelosi's "Five White men who should open up a hamburger stand" etc.)

    They'll come of age at a time when Whites may have dipped below 50% of America. There will be no "Gee golly, I feel kind of guilty about winning the lottery of being born a White man in America" for them. Rather, there will be ethnic identity and solidarity. There will be alienation. There will be a burning sense of righteous injustice.

    Don't expect them to hold back.

    Fasten your seatbelts. We're just getting started.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Moses says:
    @IHTG
    What is happening, my friend...is white nationalism. Yes, white nationalism.

    In these southern Red States that have large minorities - blacks in South Carolina's case, Hispanics in Arizona's - the Republicans need whites to bloc-vote for them in order to win elections. And usually they do! For an example of what happens when they don't, see the recent Alabama special election.

    But shockingly, what you get when 80% of whites vote for the same party and overwhelm the minority vote is not some hard right-wing ideological nationalist. Instead you get a milquetoast moderate, because that's what it takes to appeal to as many white people as possible. If you want to win, you can't afford to offend any white person. And white people - all people, really - have a spectrum of ideologies.

    Racial cohesion leads to ideological muddling. This is a big problem with the concept of racial nationalism in a diverse country, one that is largely unrecognized by its adherents.

    And white people – all people, really – have a spectrum of ideologies.

    You’re technically correct, of course, but in reality White people are the most politically diverse group by far. Blacks, Hispanics and Asians reliably vote >2/3 Democrat. Black women voted a whopping 94% for Clinton.

    Look no further than the 2016 Presidential election breakdown (1st % is Clinton, 2nd is Trump):

    Whites: 37%, 58%
    Blacks: 88%, 8%
    Hispanics: 65%, 29%

    Source: https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/groups-voted-2016/

    Clearly, there are racial differences in politics that persist over generations. Just as clearly, the Democratic strategy of flooding the USA with non-White voters will cement them in permanent majority over a deeply racially fractured electorate.

    Seems to be a recipe for increasing racial friction. I don’t think it will end well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Moses says:
    @anonymouslee
    We know boomers lack the heart to do anything that needs to be done.

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve's childhood.

    I saw what that did to my own father. Well gee golly, he feels kind of guilty about winning the lottery by being born (he says he's quoting Warren Buffet with that gem) in America! He thinks everyone should have what we had! So he's happy to trash the paradise built for him by his ancestors.

    I am somewhat less sanguine about boomers booming. (What did Steve say about patrimony?) Those of you who are older have no idea what it's like to listen to rhetoric about your privilege while being abused for being born a white male. You may disagree with the rhetoric but you can't know what it's like living it from birth. And boomer "men" let this happen with a smirk and a shrug about how it's true that "we" always got everything so it's only right for everyone else to get a turn and for white men to be available for cathartic beatings. Note that "we" weren't born when "we" experienced white male privilege that we need to now atone for.

    And note, crucially, when boomer "men" gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn't give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer "men" at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.

    And note, crucially, when boomer “men” gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn’t give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer “men” at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.

    1,000 times this.^

    When I was in grad school we had big time executives visit, speak and do brown-bag lunches with students. I attended a lunch with the ex-CEO of Lucent Technologies, Henry Schacht.

    People tend to speak frankly at small, private gatherings of grad students. I’ll never forget Schact’s holier-than-thou pontificating about how important it was to give hiring preferences to women and minorities in Corporate America.

    I thought “Hey, jerk, you got yours and now you’re making it harder for me to get mine? If there was any “oppressing” I didn’t do it! And not only that, you’re grandstanding about your virtue without it costing you a dime? Why didn’t you resign at the pinnacle of your career and give your plumb CEO job to a woman or minority? Screw you!”

    You might say that was the beginning of my awakening. There’s a special place in hell reserved for cucks.

    Read More
    • Agree: Desiderius
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. @anony-mouse
    Enoch Powell once said that even if Britain went Communist he would still be willing to fight for it. If you believe that America is made for its 'posterity' you would have to agree with him if America happened to go Communist.

    But that doesn't accord with what the founders-Give Me Liberty or give me Death-seemed to be saying.

    BTW How come no one here never mentions 'E Pluribus Unum' which first appeared on the Great Seal of the United States in 1782-even before the Constitution?

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?

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

    Out of many states one nation, you can not really think your retconning of America is going to work in the age of the Internet, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. TangoMan says:
    @whorefinder
    After Tucker got bitch-slapped by Jon Stewart on Crossfire because he was the token-establishment-conservative-whipping boy, Tucker spent some time in the wilderness. When he came back to TV with this show, I thought he'd just be a retread of establishment republican talking points---especially with the O'Reilly/Ailes scandals causing Tucker to get a show in the first place.

    It seems Tucker has learned a few things since Stewart's torpedoing, and seems to have stopped playing the left's game of making R's the Washington Generals, and actually being more Alt-Right. It's been amusing to watch---his take down of that lying Congressman Schiff on the Russia stuff was gold, and his exposure of Kurt Eichenwald's mental problems was surreal--but I still don't trust the cuck; he's been a Washington insider far too long, and is a proud swamp resident.

    I'm fearing he, like Macron, merely exists to drive alt-right to him so he can subsume them and morph them into neocons like the Tea Party was subsumed and destroyed.

    Remember Gucci Little Piggy’s blog? He shut it down when he went to work for the Daily Caller, run by Tucker. Tucker hired him even though he wasn’t writing standard Republican fare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @whorefinder
    I don't trust Piggy either; he was selling out and writing for "Nu-male", pro-feminist crapfest online magazines and becoming buddy-buddy with Hugo Schwyzer, and then when called on it, claimed like a cuck that he was "reaching out" and we were actually bad for being so insular. Pretty standard cuckish explanation and behavior. So if Tuck thinks that kind of cuck-sellout is good to hire, what does that tell you?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. Coemgen says:
    @J.Ross
    Massively so. Huge growth in Mexico, several "refugee" warehouses, voted for CIA terrorist Evan McMullin (photographed with ISIS) instead of Trump in the election.

    Hm, Mormons are globalists. That explains a lot… Jeez, don’t people realize that globalism is imperialism “on steroids?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. Moses says:
    @anonymouslee
    We know boomers lack the heart to do anything that needs to be done.

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve's childhood.

    I saw what that did to my own father. Well gee golly, he feels kind of guilty about winning the lottery by being born (he says he's quoting Warren Buffet with that gem) in America! He thinks everyone should have what we had! So he's happy to trash the paradise built for him by his ancestors.

    I am somewhat less sanguine about boomers booming. (What did Steve say about patrimony?) Those of you who are older have no idea what it's like to listen to rhetoric about your privilege while being abused for being born a white male. You may disagree with the rhetoric but you can't know what it's like living it from birth. And boomer "men" let this happen with a smirk and a shrug about how it's true that "we" always got everything so it's only right for everyone else to get a turn and for white men to be available for cathartic beatings. Note that "we" weren't born when "we" experienced white male privilege that we need to now atone for.

    And note, crucially, when boomer "men" gallantly gave up white male privilege they didn't give up their own status. There was no time machine to blow up the system in which they came of age and to maturity. Rather, boomer "men" at the peak of their career power decided it was time share the wealth by, eg, hiring young asian women to work beneath them instead of younger, ambitious white men. How woke of them.

    More interesting will be how the first white babies born a minority in their birth year (which was 2016 or 2017) will feel about it. Hint: they will not feel as restrained as Steve does after growing up in a torture chamber for white boys instead of the white boy paradise of Steve’s childhood.

    This is an important and, I believe, prescient insight.

    A whole generation of young White men are and will come of age in a time when many institutions in our society are set up to humiliate and browbeat them at every turn, both publicly and privately. (Just watch any random TV commercial featuring a husband and wife. Endure any university “critical theory” class. Pelosi’s “Five White men who should open up a hamburger stand” etc.)

    They’ll come of age at a time when Whites may have dipped below 50% of America. There will be no “Gee golly, I feel kind of guilty about winning the lottery of being born a White man in America” for them. Rather, there will be ethnic identity and solidarity. There will be alienation. There will be a burning sense of righteous injustice.

    Don’t expect them to hold back.

    Fasten your seatbelts. We’re just getting started.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Achmed E. Newman

    E Pluribus Unum-sounds quite pro-diversity, no?
     
    No, not at all, to me. "Out of many, one" means that anybody different assimilates to the culture of America. I realize this is not an anti-immigration position either, but it's not pro-diversity. The people that push diversity want no assimilation to happen (the way it goes now, in fact).

    They want these light-bulb-headed Somalians over here, these studious introverted Chinese sitting there, these Indians in gowns with dots on their foreheads over there, and those towel-headed guys there speaking some expectorant-based-dialect with their black-mummified girlfriends all to be hanging out at the coffee shops having a good old diverse time, as the normal Americans just put up with it. It's kind of fun if all that's only 2 dozen people in a city of 200,000, and the innumerate people that don't get out much really imagine that this is about what we have.

    I would never fight for a Communist government if there were a way out. It's much better to stop them from internally taking over early on. It's not THAT early in America. If "my people" truly become Communists, they are dead to me, and I would rather adopt a new "my people".

    It’s actually much more specific than that. “E pluribus unum” was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It’s become the most overworked phrase since, “All men are created equal.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "People make countries: Liberia has a scrupulously rights-oriented charter; it’s still a shithole."

    It's a "shithole" as far as political corruption. Why? Because of competing ideas and how ideas were put forth and implemented, which leads to the formation of groups who defend such ideas. In this particular case, these ideas are put force through intimidation and violence.

    Now, if ideas could not exist outside of the mind, how would an idea in one's question been transmitted to me to ponder? Does my iPhone exist as part of my mind, or is it an external device that sends ideas without it being a mind of its own? Are ideas transmitted as words, or are the words merely stimuli generated to evoke similar ideas to those who receive it? It probably is more accurate to say a person's words evoke a new idea to another person, but then the question of identification is raised. If they were essentially the same idea, it would have to take place at the same time, right?
    , @Corvinus
    "It’s actually much more specific than that. “E pluribus unum” was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It’s become the most overworked phrase since, “All men are created equal.”

    Context in the time period, my friend. People make countries through ideas. Those ideas are transferable and malleable. That nation-state could now make its own decisions as to who would be part of its political and cultural landscape.

    "I’ve never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea?"

    The idea shared by the people of America by way of the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which are universal concepts.

    When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you’re near 90% white you don’t have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing."

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear--specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals. Yet, those same people whose ancestors had been deemed “unfit” for American inclusion by nativists in the 1850’s and 1890’s claim to possess the inherent qualities required to perpetuate Western Civilization. Nativists held those groups in contempt for “alien ways of life”, yet by the power of "magic dirt", those groups have transformed themselves into one of the natives.

    Again, I will make it loud and clear for you--only those of stout Anglo-Saxon heritage served as the conduit to Western Civilization superiority and American exceptionalism. Do you really think the British desired to have their culture being watered down by immigrants of notoriously questionable character, that being light-skinned Irish, fair-weathered Germans, and swarthy Poles and Italians?

    Yet, the damndest thing is that the English are but a combination of motley collection of Angles, Saxons, Celts, Jutes, Britons, and Normans. So perhaps Vox Day, when taking into account this fact, is overstating his case...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @anonymouslee
    I don't know why we don't more often point out the absolutely definitive evidence against "muh Constitution" arguments:

    the worst shitholes, however you want to choose them from the Soviet Union to the failed states of Africa to the genocidal warmongers of Europe, have fantastic constitutions. Any country you hate, just name it and find a perfectly nice sounding Constitution.

    We are a people. The Constitution is something we decided to put on paper to better organize the government which exists to serve us, the nation. Not the other way around.

    The Constitution didn't write us, we wrote the Constitution. (hat tip to Malcolm Little for getting me down to one line)


    Something else we should point out is that rhetoric about how people are not really people paves the way for attempts at genocide. No people, no crime. Case closed!

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

    This people vs ideals thing seems pretty dumb to me. People are the holders of ideals. If you transplanted a bunch of Africans, they would be both different people AND hold different ideals. So that thought experiment is sort of dumb.

    The real crux that Carlson won’t mention on TV is whether it is possible/probable to truly transfer new ideals to other people. This might not be possible if, e.g., ideals are hard to change in adulthood, or genetic differences make it difficult, etc.

    Carlson misses all that. I see flashes of good stuff from him but ultimately this is TV. There are certain topics you don’t touch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  217. Tulip says:

    Since America is an idea, why don’t we invade Mexico, place them under a military protectorate, and then Americanize them! Surely it is racist to allow Mexico to exist as a sovereign country and resist our “exceptional” ideas and political hegemony. Mandatory English and a ban on pinata’s.

    This way, all those people in Mexico won’t have to make a dangerous trek across the border, they can stay where they are. They couldn’t be governed worse than they currently are in any event.

    But Fred Reed we deport.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  218. Tulip says:
    @Joe Schmoe

    But what idea would Lindsey Graham be?

     

    Oh, I know, I know!

    .
    .
    .

    prostitution

    The idea of Lindsey Graham is. . .

    enthusiastically standing next to John Podesta at a pizza party.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. If Lindsey Graham were an idea, he would be something like “blackmailed controlled opposition”. You just know that old fruit has an entire cemetery of skeletons rattling around in his closet. Hence his fierce insistence on open borders and all the other rubbish that our hostile elite is imposing on us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  220. whorefinder says: • Website
    @TangoMan
    Remember Gucci Little Piggy's blog? He shut it down when he went to work for the Daily Caller, run by Tucker. Tucker hired him even though he wasn't writing standard Republican fare.

    I don’t trust Piggy either; he was selling out and writing for “Nu-male”, pro-feminist crapfest online magazines and becoming buddy-buddy with Hugo Schwyzer, and then when called on it, claimed like a cuck that he was “reaching out” and we were actually bad for being so insular. Pretty standard cuckish explanation and behavior. So if Tuck thinks that kind of cuck-sellout is good to hire, what does that tell you?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. vx37 says:
    @Tim Howells
    Fox News has really stepped up and is playing the Fourth Estate role that you would hope for from a free press. Maybe the whole "Russia Collusion" hysteria has been a blessing in disguise, because that is what really got the Hannity/Carlson axis rolling and at war with the Deep State. There just was not time to weaponize phrases like "Putin-lover" and "pawn of the Kremlin" the way "racist" and "xenophobe" have been. Now the battle lines are drawn and the conflict is spilling over to the immigration debate. Tucker has gone full Alt-Right and Hannity and Ingraham are not far behind. This is going to get really interesting.

    I don’t see how you can say Hannity is near Alt-Right. I catch a few minutes of him now and then on the car radio and it’s just the same Bush era Republican Party horse-race BS. All Hillary scandals and no real basic substance. I listened to Rush for a few now and then too, and the other day he actually mentioned the left’s hatred of white people as one of their motivations for, I believe, supporting open borders. What makes a cuck a cuck isn’t that he’s not pro-white, it’s that he refuses to call out the left’s murderous, genocidal hatred of white people. None of these people are out of the cuckstream ™ yet, and won’t be until they follow the people out. They can’t and won’t lead.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tim Howells
    Hannity has been great on the "Russian Collusion" bs and the Mueller investigation corruption stories. This has included in-depth analysis and some prescient dot connecting. I've been pleasantly surprised by this because I was not a Hannity fan at all before. Now Hannity is weighing in on the immigration question as well in a really good way. I think that the Russian collusion narrative was so half baked and transparently dishonest that it will be a great gateway to the alt-right for many "traditional conservatives" certainly including Rush as you say. Fingers crossed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. vx37 says:
    @Wilkey
    Brevity is the soul of wit (and a compelling argument), and Tucker is much more articulate and convincing than I'll ever be, but if there's one more point I wish Tucker had made it's the contradiction between the Left's belief in diversity and their belief that America is just an idea.

    The Left believes that differences matter, but also believes that America is simply an idea. An "idea" sounds fun and interesting and possibly exhilarating, but what they really mean is that America is a system - an organization - into which you could plug any random set of (DIVERSE!) people (let's call them "organization men") and get the same result, the diversity of the people in question being irrelevant.

    If diversity doesn't meaningfully change the outcome, then why do we need it? And if it can change the outcome then why aren't we allowed to question whether the outcome could be worse? Or maybe not worse, but just different in a way the original group of people would not prefer?

    Anyone who's ever had to manage a workforce can tell you that differences matter - that the "cogs" which comprise the system alter it's performance. The cogs aren't interchangeable. Diversifying your cogs (especially with Central American or Brazilian cogs) doesn't necessarily improve the system or make it perform better.

    The left went nuts when Trump said a Mexican judge was biased (which he was) but constantly tell us we need minorities on the bench to bring a “different perspective”, i.e., biased judgements.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. vx37 says:
    @Jake
    If America is 'an idea,' then people truly are interchangeable.

    Let the Elites put that to the test. Let them pay white deplorables to leave. If 12 million of us - non-rich white Gentiles who are not Liberal and are at least nominally Christian - leave this 'idea,' and we are replaced by 3 million Numinous Negroes from Haiti and Jamaica (as citizens of the Americas, they will assimilate very easily), 3 million Mexicans/Central Americans (see above for their easy, natural assimilation), 3 million brown Mohammedans (because according to 75% or more of Jews, if we do not give Affirmative Action to Mohammedans we are just itching to gas Jews), and 3 million East Asians.

    If the US makes that investment that proves its faith in the nation as an 'idea,' then America will become a Rainbow Paradise.

    Many fewer white Gentiles - leaving only the gay ones and atheist ones and socialist ones and thoroughly Judaizing Evangelical ones - and many more blacks and browns will prove the issue.

    There’s a much simpler test that I advocate: white boycott of the military, or at least the Army and Marines. Surely they would be improved by Idea Americans, and surely Idea Americans are itching to fight Washington’s imperial wars. That last bit is a joke, of course, only stupid white people are dumb enough to itch to fight for a system eager to eliminate them. The Pillsbury Doughboy is self-ovening.

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier

    That last bit is a joke, of course, only stupid white people are dumb enough to itch to fight for a system eager to eliminate them. The Pillsbury Doughboy is self-ovening.
     
    Wonderful expression.

    When the white man wakes up and stops voluntarily joining the military to serve their masters the Republic will start to recover.

    No more wars for Israel.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Charles Pewitt
    ATTENTION STEVE SAILER: I am aware that I have used this video repeatedly, but it's a keeper and highly relevant and I am on camera using the only Matt Fong joke/reference in the history of the New Hampshire presidential primary. This video is from Dave Weigel. Moderate it on through!

    Lindsey Graham says that the United States is just an idea. This notion that America is just an “idea” is the foundational line of globaloney nonsense from the WASP / Jew ruling class.

    Lindsey Graham is a nasty little whore for the Neo-Conservatives and the American Empire profiteers. Lindsey Graham is a Baby Boomer Cuckservative who will not fight for the best interests of the European Christian ancestral core of the United States. Lindsey Graham puts the interests of foreigners, Israel and the globalizers ahead of the interests of the United States as a whole.

    Watch Lindsey Graham respond to my 2015 town hall question on immigration, national identity and foreign policy by saying that “I believe it is our God-given requirement to help those who struggle for their freedom” and "I believe in America as an idea" in this video:

    https://youtu.be/MRrG4dbYmGk

    QUOTE: Lindsey Graham is a nasty little whore for the Neo-Conservatives and the American Empire profiteers.

    Anyone with “Miss Graham’s,” er, personal tastes would be well advised not to cross his handlers.

    Federal and state laws relating to carnal congress with minors remain surprisingly illiberal in 2018.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. @vx37
    I don't see how you can say Hannity is near Alt-Right. I catch a few minutes of him now and then on the car radio and it's just the same Bush era Republican Party horse-race BS. All Hillary scandals and no real basic substance. I listened to Rush for a few now and then too, and the other day he actually mentioned the left's hatred of white people as one of their motivations for, I believe, supporting open borders. What makes a cuck a cuck isn't that he's not pro-white, it's that he refuses to call out the left's murderous, genocidal hatred of white people. None of these people are out of the cuckstream (tm) yet, and won't be until they follow the people out. They can't and won't lead.

    Hannity has been great on the “Russian Collusion” bs and the Mueller investigation corruption stories. This has included in-depth analysis and some prescient dot connecting. I’ve been pleasantly surprised by this because I was not a Hannity fan at all before. Now Hannity is weighing in on the immigration question as well in a really good way. I think that the Russian collusion narrative was so half baked and transparently dishonest that it will be a great gateway to the alt-right for many “traditional conservatives” certainly including Rush as you say. Fingers crossed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. Corvinus says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic
    It's actually much more specific than that. "E pluribus unum" was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It's become the most overworked phrase since, "All men are created equal."

    “People make countries: Liberia has a scrupulously rights-oriented charter; it’s still a shithole.”

    It’s a “shithole” as far as political corruption. Why? Because of competing ideas and how ideas were put forth and implemented, which leads to the formation of groups who defend such ideas. In this particular case, these ideas are put force through intimidation and violence.

    Now, if ideas could not exist outside of the mind, how would an idea in one’s question been transmitted to me to ponder? Does my iPhone exist as part of my mind, or is it an external device that sends ideas without it being a mind of its own? Are ideas transmitted as words, or are the words merely stimuli generated to evoke similar ideas to those who receive it? It probably is more accurate to say a person’s words evoke a new idea to another person, but then the question of identification is raised. If they were essentially the same idea, it would have to take place at the same time, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. Corvinus says:
    @The Anti-Gnostic
    It's actually much more specific than that. "E pluribus unum" was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It's become the most overworked phrase since, "All men are created equal."

    “It’s actually much more specific than that. “E pluribus unum” was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It’s become the most overworked phrase since, “All men are created equal.”

    Context in the time period, my friend. People make countries through ideas. Those ideas are transferable and malleable. That nation-state could now make its own decisions as to who would be part of its political and cultural landscape.

    “I’ve never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea?”

    The idea shared by the people of America by way of the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which are universal concepts.

    When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you’re near 90% white you don’t have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing.”

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear–specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals. Yet, those same people whose ancestors had been deemed “unfit” for American inclusion by nativists in the 1850’s and 1890’s claim to possess the inherent qualities required to perpetuate Western Civilization. Nativists held those groups in contempt for “alien ways of life”, yet by the power of “magic dirt”, those groups have transformed themselves into one of the natives.

    Again, I will make it loud and clear for you–only those of stout Anglo-Saxon heritage served as the conduit to Western Civilization superiority and American exceptionalism. Do you really think the British desired to have their culture being watered down by immigrants of notoriously questionable character, that being light-skinned Irish, fair-weathered Germans, and swarthy Poles and Italians?

    Yet, the damndest thing is that the English are but a combination of motley collection of Angles, Saxons, Celts, Jutes, Britons, and Normans. So perhaps Vox Day, when taking into account this fact, is overstating his case…

    Read More
    • Replies: @ben tillman

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear–specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals.
     
    Germans invented "Anglo-Saxon [political] ideals", so that is a ludicrous claim.
    , @Anon

    Your boy toy
     
    Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  228. @Anonymous
    I'm all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission. No German '48ers, Jews or other 19th-century latecomers need apply. A big downside is I think we would get stuck with Lindsey Graham.

    I’m all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission.

    I’ve often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a “livre d’or” like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants.

    The old constitution of Virginia, which prevailed in the time of Jefferson, restricted the franchise to freeholders, but made an exception to this for all veterans of the Revolution and their descendants, who were entitled to the franchise regardless of the property qualification. I think they had the right idea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I’ve often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a “livre d’or” like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants."

    Because that would have run completely counter to what they were fighting for--liberty for themselves and their posterity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. @Corvinus
    "It’s actually much more specific than that. “E pluribus unum” was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It’s become the most overworked phrase since, “All men are created equal.”

    Context in the time period, my friend. People make countries through ideas. Those ideas are transferable and malleable. That nation-state could now make its own decisions as to who would be part of its political and cultural landscape.

    "I’ve never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea?"

    The idea shared by the people of America by way of the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which are universal concepts.

    When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you’re near 90% white you don’t have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing."

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear--specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals. Yet, those same people whose ancestors had been deemed “unfit” for American inclusion by nativists in the 1850’s and 1890’s claim to possess the inherent qualities required to perpetuate Western Civilization. Nativists held those groups in contempt for “alien ways of life”, yet by the power of "magic dirt", those groups have transformed themselves into one of the natives.

    Again, I will make it loud and clear for you--only those of stout Anglo-Saxon heritage served as the conduit to Western Civilization superiority and American exceptionalism. Do you really think the British desired to have their culture being watered down by immigrants of notoriously questionable character, that being light-skinned Irish, fair-weathered Germans, and swarthy Poles and Italians?

    Yet, the damndest thing is that the English are but a combination of motley collection of Angles, Saxons, Celts, Jutes, Britons, and Normans. So perhaps Vox Day, when taking into account this fact, is overstating his case...

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear–specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals.

    Germans invented “Anglo-Saxon [political] ideals”, so that is a ludicrous claim.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "It’s actually much more specific than that. “E pluribus unum” was a reference to the thirteen colonies uniting to form a single nation-state. It’s become the most overworked phrase since, “All men are created equal.”

    Context in the time period, my friend. People make countries through ideas. Those ideas are transferable and malleable. That nation-state could now make its own decisions as to who would be part of its political and cultural landscape.

    "I’ve never gotten a good answer on this. America is an idea? Whose idea?"

    The idea shared by the people of America by way of the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, which are universal concepts.

    When you no longer hold the idea do we revoke your America-card? When you’re near 90% white you don’t have to think too critically about this. At 64% and dropping, the fault lines are showing."

    The fault lines showed ever since the non-British came to our country. Your boy toy Vox Day made it clear--specific Europeans, most notably the Germans, the Irish, the Italians, and the Polish, lacked the ability to comprehend and put into practice Anglo-Saxon ideals. Yet, those same people whose ancestors had been deemed “unfit” for American inclusion by nativists in the 1850’s and 1890’s claim to possess the inherent qualities required to perpetuate Western Civilization. Nativists held those groups in contempt for “alien ways of life”, yet by the power of "magic dirt", those groups have transformed themselves into one of the natives.

    Again, I will make it loud and clear for you--only those of stout Anglo-Saxon heritage served as the conduit to Western Civilization superiority and American exceptionalism. Do you really think the British desired to have their culture being watered down by immigrants of notoriously questionable character, that being light-skinned Irish, fair-weathered Germans, and swarthy Poles and Italians?

    Yet, the damndest thing is that the English are but a combination of motley collection of Angles, Saxons, Celts, Jutes, Britons, and Normans. So perhaps Vox Day, when taking into account this fact, is overstating his case...

    Your boy toy

    Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?"

    Ask for forgiveness for your sins first before castigating others.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. Corvinus says:
    @Anon

    Your boy toy
     
    Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?

    “Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?”

    Ask for forgiveness for your sins first before castigating others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Why don't you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "Banging right along with our non-sarcastic Christianity, eh Corvinus?"

    Ask for forgiveness for your sins first before castigating others.

    Why don’t you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Why don’t you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?"

    Deep down, you know I'm being absolutely sincere. Again, seek forgiveness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. Corvinus says:
    @Anon
    Why don't you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?

    “Why don’t you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?”

    Deep down, you know I’m being absolutely sincere. Again, seek forgiveness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Why should I seek forgiveness for offending you? Are you God, or at what have you taken offense?

    Why are you afraid of being confronted with your own words? Is this a hallmark of sincerity?

    Why don't you answer my questions? Why are you afraid of the truth?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. Corvinus says:
    @Crawfurdmuir

    I’m all for setting aside part of North America for its British heritage population. You have to qualify for admission to DAR, SAR or the United Empire Loyalists to be eligible for admission.
     
    I've often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a "livre d'or" like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants.

    The old constitution of Virginia, which prevailed in the time of Jefferson, restricted the franchise to freeholders, but made an exception to this for all veterans of the Revolution and their descendants, who were entitled to the franchise regardless of the property qualification. I think they had the right idea.

    “I’ve often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a “livre d’or” like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants.”

    Because that would have run completely counter to what they were fighting for–liberty for themselves and their posterity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir

    Because that would have run completely counter to what they were fighting for–liberty for themselves and their posterity.
     
    You make no sense. They and their posterity (i.e., their descendants) had that liberty, and were enfranchised under provisions like the ones I mentioned, as, for example, those of the old constitution of Virginia. And the Revolutionary generation guarded their liberty and their franchise jealously, enshrining severe restrictions on citizenship in early law governing naturalization. The First Congress passed the Act of 1790 confining it to free white persons of good repute. By a revision in 1798, an applicant for citizenship had, in addition to that qualification, to have met a fourteen-year residency requirement.

    Americans of the Revolutionary period simply never foresaw what would become of the country they founded. If they had, they'd have recognized that citizenship and the franchise needed to be put beyond easy manipulation by factions seeking to tip the political balance in their favor by diluting the electorate. It would have been far better to have written restrictions on citizenship into the Constitution itself than to have relied on succeeding generations not to change the sensible provisions of the 1790 and 1798 Acts.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Corvinus
    "Why don’t you follow your own advice? Is it, just possibly, insincere?"

    Deep down, you know I'm being absolutely sincere. Again, seek forgiveness.

    Why should I seek forgiveness for offending you? Are you God, or at what have you taken offense?

    Why are you afraid of being confronted with your own words? Is this a hallmark of sincerity?

    Why don’t you answer my questions? Why are you afraid of the truth?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. lavoisier says: • Website
    @vx37
    There's a much simpler test that I advocate: white boycott of the military, or at least the Army and Marines. Surely they would be improved by Idea Americans, and surely Idea Americans are itching to fight Washington's imperial wars. That last bit is a joke, of course, only stupid white people are dumb enough to itch to fight for a system eager to eliminate them. The Pillsbury Doughboy is self-ovening.

    That last bit is a joke, of course, only stupid white people are dumb enough to itch to fight for a system eager to eliminate them. The Pillsbury Doughboy is self-ovening.

    Wonderful expression.

    When the white man wakes up and stops voluntarily joining the military to serve their masters the Republic will start to recover.

    No more wars for Israel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. @lavoisier

    McCain gets elected because the Boomers in Sun Lakes and Sun City, the CoC Republicans, and the Mormons all vote en bloc for him.
     
    Ok, I get it with the Boomers--early onset dementia--and the CoC Republicans--greed--but what is wrong with the Mormons??

    Is it that magic underwear??

    How do you think Flake got the nod to be the next Senator?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @Corvinus
    "I’ve often thought it was a shame that the Founders did not establish a “livre d’or” like that of the Venetian Republic, in which the names of those who fought for independence were inscribed, and confine the franchise to them and their descendants."

    Because that would have run completely counter to what they were fighting for--liberty for themselves and their posterity.

    Because that would have run completely counter to what they were fighting for–liberty for themselves and their posterity.

    You make no sense. They and their posterity (i.e., their descendants) had that liberty, and were enfranchised under provisions like the ones I mentioned, as, for example, those of the old constitution of Virginia. And the Revolutionary generation guarded their liberty and their franchise jealously, enshrining severe restrictions on citizenship in early law governing naturalization. The First Congress passed the Act of 1790 confining it to free white persons of good repute. By a revision in 1798, an applicant for citizenship had, in addition to that qualification, to have met a fourteen-year residency requirement.

    Americans of the Revolutionary period simply never foresaw what would become of the country they founded. If they had, they’d have recognized that citizenship and the franchise needed to be put beyond easy manipulation by factions seeking to tip the political balance in their favor by diluting the electorate. It would have been far better to have written restrictions on citizenship into the Constitution itself than to have relied on succeeding generations not to change the sensible provisions of the 1790 and 1798 Acts.

    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.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?