The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NR's Demand to "Machine-Gun" Trump "To the Floor" Is Just Metaphorical (I Hope)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From National Review:

It’s Time for an Anti-Trump Manhattan Project

by CHARLES C. W. COOKE

February 24, 2016 4:51 PM

@CHARLESCWCOOKE

… Far from being at the bottom of its fortunes, the GOP is in fact coming to the end of a long, slow, tough effort to rebuild after the disaster of 2008 — an effort that would benefit everybody involved if it could be completed. At present, the party’s primary national problem is that it does not run the White House, and, therefore, cannot overcome the final constitutional hurdle to ushering in significant nationwide change despite its huge power in the House, its small advantage in the Senate, and its considerable presence in the states. If Donald Trump were to be the party’s nominee — and if his being so were to do to both the presidential and down-ballot races what polling suggests it would — this problem would not be solved so much as reset from scratch.

As Avi Woolf pointed out yesterday, far from hastening the advent of real reform, the Trump movement is unconsciously channeling the strategy employed by Peter III in the Seven Years War: Namely, to give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough, and to hand full political control to the enemy as a result.

If the Trump contingent should succeed in this endeavor, the party would not emerge refreshed or improved; it would be summarily returned to where it was languishing back in early 2009. And if that should happen? Well, suffice it to say that it would be an unmitigated, unalloyed, potentially unsalvageable disaster. …

If I sound frightened or eschatological in my tone, that’s because I am …

… Now is the time to throw everything at Trump, and to stop this disaster in its tracks. Will our children wonder why we were so reluctant?

Incidentally, when I say “everything,” I really do mean everything.

Tomorrow night, as they stand on either side of Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz must find their resolve and all-but-machine-gun the man to the floor.

Note to NR readers: Please don’t forget the words “all-but” when you starting obsessing over the need to “machine-gun the man to the floor.” Mr. Cooke is talking about machine-gunning Donald Trump as a metaphor.

Machine-gunning Sadat to the floor, 1981

… Melt down the fences if you have to; we need long-range bombers here. … Why, moreover, are the men in charge of the big guns all-but flirting with the snipers on the other side? …

As of today, that answer is clear: The anti-Trump forces that still make up the majority of the Republican coalition must begin an expedited Manhattan Project, the sole aim of which is to bring down the front-runner piece by unpleasant piece. … Time to go nuclear, chaps.

— Charles C. W. Cooke is a staff writer at National Review.

Please, remember, all the calls for lethal violence against Trump in this essay are just intended as literary devices.

 
Hide 184 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles:

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It’s nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    • Replies: @EriK
    Cooke's voice is like nails on a chalkboard for me. On the other hand I could listen to Derb all day.
    , @Anonymous
    There is definitely a "Charisma Man" effect with how Americans treat people with English accents:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charisma_Man#Concept
    , @dr kill
    I like the way these poseurs always opine in a safe place, safe from depressive realists such as myself who refuse to register in exchange for the right to comment. Thank you Unz and Ace.
    , @Anonymous
    Tom Rogan is another British guy currently at the National Review.

    National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O'Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.
    , @John Derbyshire, @Dirk Dagger
    My Chihuahua accent does me more good with the womens in the English than mi legua materna.
    , @Ragno
    The scarf, the carefully-groomed douchebag beard, the plummy speaking voice.....if ever a man was born to answer to "Benedict Cumberbatch", it is Mr. Cooke.

    His bitterness at Capricious Fate must be all-consuming.
  2. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Manhattan Project was dominated by Jews.

    Btw, there is one way to derail the Trump Express.

    Listen to the People. But GOP puts forth guys like Rubio who only listen to donors.

    GOP and NR talk about ‘conservatism’ but never in relation to the people.
    They practice a kind of closed membership ‘conservatism’ where only think-tank insiders and cucks get to call the shots.

    • Replies: @Drapetomaniac
    Sorry bud, you're not one of the Crony Conservatives.
  3. I think Trump is rather well-armed.

  4. NR don’t write checks your ass can’t cash.

    • Agree: gruff
    • Replies: @Oscar Peterson
    Looks to me that NR is really demanding that others write the checks.
  5. Palin got blasted for putting cross-hairs on Democratic candidates.

    We’ve been told that ‘ugly sentiments” prepared the ground for Kennedy’s assassination.

    But shiite, doesn’t this beat all?

    No one would have said such stuff about Obama.

    But against a nationalist candidate, NR is using murder-metaphor.

    What the cuck!

    PS. They say Trump is vulgar, but NR now gives political commentary like Transformers.

    • Replies: @Jack_Q
    "murder-metaphor"...well worth stealing that

    I could easily see that as a Drudge headline: NR Promotes Murder Metaphor for Trump
  6. Have you seen Cuck Cooke? Trump will be fine.

    • Replies: @Thea
    Someone should make a meme of that smug mug
  7. • Replies: @SFG
    Entertaining, but it does kind of prove Steve's point the right needs better cultural people. ;)
  8. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    Cooke’s voice is like nails on a chalkboard for me. On the other hand I could listen to Derb all day.

  9. Avi Woolf is a israeli who writes for the Times of Israel and Charlie Cooke is a clueless Brit, who are they to tell what Americans should do?

    • Replies: @Wally
    Bingo!

    As if Israel & Britain are well run countries.

    , @Ed
    Avi has become unhinged the last few weeks, ranting & raving about Trump. He unfollowed, then blocked me when I told him to get a grip after Trump's Nevada's win.

    I think he had a breakdown not too long after. He wrote a long post about taking a break from Twitter.
    , @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    Amen. That is the job of a native, like Nikki Haley.
  10. It’s just, erm, dry British humour. Cooke is from England:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/magazine/charles-c-w-cooke-can-fend-for-himself.html

    • Replies: @CK
    The USA is not the "colonies" it hasn't been for two+ centuries yet that is Mr. Leibovitch's formulation for his first question. "Will no one rid me of these troublesome peoples?"
    , @22pp22
    I'm British and I don't want Cooke back. Please send him to a third country - s0mewhere like Lesotho.
  11. I’ve been worried about this kind of eliminationism since about three weeks after Trump announced and he broke through to the top of the polls.

    • Agree: DCThrowback
    • Replies: @disambiguated
    Yes - I'm worried that someone will try something against Trump, and I also worry that his Secret Service detail might not be as effective as they could be . . on purpose. I hope he has serious private security who're in his pay, and that they're routinely re-vetted.
  12. Remember that these are the same neocons who strutted around quoting Caligula’s “let them hate so long as they fear” back when they were at their height in the Bush Jr. era. People with violent and nasty fantasies during both the peaks and valleys of their lives are obviously dangerous and prone to lash out.

    These twerps writing at the NRO are just palace courtiers and gossips but what they say very likely reflects the mood of the folks who pay them.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @rod1963
    I agree.

    If you make a list of the people who hate Trump it's nothing short of amazing.

    The Pope
    The GOP
    The DP
    Obama
    NR
    TNR
    Neo-Cons
    Wall Street titans
    Hedge fund managers
    The Clintons and their murder machine(them I'd watch out for, because both of them face prosecution under Trump should he win).
    Chambers of Commerce
    Club for Growth
    The Davos set

    Although the EU bosses haven't said anything I am sure they are very worried about the political ramifications should Trump win.

    Trump better be very careful who he chooses as a VP, if it's a establishment type, it will green light bad things happening to him.

    Trillions are at stake if Trump wins. It's enough to get the wealthy thinking about a black bag operation.
  13. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Cooke has argued in favor of Holocaust denial:

    “Charles C.W. Cooke’s Shameful Screed on Holocaust Denial”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/charles_c_w_cookes_shameful_screed_on_holocaust_denial.html

    With much disgust, I discovered that National Review Online has officially mainstreamed Holocaust denial. By publishing Charles C.W. Cooke’s blog that pronounces that it “is a damn shame” that a California school district caved to pressure and withdrew an assignment requiring students to argue that the Holocaust did not occur, NRO is supporting the dissemination of an unbelievably offensive ideology that was formerly only espoused by psychotic tyrants such as Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    Unlike the vast majority of respected opinions on the subject, Cooke bases his abhorrent position on claims that “There really is no better way of teaching critical thinking” than allowing debate on whether or not the Holocaust in fact occurred.

    • Replies: @SFG
    No, that's not what he said, he said debating it was a way to teach critical thinking.

    I'm not so sure myself--I'd rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways--but that's not what Cooke is saying.
    , @Chuck
    *clutches prayer shawl*
  14. Leftist conservative [AKA "Trump Kills Last Mosquito, Places Tiny Make America Great Hat On ZikaHead Baby"] says: • Website

    a very interesting development very recently in the primaries–on one of the news shows (fox, I think) Ted Cruz came on and was talking to the host (maybe Bill Oreilly, or Hannity, not sure), and was asked whether all the illegals were to be deported.

    Yes, said Cruz. And he would build a wall.

    This statement was a departure from what he had said earlier in debates. But there was something else that was even more important — Cruz said that the illegals were depressing american wages. He said that twice. So evidently he is planning to make this his new tactic–attacking immigration purely on economic grounds. Not that I believe he would actually deport them and build a wall. He is an obvious liar.

    But I am very glad to see that this linking of immigration and wages is coming into play. I really think that if cruz pushes this hard, he will surge in popularity. The linkage of immigration and wages is something the establishment and the media don’t like. I searched google news to see if the media had picked up on the mention of immigrants and wages by cruz. Nope.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    "The linkage of immigration and wages is something the establishment and the media don’t like."

    The .01% (monopolists/rent seekers) hates taxes, regulations, wages and small business. They are constantly working to usurp the sovereignty of nation states so that they can be law givers. This is the thrust of Obama's super secret trade deals. It's feudalism. We have come full circle.
    , @Ragno
    The Best Username....Ever! contest is now officially over.
  15. Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren’t screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little ‘warning’ to straighten up and fly right. You’d think they’d be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It’s more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.

    • Replies: @gruff

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.
     
    You're thinking of the Praetorian Guard, whose emperor-making power was a slightly different matter than that of the legions and more analogous to the Secret Service. In any case power then was based on swords. Even if it were based only on guns today, the Secret Service would be easily destroyed by the many other armed state organizations.
    , @Anonymous

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren’t screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little ‘warning’ to straighten up and fly right. You’d think they’d be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It’s more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.
     

    The guy closest to Trump at all times, even in-between the Secret Service and Trump, is Keith Schiller, who has been Trump's personal bodyguard for 16 years. Schiller's a former NYPD detective.
    , @BenKenobi
    Is that an oblique reference to what Worth said in Cube?
  16. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    There is definitely a “Charisma Man” effect with how Americans treat people with English accents:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charisma_Man#Concept

  17. It’s amazing to me that they haven’t had Rubio disavow amnesty yet. He is dead in the water until he make a credible commitment against it. Instead, he’s going on O’Reilly and still refusing to give straight answers, and vaguely saying that he wants amnesty, but the American People won’t let it happen, so therefore the American People should vote for him.

    Are the donor $$$ that enticing or are the people running Rubio’s campaign just extremely stupid?

    Also noteworthy that NR has had several articles blaming everything under the sun for Trump EXCEPT the gop establishment’s refusal to put forth a credible anti-amnesty candidate.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That would be bad politically. Trump would run with it and make hay out of him being for amnesty and now flip flopping. The best strategy would be to ignore it.
    , @Maj. Kong
    If Conservatism Inc surrendered on amnesty, they would lose their entire reason for existence. The donors are only funding them to be the Judas goat. What we know as the 'conservative movement' today, was largely an effort to marginalize those that were not internationalists on foreign policy. That was the reason Buckley 'purged' the John Birch Society. It is the entire reason why they are angry at Trump.

    The dominant cleavage between us and them is immigration. A Trump victory checkmates the controlled opposition.
    , @Bastion
    They're working feverishly on a firmware update as we speak. Sadly, I don't think it will make it out of QA in time for super Tuesday...
  18. Leftist conservative [AKA "Trump Kills Last Mosquito, Places Tiny Make America Great Hat On ZikaHead Baby"] says: • Website

    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest

    • Replies: @BB753

    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest
     
    Those don't help against rifles or AP ammo.

    Also, aren',t aircraft crashes the traditional way of getting rid of political problems? I recall guy who was supposed to testify because of voting fraud allegations having a crash just before..

    http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/the-mysterious-death-of-bushs
    , @Diversity Heretic
    I hope that he controls his food and water supplies as well--poison was a favorite weapon of the Borgias and it seems the U.S. is on a path to emulating them.
    , @Wilkey
    "BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest"

    Rumor has it he wears bulletproof hair, as well.
  19. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Roger Stone, long time Trump friend and associate and former Trump advisor, who regularly appears on CNN and other major outlets as a pundit, has argued in his books that JFK, RFK, and others were assassinated by insiders, and that the Hinckley shooting of Reagan was an assassination attempt orchestrated by George H.W. Bush:

    http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/01/28/author-roger-stones-latest-conspiracy-theory-george-h-w-bush-behind-reagan-assassination-attempt/

    Depending on who Trump’s VP pick is, it’s possible that he would be taken out after being elected.

    • Replies: @Ed
    One type of VP pick that I've never really liked is the "party unification" pick.

    Pretty much Americans are expected to believe that political assassinations never happen in the US. In other countries, OK. But in the US, its always deranged lone gunmen. Somehow even the Lincoln assassination gets slotted into this, despite the "official" story describing a conspiracy organized by a well-known public figure to not only kill Lincoln, but to decapitate the upper echelon of the federal government, and it happening civil war/ armed insurgency.

    There were eight assassination attempts on US presidents that got as far as gunshots being exchanged. Of these eight attempts:

    1. Three happened after the newly elected President had put his main rival for the party nomination on the ticket as his running mate (FDR, JFK, and Reagan).

    2. A fourth happened after the newly elected President put someone tied to the rival faction in the party on the ticket as his running mate (Garfield), the assassin actually said afterwards that he was trying to make the VP the president and to put his faction in power.

    3. A fifth was after the winning presidential ticket was a national unity ticket, involving a presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate from different parties (Lincoln). These happened a few times in the nineteenth century but are no longer done, for obvious reasons.

    If your are curious, for the other three, two involved what we would now call terrorists (McKinley and Truman), and the eighth actually involved a deranged person associated with the Manson family (Ford).

    Adlai Stevenson and John Kerry survived putting their chief rival for the nomination on the ticket by using the clever technique of losing the election.

    Anyway, given some of the rhetoric we are hearing about Trump, his main priority of his vice presidential pick is to find someone who would pretty much carry out his program if anything happened.

    A few presidents used the tactic of picking a running mate that no one in their right mind would want to see president, but that can cost a lot of votes, and they made Nixon get rid of Agnew before Watergate came to its conclusion.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    the Hinckley shooting of Reagan was an assassination attempt orchestrated by George H.W. Bush:
     
    The Bushes happen to be Hinckley descendants. So it was a cousin thing, I guess.

    But then there's the weird data point that Ronald Wilson's son is Ronald Prescott. Where did that come from?
  20. The sheer hysteria over Trump is a beautiful thing to behold. The US advertises itself overseas as a country where people like him are in abundance. The reality is very different.

    We have two political machines:

    – Repubs: give big business whatever they want. Grind small business, medium business and workers into the dust.
    – Dems: worship and promote any fringe to the point of absurdity. Give big business whatever they want. Grind small business, medium business and workers into the dust.

    There are millions feeding directly off these machines. You are hearing the terror that there is a possibility of democracy breaking out in the US.

  21. Too bad. I usually like Charlie Cooke.

    One of the most depressing things about politics is having to watch people you like and respect make fools of themselves.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Too bad. I usually like Charlie Cooke."

    I don't believe that this wanker is "that" Charlie Cooke.
  22. “the Trump movement is unconsciously channeling the strategy employed by Peter III in the Seven Years War: Namely, to give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough, and to hand full political control to the enemy as a result.”

    Handing full political control to the enemy is the long term strategy of the open borders-GOP establishment.

    • Agree: Chrisnonymous
  23. iSteveFan says:

    the Trump movement is unconsciously channeling the strategy employed by Peter III in the Seven Years War: Namely, to give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough, and to hand full political control to the enemy as a result.

    To give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough sounds a whole lot like what the GOP did when its base gave them huge Congressional victories in 2010 and 2014. Didn’t they just cave and give Obama everything on his budget in exchange for the right of US oil drillers to export American crude?

    Wow, that’s like right out of Jack and the Beanstalk.

    Incidentally the more and more I hear people attacking Trump, from a sitting US president to a sitting Pope, to practically all of my supposed betters on the left and right who have put the USA in the position we find ourselves in today, the more I believe he is the guy.

    • Replies: @Gato de la Biblioteca
    I've got my doubts about Trump being the guy. But I know everyone else isn't, and at least Trump pisses off all the right people, so he's got my vote - if he can survive until November.
  24. Hey Steve, didn’t you use a certain phrase when you referred to that dutch guy a while back? Wasn’t it, “He had it coming…” Let me know if I’m wrong.

    • Replies: @Stacy2355
    If you are referring to Pim Fortuyn you should know that Steve was disapprovingly referencing liberal media pundits who basically said that Fortuyn had it coming. Mr. Fortuyn was assassinated for being an immigration restrictionist.
  25. Wasn’t Charlie Cooke the guy who called Trump a “witless ape” at the beginning of his campaign?

    Oh, no, wait – that was Kevin Williamson.

  26. If having the right enemies made you the good guy, we’d all have to find something nice to say about either Hitler or Stalin.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    Wasn't Stalin the guy the NY Times covered for and told us how great he was during the Holodomor? Wasn't he the one they called 'Uncle Joe'? It seems like Stalin had a lot of friends.
    , @antipater_1
    Hitler loved animals.
  27. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Makes you wonder if NR is holdover KGB operation.

    Does that mean that to be a true Republican, you actually have to be a complete traitor to the USA?

    What is American about American Interest -Last, Forever and Always? The Democrats have that Market all to themselves, I thought, till I read what this guy said.

  28. Tomorrow night, as they stand on either side of Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz must find their resolve and…machine-gun the man to the floor.

    A small ellipsis amends Cooke’s thought to what he obviously meant.

  29. Cruz could metaphorically machine gun the bully-boy Trump to the floor – or could have, it may be too late now – but he seems to think that being “nice” is a virtue in politics, so he probably won’t.

    • Replies: @CK
    You would have to believe that Cruz is smarter and faster on his feet than Trump is. There is no
    evidence to support that belief. Being civilized is a virtue; Trump is Cruz isn't.
  30. @NOTA
    If having the right enemies made you the good guy, we'd all have to find something nice to say about either Hitler or Stalin.

    Wasn’t Stalin the guy the NY Times covered for and told us how great he was during the Holodomor? Wasn’t he the one they called ‘Uncle Joe’? It seems like Stalin had a lot of friends.

  31. @Anon
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcLAZ_9OMFo

    Entertaining, but it does kind of prove Steve’s point the right needs better cultural people. 😉

    • Replies: @Anon
    Isn't the video a parody of Trumpism?
    , @Chrisnonymous
    I kind of teared up at the part with the Bernie FEMA camp fluoridated water sign...
    Only Trump can save us from Soviet death-camp mind-control water...
  32. @Anonymous
    Cooke has argued in favor of Holocaust denial:

    "Charles C.W. Cooke's Shameful Screed on Holocaust Denial"

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/charles_c_w_cookes_shameful_screed_on_holocaust_denial.html

    With much disgust, I discovered that National Review Online has officially mainstreamed Holocaust denial. By publishing Charles C.W. Cooke’s blog that pronounces that it “is a damn shame” that a California school district caved to pressure and withdrew an assignment requiring students to argue that the Holocaust did not occur, NRO is supporting the dissemination of an unbelievably offensive ideology that was formerly only espoused by psychotic tyrants such as Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    Unlike the vast majority of respected opinions on the subject, Cooke bases his abhorrent position on claims that “There really is no better way of teaching critical thinking” than allowing debate on whether or not the Holocaust in fact occurred.
     

    No, that’s not what he said, he said debating it was a way to teach critical thinking.

    I’m not so sure myself–I’d rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways–but that’s not what Cooke is saying.

    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    "I’d rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways"

    So, we should debate everything, except of course where we already know there's no evidence on the other side? I bet you have a pretty long list of those items.
    , @reiner Tor
    There is some evidence the holocaust never took place. It's not very strong evidence, and there's plenty of evidence the holocaust did take place, but if you know enough of an event, any event, you'll be able to argue it never happened. Like, if 99% of the evidence flows in one direction, then if you only know 5 or 20 facts, pretty much all will confirm it, but if you know 300 facts, a few of them will be against it. Also, if you are good enough, you can spin some of the evidence as proving nothing, and some as proving the opposite.

    So I don't think it's a very bad exercise.
  33. @Anonymous
    Roger Stone, long time Trump friend and associate and former Trump advisor, who regularly appears on CNN and other major outlets as a pundit, has argued in his books that JFK, RFK, and others were assassinated by insiders, and that the Hinckley shooting of Reagan was an assassination attempt orchestrated by George H.W. Bush:

    http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/01/28/author-roger-stones-latest-conspiracy-theory-george-h-w-bush-behind-reagan-assassination-attempt/

    Depending on who Trump's VP pick is, it's possible that he would be taken out after being elected.

    One type of VP pick that I’ve never really liked is the “party unification” pick.

    Pretty much Americans are expected to believe that political assassinations never happen in the US. In other countries, OK. But in the US, its always deranged lone gunmen. Somehow even the Lincoln assassination gets slotted into this, despite the “official” story describing a conspiracy organized by a well-known public figure to not only kill Lincoln, but to decapitate the upper echelon of the federal government, and it happening civil war/ armed insurgency.

    There were eight assassination attempts on US presidents that got as far as gunshots being exchanged. Of these eight attempts:

    1. Three happened after the newly elected President had put his main rival for the party nomination on the ticket as his running mate (FDR, JFK, and Reagan).

    2. A fourth happened after the newly elected President put someone tied to the rival faction in the party on the ticket as his running mate (Garfield), the assassin actually said afterwards that he was trying to make the VP the president and to put his faction in power.

    3. A fifth was after the winning presidential ticket was a national unity ticket, involving a presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate from different parties (Lincoln). These happened a few times in the nineteenth century but are no longer done, for obvious reasons.

    If your are curious, for the other three, two involved what we would now call terrorists (McKinley and Truman), and the eighth actually involved a deranged person associated with the Manson family (Ford).

    Adlai Stevenson and John Kerry survived putting their chief rival for the nomination on the ticket by using the clever technique of losing the election.

    Anyway, given some of the rhetoric we are hearing about Trump, his main priority of his vice presidential pick is to find someone who would pretty much carry out his program if anything happened.

    A few presidents used the tactic of picking a running mate that no one in their right mind would want to see president, but that can cost a lot of votes, and they made Nixon get rid of Agnew before Watergate came to its conclusion.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    If Trump wins the primary, he will move towards the center/niceness rhetorically whether his policy positions change or not. Then everyone will sigh a rhetorical sigh of relief and stop calling for "stop by all means". The only question is whether Trump will pick Rubio as his running mate...
    , @antipater_1
    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #1 was by the Manson's Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme. However, she was unable to get a shot off as her gun jammed.

    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #2 was just under 3 weeks later when Sarah Jane Moore tried it. She got one shot off but a bystander hit her arm and the bullet went astray.

    , @Ron Mexico
    What of Jackson's attempt? Opponents of the dismantling of the Bank? The bullets didn't want any part of Ol Hickory, though.
  34. @The Man From J.A.M.E.S.
    It's amazing to me that they haven't had Rubio disavow amnesty yet. He is dead in the water until he make a credible commitment against it. Instead, he's going on O'Reilly and still refusing to give straight answers, and vaguely saying that he wants amnesty, but the American People won't let it happen, so therefore the American People should vote for him.

    Are the donor $$$ that enticing or are the people running Rubio's campaign just extremely stupid?

    Also noteworthy that NR has had several articles blaming everything under the sun for Trump EXCEPT the gop establishment's refusal to put forth a credible anti-amnesty candidate.

    That would be bad politically. Trump would run with it and make hay out of him being for amnesty and now flip flopping. The best strategy would be to ignore it.

  35. The author of this piece is either stupid or thinks his readers are.

    Not one mention of the *immig* term.

    He, and his cohort, think the main problems people have with Republicans now is that they aren’t, what, pro-life enough, pro-gun enough, pro-invade the world enough? Not bold enough in enacting lower capital gains tax rates? Those are the real problems of the Reagan Republicans?

    The question now is will the establishment ever wake up? Can they change, or is it the party, exclusively, of the Chamber of Commerce? And why can’t the voters just keep bending over?

    • Replies: @asdf
    Oops. I stand corrected, somewhat - "before the voters had a chance to stop them, the White House would usher in an irreversible amnesty; and, Trump having been turned into a pariah by a hostile press, his “anti-PC” attitude would be rendered toxic in perpetuity. The likely result of ...

    As if Rubio wasn't part of the amnesty crowd? And as if voting for Rubio or Cruz wasn't a form of PC in itself?

    It isn't planned parenthood and gay marriage that's the problem.
  36. Didn’t NR do a cover piece on Trump a few weeks ago in which all the editorial staff laid out the case against him? They seemed to throw everything at Trump in that issue, yet Trump rolled through February’s primaries/caucuses. What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    If Trump were to win, I do hope he banishes the neocons. They not only stunk up the Bush admin, but they have managed to stay around during Obama too. Besides immigration and trade, if Trump could effectively end the influence of the neocons, he would do this nation a great service.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    The neocons/liberal interventionists make up the entirety of the foreign policy establishment in this country. The small minority are a motely crew of left-leaning 'realists'. There is arguably no organization, intellectuals, etc; that promotes a return to the first principles of our pre-Woodrow Wilson foreign policy.

    It is a sign of the marked decline in neoconservative talent, that a movement that once had many things to say on all sorts of subjects, is reduced to being a hereditary group of shills for the military-industrial complex.
    , @Lugash
    Since present day America doesn't have much industry left, I propose we call it the military-financial complex. Or may foreign adventurism-financial federation.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    I didn't read the anti-Trump special issue, but I assume it fell short of calling for his assassination. BTW, about a week ago my liberal sister-in-law told me Trump should be assassinated. There's a lot of that kind of talk around.
    , @Hapalong Cassidy
    You've touched on the main reason the establishment Republicans are against Trump. Trump said that we should let Putin handle ISIS, and that he could work with Putin. This is 100% at odds with the neocon agenda, and the neocons still control the Republican Party. They would rather see Hillary win than Trump. Hillary would all but certainly be more pro-Israel and anti-Putin than Trunp. I still think the biggest threat to Trump right now is Cruz. The neocons can trust Cruz with their foreign policy agenda, and the big donors might be willing to gamble that once he's in office, he'll cave on immigration (which is far less a likelihood with Trump).
  37. @countenance
    I've been worried about this kind of eliminationism since about three weeks after Trump announced and he broke through to the top of the polls.

    Yes – I’m worried that someone will try something against Trump, and I also worry that his Secret Service detail might not be as effective as they could be . . on purpose. I hope he has serious private security who’re in his pay, and that they’re routinely re-vetted.

    • Replies: @White Guy In Japan
    I assumed Trump had Blackwater mercenaries around him 24/7.

    Plus I imagine him packing a solid gold Desert Eagle.
    , @David In TN
    I read an account of a Trump event last Summer. Trump's private bodyguards were a group of Rob Gronkowski look-a-likes.
  38. @Ed
    One type of VP pick that I've never really liked is the "party unification" pick.

    Pretty much Americans are expected to believe that political assassinations never happen in the US. In other countries, OK. But in the US, its always deranged lone gunmen. Somehow even the Lincoln assassination gets slotted into this, despite the "official" story describing a conspiracy organized by a well-known public figure to not only kill Lincoln, but to decapitate the upper echelon of the federal government, and it happening civil war/ armed insurgency.

    There were eight assassination attempts on US presidents that got as far as gunshots being exchanged. Of these eight attempts:

    1. Three happened after the newly elected President had put his main rival for the party nomination on the ticket as his running mate (FDR, JFK, and Reagan).

    2. A fourth happened after the newly elected President put someone tied to the rival faction in the party on the ticket as his running mate (Garfield), the assassin actually said afterwards that he was trying to make the VP the president and to put his faction in power.

    3. A fifth was after the winning presidential ticket was a national unity ticket, involving a presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate from different parties (Lincoln). These happened a few times in the nineteenth century but are no longer done, for obvious reasons.

    If your are curious, for the other three, two involved what we would now call terrorists (McKinley and Truman), and the eighth actually involved a deranged person associated with the Manson family (Ford).

    Adlai Stevenson and John Kerry survived putting their chief rival for the nomination on the ticket by using the clever technique of losing the election.

    Anyway, given some of the rhetoric we are hearing about Trump, his main priority of his vice presidential pick is to find someone who would pretty much carry out his program if anything happened.

    A few presidents used the tactic of picking a running mate that no one in their right mind would want to see president, but that can cost a lot of votes, and they made Nixon get rid of Agnew before Watergate came to its conclusion.

    If Trump wins the primary, he will move towards the center/niceness rhetorically whether his policy positions change or not. Then everyone will sigh a rhetorical sigh of relief and stop calling for “stop by all means”. The only question is whether Trump will pick Rubio as his running mate…

  39. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    I like the way these poseurs always opine in a safe place, safe from depressive realists such as myself who refuse to register in exchange for the right to comment. Thank you Unz and Ace.

  40. More and more I am thinking of Charles Lindbergh. Brits and Jews against American isolationism and nativism.

  41. @asdf
    The author of this piece is either stupid or thinks his readers are.

    Not one mention of the *immig* term.

    He, and his cohort, think the main problems people have with Republicans now is that they aren't, what, pro-life enough, pro-gun enough, pro-invade the world enough? Not bold enough in enacting lower capital gains tax rates? Those are the real problems of the Reagan Republicans?

    The question now is will the establishment ever wake up? Can they change, or is it the party, exclusively, of the Chamber of Commerce? And why can't the voters just keep bending over?

    Oops. I stand corrected, somewhat – “before the voters had a chance to stop them, the White House would usher in an irreversible amnesty; and, Trump having been turned into a pariah by a hostile press, his “anti-PC” attitude would be rendered toxic in perpetuity. The likely result of …

    As if Rubio wasn’t part of the amnesty crowd? And as if voting for Rubio or Cruz wasn’t a form of PC in itself?

    It isn’t planned parenthood and gay marriage that’s the problem.

  42. @SFG
    Entertaining, but it does kind of prove Steve's point the right needs better cultural people. ;)

    Isn’t the video a parody of Trumpism?

  43. First, most of the “smart” people said this guy couldn’t win.

    A few of us felt otherwise — and said so.

    Now, as we are proven right, they are panicking and scrambling like headless chickens — and threatening him.

    We are laughing at them, and holding our breath, hoping we will be allowed to elect our leader this time.

    1) Unbalanced foreign trade needs to stop, so Americans can get their jobs and productive capacity back.

    2) We have to take ownership of our country, by deciding who gets in, and by ending the destruction of the aforementioned labor force that is caused by unchecked importation of cheap workers.

    3) We must exercise our right to free speech, even though some of what we say may offend the political left (or right, or powers that be) and the collective insistence on “correctness.”

    We have one candidate who assertively addresses these three major concerns, which basically amount to taking our country back.

  44. @Anonymous
    It's just, erm, dry British humour. Cooke is from England:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/magazine/charles-c-w-cooke-can-fend-for-himself.html

    The USA is not the “colonies” it hasn’t been for two+ centuries yet that is Mr. Leibovitch’s formulation for his first question. “Will no one rid me of these troublesome peoples?”

  45. What happened to National Review? It’s in complete meltdown.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Some people with common sense were purged in the 1990s.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    I suggest Trump buy National Review and put it out of its misery.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Some people with common sense were purged in the 2000s. Coulter, Derb, Steyn.
  46. @SFG
    Entertaining, but it does kind of prove Steve's point the right needs better cultural people. ;)

    I kind of teared up at the part with the Bernie FEMA camp fluoridated water sign…
    Only Trump can save us from Soviet death-camp mind-control water…

  47. @Anon
    Manhattan Project was dominated by Jews.

    Btw, there is one way to derail the Trump Express.

    Listen to the People. But GOP puts forth guys like Rubio who only listen to donors.

    GOP and NR talk about 'conservatism' but never in relation to the people.
    They practice a kind of closed membership 'conservatism' where only think-tank insiders and cucks get to call the shots.

    Sorry bud, you’re not one of the Crony Conservatives.

  48. @The Man From J.A.M.E.S.
    It's amazing to me that they haven't had Rubio disavow amnesty yet. He is dead in the water until he make a credible commitment against it. Instead, he's going on O'Reilly and still refusing to give straight answers, and vaguely saying that he wants amnesty, but the American People won't let it happen, so therefore the American People should vote for him.

    Are the donor $$$ that enticing or are the people running Rubio's campaign just extremely stupid?

    Also noteworthy that NR has had several articles blaming everything under the sun for Trump EXCEPT the gop establishment's refusal to put forth a credible anti-amnesty candidate.

    If Conservatism Inc surrendered on amnesty, they would lose their entire reason for existence. The donors are only funding them to be the Judas goat. What we know as the ‘conservative movement’ today, was largely an effort to marginalize those that were not internationalists on foreign policy. That was the reason Buckley ‘purged’ the John Birch Society. It is the entire reason why they are angry at Trump.

    The dominant cleavage between us and them is immigration. A Trump victory checkmates the controlled opposition.

  49. @Brett_McS
    Cruz could metaphorically machine gun the bully-boy Trump to the floor - or could have, it may be too late now - but he seems to think that being "nice" is a virtue in politics, so he probably won't.

    You would have to believe that Cruz is smarter and faster on his feet than Trump is. There is no
    evidence to support that belief. Being civilized is a virtue; Trump is Cruz isn’t.

  50. Far from being at the bottom of its fortunes, the GOP is in fact coming to the end of a long, slow, tough effort to rebuild after the disaster of 2008

    Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.

    • Replies: @asdf
    I don't disagree with you myself, but I think it's more like it took years for the W Bush legacy to become clear. I don't even think it was 2008, I think it was 2012 when it became the turning point that led us here.

    Just speculating. No claims to be a pundit, though this buffoon shouldn't either.
    , @antipater_1
    "Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008."
    That's strange. I seem to remember a near economic collapse in 2008 under GW Bush.
    , @Wilkey
    "Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008."

    Yeah, saying that 2008 was the disaster (he's referring to the elections, I presume) is to pretend that we didn't arrive at 2008 for a reason. We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years - the pointless wars, the flood of illegals, the housing bubble, the rapidly expanding government bureaucracy, and all the rest. Prior to Bush's 8 years no one was talking about how insanely wealthy and powerful the D.C. area was growing. Today D.C. metro ranks up there with Silicon Valley and NYC, and has almost certainly surpassed Chicago.

    If you were to try to fix the point in time at which American politics finally went off the rails, became brazenly about Wall Street instead of Main Street, and fully embraced the post-American/anti-white middle class agenda, it would be some time during Bush's tenure. Clinton was almost there, and was pushing the Democratic Party in that direction. Obama was that ideology's full realization.

    Bush was something even worse than Clinton or Obama: he was the complete abandonment of any attempt to fight that ideology. Bush surrendered, and his men seem to have convinced every other leading Republican to surrender, as well. Prior to Bush there were large numbers of Republican pols, up to and including party leaders, who were willing to embrace the white middle class, oppose political correctness, and all the rest. From Bush onwards all that opposition has had to come from the outside (hence the Tea Party), from the lower rungs of the party, or from pols treated as outsiders (Jeff Sessions, Tom Tancredo, etc.)

    I can still remember Bush's spokesman responding to the GOP defeat in the 2006 elections. He was all but dancing on their graves. One of the first things he noted was that it increased the chances of passing an amnesty bill.

    Obama happened because of Bush. Not just because of the war and the financial crisis. He happened because Republicans had spent eight years refusing to fight the ideological radicalization Obama represented.

    It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again.
  51. @iSteveFan
    Didn't NR do a cover piece on Trump a few weeks ago in which all the editorial staff laid out the case against him? They seemed to throw everything at Trump in that issue, yet Trump rolled through February's primaries/caucuses. What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    If Trump were to win, I do hope he banishes the neocons. They not only stunk up the Bush admin, but they have managed to stay around during Obama too. Besides immigration and trade, if Trump could effectively end the influence of the neocons, he would do this nation a great service.

    The neocons/liberal interventionists make up the entirety of the foreign policy establishment in this country. The small minority are a motely crew of left-leaning ‘realists’. There is arguably no organization, intellectuals, etc; that promotes a return to the first principles of our pre-Woodrow Wilson foreign policy.

    It is a sign of the marked decline in neoconservative talent, that a movement that once had many things to say on all sorts of subjects, is reduced to being a hereditary group of shills for the military-industrial complex.

  52. @Grumpy
    What happened to National Review? It's in complete meltdown.

    Some people with common sense were purged in the 1990s.

  53. I find myself wondering what these NR conservatives can really mean at this point when they talk about “stopping Trump.” I simply can’t believe that they are so delusional that at this stage of the game they don’t realize that Trump isn’t going to be stopped from getting the Republican nomination.

    So what they really want him to be stopped from seems obvious: winning the general.

    And, though they would never acknowledge that goal, it’s also obvious enough why they would seek it. If he loses in the general, then what he represents likely ends with him — he becomes a cautionary tale about rocking the boat they command. If he wins, then it is they who go into the drink.

  54. @melendwyr
    Didn't Trump get assigned a mandatory 'protective' squad of Secret Service agents? I've always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who's going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren't screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little 'warning' to straighten up and fly right. You'd think they'd be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It's more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.

    You’re thinking of the Praetorian Guard, whose emperor-making power was a slightly different matter than that of the legions and more analogous to the Secret Service. In any case power then was based on swords. Even if it were based only on guns today, the Secret Service would be easily destroyed by the many other armed state organizations.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Yes, the Secret Service is more analogous to the Praetorian. The legions did put the Praetorian in its place many times, however. See Septimius Severus, for example.
    , @melendwyr
    I'm not so much thinking of raw power - even if the Secret Service is genuinely elite they'd be wildly outnumbered - as having direct access to the families of major politicians.

    Even then, it's mostly a joke, of course. But I remember several years ago someone making a joke that new Presidents became political conformists so rapidly once elected that it was as if they were taken into a room in the White House and shown a filmstrip about what would happen to them if they didn't toe the line.

    I took it as a complete joke at the time. I mostly take it so, now... but I have to wonder.
  55. @Bill

    Far from being at the bottom of its fortunes, the GOP is in fact coming to the end of a long, slow, tough effort to rebuild after the disaster of 2008
     
    Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.

    I don’t disagree with you myself, but I think it’s more like it took years for the W Bush legacy to become clear. I don’t even think it was 2008, I think it was 2012 when it became the turning point that led us here.

    Just speculating. No claims to be a pundit, though this buffoon shouldn’t either.

  56. @Anonymous
    Roger Stone, long time Trump friend and associate and former Trump advisor, who regularly appears on CNN and other major outlets as a pundit, has argued in his books that JFK, RFK, and others were assassinated by insiders, and that the Hinckley shooting of Reagan was an assassination attempt orchestrated by George H.W. Bush:

    http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/01/28/author-roger-stones-latest-conspiracy-theory-george-h-w-bush-behind-reagan-assassination-attempt/

    Depending on who Trump's VP pick is, it's possible that he would be taken out after being elected.

    the Hinckley shooting of Reagan was an assassination attempt orchestrated by George H.W. Bush:

    The Bushes happen to be Hinckley descendants. So it was a cousin thing, I guess.

    But then there’s the weird data point that Ronald Wilson’s son is Ronald Prescott. Where did that come from?

  57. Is there an emoticon for responding to Mr. Cooke that expresses: I know you’re a paid liar and nothing you’ve been written about over the last decade has had any resemblance to reality and you are slightly less relevant to a thinking person’s discussion than Tom Friedman?

    Because that would save me a lot of time thinking and writing every time I see a NR article. Maybe just a “404” for the missing WMD?

  58. @Leftist conservative
    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest

    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest

    Those don’t help against rifles or AP ammo.

    Also, aren’,t aircraft crashes the traditional way of getting rid of political problems? I recall guy who was supposed to testify because of voting fraud allegations having a crash just before..

    http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/the-mysterious-death-of-bushs

  59. Twitter famously banned Chuck Johnson for tweeting about “taking out” Deray Mckesson. I wonder if they’ll exile Cooke for advocating “machine gunning”.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I know this sounds totally mom-ish, but having just driven past Newtown, what in the world are Trump-haters thinking with "machine gunning someone to the floor???" Lanza did just that, but to 20 small kids and 6 teachers.

    There's weird "death wish," talk, lately. The intense hatred over Trump is grotesque, suddenly...the ones who I know support him just stay mum.

    But, civilized people need to stop using words like machine-gun-the-man; bombing, blasting (heard decapitating Trump, hah, of all things! - yesterday, on NPR...some GOP guy; I was painting ferociously, so, sorry, spaced on the name) - show was on NPR @around 5:30pm EST.

    This is all very psychopathic (or creepy)....especially when these same people suggest that all Trump supporters are losers, bigots, dummies, trailer trash, crazy, meth-addled., etc.

    Lastly, the two parties have continually presented unappealing candidates for almost 2 decades. So, Dems and Repubs need to find better candidates, duh...Trump's appeal to American people can not be violently wished away, and heavens, plotted away will really destroy the country.

  60. So the problem to the cucks isn’t that they abandoned the populace’s demands in favor of policies that disintegrated the nation, destroyed democracy, and favored only the wealthied elite…

    it’s that Trump must be eliminated.

    Perhaps they can do it on the Ides of March on the Senate floor.

  61. I remember Sarah Palin being condemned for using targets on congressional districts or something when Gabbie Giffords was shot. Some of those condemnations came from NPR.

    As for nuking Trump, he’s been attacked by the president, by his own party in its state of the union response (supposedly to be used to rebut the president), the pope, UK’s parliament–does he really think Cruz and Rubio doubling-down is going to do the trick? If anything, that tact will probably just help Trump by pushing some of Cruz’s anti-establishment support Trump’s way when Cruz drops out.

    • Replies: @TangoMan
    Republicans are their own worst enemy. Today Romney came out firing at Trump about Trump not releasing his tax returns and his comment was full of innuendo, exactly the tactic that Harry Reid used against Romney.

    How did the Clintons earn a $100 million fortune? Romney is firing at Trump when he should be firing at the sources of Clinton income. Everyone knows that the Clintons earned their fortune through graft, through selling influence, but no, let the Clintons off the hook and fire at Trump and insinuate that there is skulduggery afoot.
  62. @gruff

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.
     
    You're thinking of the Praetorian Guard, whose emperor-making power was a slightly different matter than that of the legions and more analogous to the Secret Service. In any case power then was based on swords. Even if it were based only on guns today, the Secret Service would be easily destroyed by the many other armed state organizations.

    Yes, the Secret Service is more analogous to the Praetorian. The legions did put the Praetorian in its place many times, however. See Septimius Severus, for example.

  63. @iSteveFan
    Didn't NR do a cover piece on Trump a few weeks ago in which all the editorial staff laid out the case against him? They seemed to throw everything at Trump in that issue, yet Trump rolled through February's primaries/caucuses. What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    If Trump were to win, I do hope he banishes the neocons. They not only stunk up the Bush admin, but they have managed to stay around during Obama too. Besides immigration and trade, if Trump could effectively end the influence of the neocons, he would do this nation a great service.

    Since present day America doesn’t have much industry left, I propose we call it the military-financial complex. Or may foreign adventurism-financial federation.

    • Replies: @Wes Banks
    It's the military-financial-media/entertainment complex
  64. @NOTA
    If having the right enemies made you the good guy, we'd all have to find something nice to say about either Hitler or Stalin.

    Hitler loved animals.

  65. It’s definitely incitement.

  66. @Cagey Beast
    Remember that these are the same neocons who strutted around quoting Caligula's "let them hate so long as they fear" back when they were at their height in the Bush Jr. era. People with violent and nasty fantasies during both the peaks and valleys of their lives are obviously dangerous and prone to lash out.

    These twerps writing at the NRO are just palace courtiers and gossips but what they say very likely reflects the mood of the folks who pay them.

    I agree.

    If you make a list of the people who hate Trump it’s nothing short of amazing.

    The Pope
    The GOP
    The DP
    Obama
    NR
    TNR
    Neo-Cons
    Wall Street titans
    Hedge fund managers
    The Clintons and their murder machine(them I’d watch out for, because both of them face prosecution under Trump should he win).
    Chambers of Commerce
    Club for Growth
    The Davos set

    Although the EU bosses haven’t said anything I am sure they are very worried about the political ramifications should Trump win.

    Trump better be very careful who he chooses as a VP, if it’s a establishment type, it will green light bad things happening to him.

    Trillions are at stake if Trump wins. It’s enough to get the wealthy thinking about a black bag operation.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    Add the Washington Post, Huffington Post and Vincente Fox to your list. Be prepared to make daily edits as the hysteria spreads.
    , @Olorin
    Trump is just a stand-in for their real hatred: rank and file Americans and Europeans who, for the past century-plus, have resisted the increasingly globalized and granular reach of central banking and its chosen elites, and their errand boys.
  67. @Ed
    One type of VP pick that I've never really liked is the "party unification" pick.

    Pretty much Americans are expected to believe that political assassinations never happen in the US. In other countries, OK. But in the US, its always deranged lone gunmen. Somehow even the Lincoln assassination gets slotted into this, despite the "official" story describing a conspiracy organized by a well-known public figure to not only kill Lincoln, but to decapitate the upper echelon of the federal government, and it happening civil war/ armed insurgency.

    There were eight assassination attempts on US presidents that got as far as gunshots being exchanged. Of these eight attempts:

    1. Three happened after the newly elected President had put his main rival for the party nomination on the ticket as his running mate (FDR, JFK, and Reagan).

    2. A fourth happened after the newly elected President put someone tied to the rival faction in the party on the ticket as his running mate (Garfield), the assassin actually said afterwards that he was trying to make the VP the president and to put his faction in power.

    3. A fifth was after the winning presidential ticket was a national unity ticket, involving a presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate from different parties (Lincoln). These happened a few times in the nineteenth century but are no longer done, for obvious reasons.

    If your are curious, for the other three, two involved what we would now call terrorists (McKinley and Truman), and the eighth actually involved a deranged person associated with the Manson family (Ford).

    Adlai Stevenson and John Kerry survived putting their chief rival for the nomination on the ticket by using the clever technique of losing the election.

    Anyway, given some of the rhetoric we are hearing about Trump, his main priority of his vice presidential pick is to find someone who would pretty much carry out his program if anything happened.

    A few presidents used the tactic of picking a running mate that no one in their right mind would want to see president, but that can cost a lot of votes, and they made Nixon get rid of Agnew before Watergate came to its conclusion.

    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #1 was by the Manson’s Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme. However, she was unable to get a shot off as her gun jammed.

    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #2 was just under 3 weeks later when Sarah Jane Moore tried it. She got one shot off but a bystander hit her arm and the bullet went astray.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Charlie should have known better than to send a woman to do a man's job.
  68. I was thinking of General Mattis for Trump’s running mate, and then Duncan D. Hunter endorsed Trump, and I realized he’s the one. Google him. He looks like the guy who’d carry out Trump’s program, all right, AND he has military and political cred.

  69. @Bill

    Far from being at the bottom of its fortunes, the GOP is in fact coming to the end of a long, slow, tough effort to rebuild after the disaster of 2008
     
    Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.

    “Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.”
    That’s strange. I seem to remember a near economic collapse in 2008 under GW Bush.

  70. @Danindc
    Have you seen Cuck Cooke? Trump will be fine.

    http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/related_charles-cw-cooke_gd_150902.jpg

    Someone should make a meme of that smug mug

  71. I’m most fearful that the same pundits who argued that Trump will never win are finally saying his nomination is inevitable. Makes me think this dream will end soon. These hacks are so awful that I’d go through my meager savings on hookers right now if they said the sun will rise tomorrow.

  72. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @melendwyr
    Didn't Trump get assigned a mandatory 'protective' squad of Secret Service agents? I've always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who's going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren't screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little 'warning' to straighten up and fly right. You'd think they'd be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It's more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren’t screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little ‘warning’ to straighten up and fly right. You’d think they’d be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It’s more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.

    The guy closest to Trump at all times, even in-between the Secret Service and Trump, is Keith Schiller, who has been Trump’s personal bodyguard for 16 years. Schiller’s a former NYPD detective.

  73. @iSteveFan
    Didn't NR do a cover piece on Trump a few weeks ago in which all the editorial staff laid out the case against him? They seemed to throw everything at Trump in that issue, yet Trump rolled through February's primaries/caucuses. What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    If Trump were to win, I do hope he banishes the neocons. They not only stunk up the Bush admin, but they have managed to stay around during Obama too. Besides immigration and trade, if Trump could effectively end the influence of the neocons, he would do this nation a great service.

    What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    I didn’t read the anti-Trump special issue, but I assume it fell short of calling for his assassination. BTW, about a week ago my liberal sister-in-law told me Trump should be assassinated. There’s a lot of that kind of talk around.

    • Replies: @Wally
    Did this sister-in-law say why and by who?
    , @travel lyte
    I've said it elsewhere (Taki), Trump needs to name Ann Coulter as his
    running mate now for his own safety. Ann could also get secret service
    protection free. Bonus.
  74. @Grumpy
    What happened to National Review? It's in complete meltdown.

    I suggest Trump buy National Review and put it out of its misery.

  75. @Anonymous
    Avi Woolf is a israeli who writes for the Times of Israel and Charlie Cooke is a clueless Brit, who are they to tell what Americans should do?

    Bingo!

    As if Israel & Britain are well run countries.

  76. @The Man From J.A.M.E.S.
    It's amazing to me that they haven't had Rubio disavow amnesty yet. He is dead in the water until he make a credible commitment against it. Instead, he's going on O'Reilly and still refusing to give straight answers, and vaguely saying that he wants amnesty, but the American People won't let it happen, so therefore the American People should vote for him.

    Are the donor $$$ that enticing or are the people running Rubio's campaign just extremely stupid?

    Also noteworthy that NR has had several articles blaming everything under the sun for Trump EXCEPT the gop establishment's refusal to put forth a credible anti-amnesty candidate.

    They’re working feverishly on a firmware update as we speak. Sadly, I don’t think it will make it out of QA in time for super Tuesday…

  77. @Harry Baldwin
    What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    I didn't read the anti-Trump special issue, but I assume it fell short of calling for his assassination. BTW, about a week ago my liberal sister-in-law told me Trump should be assassinated. There's a lot of that kind of talk around.

    Did this sister-in-law say why and by who?

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    I just told her to STFU with that kind of talk in my house. I feel comfortable yelling at her because she has an abusive husband so it rolls off her like water off a duck's back. She's a nice enough person, just a typical liberal ditz. Wouldn't really assassinate anyone--doesn't even own a scoped rifle. Loves the immigrants. My elderly mother-in-law is being cared for by family friends who are paid for their work, but my sister-in-law thinks Visiting Angels should be brought in. Why? Because "They hire Africans and we have to support the immigrants!"

    That's what we're dealing with around here.
  78. @Audacious Epigone
    I remember Sarah Palin being condemned for using targets on congressional districts or something when Gabbie Giffords was shot. Some of those condemnations came from NPR.

    As for nuking Trump, he's been attacked by the president, by his own party in its state of the union response (supposedly to be used to rebut the president), the pope, UK's parliament--does he really think Cruz and Rubio doubling-down is going to do the trick? If anything, that tact will probably just help Trump by pushing some of Cruz's anti-establishment support Trump's way when Cruz drops out.

    Republicans are their own worst enemy. Today Romney came out firing at Trump about Trump not releasing his tax returns and his comment was full of innuendo, exactly the tactic that Harry Reid used against Romney.

    How did the Clintons earn a $100 million fortune? Romney is firing at Trump when he should be firing at the sources of Clinton income. Everyone knows that the Clintons earned their fortune through graft, through selling influence, but no, let the Clintons off the hook and fire at Trump and insinuate that there is skulduggery afoot.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    I used to think Romney was a decent guy, if an inept politician, but I've lost all respect for him. A year or two ago he actually said Obama's amnesty didn't go far enough--this from the guy who pretended to be the hardliner on immigration.

    Harry Reid struck a low blow when he claimed Romney hadn't paid taxes., based on no evidence. Dingy Harry just wanted to plant the thought. So what does the fine upstanding Mormon do? He says there's a bombshell in Trump's taxes, based on no evidence. Just wants to get the idea out there. Romney, you are a contemptible loser. Just go away.
    , @Anon
    Something tells me that very few establishment Republicans will be getting jobs in the Trump administration, and it's going to be entirely their own fault for burning bridges with Trump in the stupidest way possible before the election.

    I really can't believe they're that paranoid about Trump. Honestly, it's ridiculous. The Republican establishment is more afraid of what a long-time businessman will do to the country than screechy socialist nutjobs like Hillary or Bernie, despite their lack of even the vaguest grasp of economic math.
  79. @Cracker
    Hey Steve, didn't you use a certain phrase when you referred to that dutch guy a while back? Wasn't it, "He had it coming..." Let me know if I'm wrong.

    If you are referring to Pim Fortuyn you should know that Steve was disapprovingly referencing liberal media pundits who basically said that Fortuyn had it coming. Mr. Fortuyn was assassinated for being an immigration restrictionist.

  80. @disambiguated
    Yes - I'm worried that someone will try something against Trump, and I also worry that his Secret Service detail might not be as effective as they could be . . on purpose. I hope he has serious private security who're in his pay, and that they're routinely re-vetted.

    I assumed Trump had Blackwater mercenaries around him 24/7.

    Plus I imagine him packing a solid gold Desert Eagle.

  81. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    Tom Rogan is another British guy currently at the National Review.

    National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O’Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.

    • Replies: @Chiron
    Also israelis like Yuval Dayan, maybe Saker is right about the AngloZionist Empire.
    , @The Z Blog
    What's hilarious about Rogan is he plays the role of international security expert on TV and on-line. I guess the high collars and James Bond accent is what sells it. In reality, his only job out of college, other than gadfly, was as a part-time security guard at Wimbledon. No kidding. He was a mall cop in college and now he plays the role of international security expert.

    That was another gag I used to enjoy at NR. In the comments of his articles, I'd post his resume. I stopped seeing his articles after a while so I assumed they got tired of me making sport of him.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O’Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR."

    They don't now.
  82. @Mr. Blank
    Too bad. I usually like Charlie Cooke.

    One of the most depressing things about politics is having to watch people you like and respect make fools of themselves.

    “Too bad. I usually like Charlie Cooke.”

    I don’t believe that this wanker is “that” Charlie Cooke.

  83. @Lugash
    Since present day America doesn't have much industry left, I propose we call it the military-financial complex. Or may foreign adventurism-financial federation.

    It’s the military-financial-media/entertainment complex

  84. @TangoMan
    Republicans are their own worst enemy. Today Romney came out firing at Trump about Trump not releasing his tax returns and his comment was full of innuendo, exactly the tactic that Harry Reid used against Romney.

    How did the Clintons earn a $100 million fortune? Romney is firing at Trump when he should be firing at the sources of Clinton income. Everyone knows that the Clintons earned their fortune through graft, through selling influence, but no, let the Clintons off the hook and fire at Trump and insinuate that there is skulduggery afoot.

    I used to think Romney was a decent guy, if an inept politician, but I’ve lost all respect for him. A year or two ago he actually said Obama’s amnesty didn’t go far enough–this from the guy who pretended to be the hardliner on immigration.

    Harry Reid struck a low blow when he claimed Romney hadn’t paid taxes., based on no evidence. Dingy Harry just wanted to plant the thought. So what does the fine upstanding Mormon do? He says there’s a bombshell in Trump’s taxes, based on no evidence. Just wants to get the idea out there. Romney, you are a contemptible loser. Just go away.

    • Replies: @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    Romney is a Mormon as is Glenn Beck who is calling true Hitler a Nazi, a Goebbels, a guy who is training brown shirts etc.

    Maybe Beck is influencing Romney; after all, Beck says God talks to him....
  85. @Wally
    Did this sister-in-law say why and by who?

    I just told her to STFU with that kind of talk in my house. I feel comfortable yelling at her because she has an abusive husband so it rolls off her like water off a duck’s back. She’s a nice enough person, just a typical liberal ditz. Wouldn’t really assassinate anyone–doesn’t even own a scoped rifle. Loves the immigrants. My elderly mother-in-law is being cared for by family friends who are paid for their work, but my sister-in-law thinks Visiting Angels should be brought in. Why? Because “They hire Africans and we have to support the immigrants!”

    That’s what we’re dealing with around here.

  86. The National Review goes from having the English/Canadian immigrant patriots of Derbyshire, Brimelow, O’Sullivan, and Steyn to the millennial hacks Tom Rogan and Charles Cooke. My God have they fallen.

    • Replies: @fnn
    Steyn has apparently been blacklisted by American TV;
    http://www.steynonline.com/7479/nitwits-of-the-round-table

    Some American readers, observing the wide range of telly shows I've been doing in Australia, have written to ask why I'm not on US TV more. Well, the short answer is I never get asked. The phone never stops not ringing.
     
  87. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @TangoMan
    Republicans are their own worst enemy. Today Romney came out firing at Trump about Trump not releasing his tax returns and his comment was full of innuendo, exactly the tactic that Harry Reid used against Romney.

    How did the Clintons earn a $100 million fortune? Romney is firing at Trump when he should be firing at the sources of Clinton income. Everyone knows that the Clintons earned their fortune through graft, through selling influence, but no, let the Clintons off the hook and fire at Trump and insinuate that there is skulduggery afoot.

    Something tells me that very few establishment Republicans will be getting jobs in the Trump administration, and it’s going to be entirely their own fault for burning bridges with Trump in the stupidest way possible before the election.

    I really can’t believe they’re that paranoid about Trump. Honestly, it’s ridiculous. The Republican establishment is more afraid of what a long-time businessman will do to the country than screechy socialist nutjobs like Hillary or Bernie, despite their lack of even the vaguest grasp of economic math.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    You've put your finger on it precisely:

    "Something tells me that very few establishment Republicans will be getting jobs in the Trump administration"

    This is why people put their weight behind this or that candidate: with an eye to future job prospects.

    Hebb's, what, $140 million? What did that buy? Professional services. Those "professionals" all keep each others' bread buttered worldwide.

    Trump is so far outside all of that, all they can do is screech.

    Interestingly, re: your "burning bridges" comment, back in 1990, when DJT was interviewed in Playboy, he spoke of how important he considered loyalty.

    Check it out:

    https://thecorporateculture.com/2015/playboy-interviewed-donald-trump-25-years-ago/

    He also manifest quite a clear understanding of the genetics of success.
  88. @Anonymous
    Tom Rogan is another British guy currently at the National Review.

    National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O'Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.

    Also israelis like Yuval Dayan, maybe Saker is right about the AngloZionist Empire.

  89. The Establishment Conservatives really are as bad as the Democrats, maybe even worse since they cloaked themselves as traditionalists for years while undermining American society with great vigor. I knew NR sold out years ago, but the open sense of hostility they hold towards Trump’s Nationalist platform tells you all you need about just how far the rot has set in. The chances of Trump becoming an American Pim Fortuyn are regrettably high. You could sense the change in the air after South Carolina, and the win in Nevada is fanning it. The party elders simply cannot accept that this is spinning out of their control. I don’t think violence is their first choice in these matters but if pressed hard enough they will set something or someone up.

    They can’t put the genie back in the bottle though. Trump may win or he may lose or even die but the feelings he has tapped into are not going away. If the Republican Establishment had any sense they would try to channel that now for their own benefit, but I’m convinced that all but a handful are either true believers in the Neo-Liberal order or greedy frauds willing to work with said order to get short-term profit. They will try to kneecap Trump every step of the way and the dissonance with their voting base is going to become starker with each passing day.

  90. So we are “to give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough, and to hand full political control to the enemy as a result.”

    This is exactly the problem to which Mr. Cooke is so laughably blind. We were promised our “big breakthroughs” in 1994, 2000, and 2014. And the establishment has done nothing in that time to secure or borders, challenge (more recently) Obama’s socialist overreach, or control the budget.

    The Republican voter has long been Charlie Brown chasing the football. We know full-well that Trump is not as conservative as we would like, but we’re sick of chasing the football so we are willing to take a flyer.

  91. @Anonymous
    It's just, erm, dry British humour. Cooke is from England:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/magazine/charles-c-w-cooke-can-fend-for-himself.html

    I’m British and I don’t want Cooke back. Please send him to a third country – s0mewhere like Lesotho.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Send Andrew Sullivan and Piers Morgan as well.
  92. The Old Sea People.

    We have the New Sea People messing up Civilization today.

  93. I’ve done the math. Trump’s Vice President/assassination insurance must be Anne Coulter.
    If, God forbid, anything happened to Trump, she’d barricade herself in the White House and proceed to go apeshit with consevative domestic policy to the edge of constitutional limits.
    Their relationship to the liberal democrats would be “Bad Trump/Worse Trump,” ensuring Trump’s safety through all four terms.

  94. @22pp22
    I'm British and I don't want Cooke back. Please send him to a third country - s0mewhere like Lesotho.

    Send Andrew Sullivan and Piers Morgan as well.

  95. Shiite! Cuck Central send hitmen to Trump.

  96. Did Trump die?

    Charles Kooke says Trump must go because his snakeoil is messing with our bodily fluids.

  97. @melendwyr
    Didn't Trump get assigned a mandatory 'protective' squad of Secret Service agents? I've always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who's going to remain Emperor.

    Remember those crazy screw-ups where lunatics were making it into the White House? Maybe those weren't screw-ups. Maybe they were the SS giving the President a little 'warning' to straighten up and fly right. You'd think they'd be in the best possible position to influence major politicians.

    It's more comforting to believe in a conspiracy than the most probable explanation: no one is in charge and there is no plan.

    Is that an oblique reference to what Worth said in Cube?

    • Replies: @melendwyr
    Not consciously. Although I think it was an excellent movie, and is applicable to much of modern civilization.
  98. The Cooke piece is incoherent and scary, even if intended metaphorically. And the military metaphors tumble one after the other, with no obvious linkage. And that reference to the strategy of Peter III in the Seven Year’s War–hell, I’m a history buff and even I have no idea to what he’s referring. How many American readers even know that the Seven Year’s War is the French and Indian War in North America? Why not refer to the brilliant strategy of Marlborough in the War of the Spanish Succession?

    Lock up the liquor cabinet or get Mr. Cooke back on his meds!

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It's an obscure but colorful incident in 18th Century history:

    From Wikipedia: "Peter III (21 February 1728 – 17 July [O.S. 6 July] 1762) (Russian: Пётр III Фëдорович, Pyotr III Fyodorovich) was emperor of Russia for six months in 1762. He was born in Kiel as Karl Peter Ulrich, the only child of Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp and Anna Petrovna, the elder surviving daughter of Peter the Great. The German Peter could hardly speak Russian and pursued a strongly pro-Prussian policy, which made him an unpopular leader. He was deposed and possibly assassinated as a result of a conspiracy led by his German wife Princess Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, who succeeded him to the throne as Catherine II."

    Frederick the Great of Prussia was finally losing the Seven Years War, when a new czar came to the throne who worshipped him.

    "After Peter succeeded to the Russian throne (5 January 1762 [O.S. 25 December 1761]), he withdrew Russian forces from the Seven Years' War and concluded a peace treaty (5 May [O.S. 24 April] 1762) with Prussia (the "Miracle of the House of Brandenburg"). He gave up Russian conquests in Prussia and offered 12,000 troops to make an alliance with Frederick II of Prussia (19 June [O.S. 8 June] 1762). Russia thus switched from an enemy of Prussia to an ally — Russian troops withdrew from Berlin and marched against the Austrians.[7] This dramatically shifted the balance of power in Europe, suddenly handing the delighted Frederick the initiative. Frederick recaptured southern Silesia (October 1762) and subsequently forced Austria to the negotiating table."

    Down in the Bunker in 1945, Hitler and Goebbels together read Carlyle's biography of Frederick the Great and took much comfort from this incident.

    , @Cagey Beast
    Just as a side note, we call it the Seven Year's War in Canada too. My high school teacher introduced it as "in many ways, the real first world war". He then when on to teach us what went on in India, Europe and the Caribbean, as well as around here.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    I like it when Cooke says, "If I sound frightened or eschatological in my tone, that’s because I am."

    I do not foresee the occasion on which I will apologize to an udience for sounding eschatological.
  99. @Leftist conservative
    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest

    I hope that he controls his food and water supplies as well–poison was a favorite weapon of the Borgias and it seems the U.S. is on a path to emulating them.

  100. @Diversity Heretic
    The Cooke piece is incoherent and scary, even if intended metaphorically. And the military metaphors tumble one after the other, with no obvious linkage. And that reference to the strategy of Peter III in the Seven Year's War--hell, I'm a history buff and even I have no idea to what he's referring. How many American readers even know that the Seven Year's War is the French and Indian War in North America? Why not refer to the brilliant strategy of Marlborough in the War of the Spanish Succession?

    Lock up the liquor cabinet or get Mr. Cooke back on his meds!

    It’s an obscure but colorful incident in 18th Century history:

    From Wikipedia: “Peter III (21 February 1728 – 17 July [O.S. 6 July] 1762) (Russian: Пётр III Фëдорович, Pyotr III Fyodorovich) was emperor of Russia for six months in 1762. He was born in Kiel as Karl Peter Ulrich, the only child of Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp and Anna Petrovna, the elder surviving daughter of Peter the Great. The German Peter could hardly speak Russian and pursued a strongly pro-Prussian policy, which made him an unpopular leader. He was deposed and possibly assassinated as a result of a conspiracy led by his German wife Princess Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, who succeeded him to the throne as Catherine II.”

    Frederick the Great of Prussia was finally losing the Seven Years War, when a new czar came to the throne who worshipped him.

    “After Peter succeeded to the Russian throne (5 January 1762 [O.S. 25 December 1761]), he withdrew Russian forces from the Seven Years’ War and concluded a peace treaty (5 May [O.S. 24 April] 1762) with Prussia (the “Miracle of the House of Brandenburg”). He gave up Russian conquests in Prussia and offered 12,000 troops to make an alliance with Frederick II of Prussia (19 June [O.S. 8 June] 1762). Russia thus switched from an enemy of Prussia to an ally — Russian troops withdrew from Berlin and marched against the Austrians.[7] This dramatically shifted the balance of power in Europe, suddenly handing the delighted Frederick the initiative. Frederick recaptured southern Silesia (October 1762) and subsequently forced Austria to the negotiating table.”

    Down in the Bunker in 1945, Hitler and Goebbels together read Carlyle’s biography of Frederick the Great and took much comfort from this incident.

    • Replies: @5371
    You will notice that Catherine didn't actually return to alliance with Austria, which indicates that Peter's policy change was not in fact as crazy as his enemies claimed.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Thank you for improving my understanding of 18th Century military and diplomatic history. I do remember that Hitler somehow thought that the death of Franklin Roosevelt in April 1945 would reenact Frederick the Great's good luck, with the Americans playing the part of the Russians and withdrawing from the war, or possibly changing sides. No such luck in the case of the Fuhrer.

    The reference by Charles Cooke to Peter III is, however, more troubling, because the probable assassination of a leader is involved. As I've posted elsewhere, I hope Donald Trump has first-rate, unbribable security. There are people who are becoming unhinged at his success.
    , @Zachary Latif
    I like history (Royal history to book) but comments like these make me suspect ur a bit of a polymath, Steve.

    In another life you would have made a popular, if colourful & contrarian, professor at a nice liberal arts college in flyover country..
  101. @Leftist conservative
    BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest

    “BTW, trump wears a bulletproof vest”

    Rumor has it he wears bulletproof hair, as well.

  102. @Diversity Heretic
    The Cooke piece is incoherent and scary, even if intended metaphorically. And the military metaphors tumble one after the other, with no obvious linkage. And that reference to the strategy of Peter III in the Seven Year's War--hell, I'm a history buff and even I have no idea to what he's referring. How many American readers even know that the Seven Year's War is the French and Indian War in North America? Why not refer to the brilliant strategy of Marlborough in the War of the Spanish Succession?

    Lock up the liquor cabinet or get Mr. Cooke back on his meds!

    Just as a side note, we call it the Seven Year’s War in Canada too. My high school teacher introduced it as “in many ways, the real first world war”. He then when on to teach us what went on in India, Europe and the Caribbean, as well as around here.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    I too have read that the Seven Year's War could be called the First World War, although I think the convention is too well established to change now. The American term "French and Indian War" is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side. A war that started in the Ohio River Valley eventually stretched to Europe and India. It is, however, a complicated war to follow in Europe.
  103. @Bill

    Far from being at the bottom of its fortunes, the GOP is in fact coming to the end of a long, slow, tough effort to rebuild after the disaster of 2008
     
    Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.

    “Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008.”

    Yeah, saying that 2008 was the disaster (he’s referring to the elections, I presume) is to pretend that we didn’t arrive at 2008 for a reason. We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years – the pointless wars, the flood of illegals, the housing bubble, the rapidly expanding government bureaucracy, and all the rest. Prior to Bush’s 8 years no one was talking about how insanely wealthy and powerful the D.C. area was growing. Today D.C. metro ranks up there with Silicon Valley and NYC, and has almost certainly surpassed Chicago.

    If you were to try to fix the point in time at which American politics finally went off the rails, became brazenly about Wall Street instead of Main Street, and fully embraced the post-American/anti-white middle class agenda, it would be some time during Bush’s tenure. Clinton was almost there, and was pushing the Democratic Party in that direction. Obama was that ideology’s full realization.

    Bush was something even worse than Clinton or Obama: he was the complete abandonment of any attempt to fight that ideology. Bush surrendered, and his men seem to have convinced every other leading Republican to surrender, as well. Prior to Bush there were large numbers of Republican pols, up to and including party leaders, who were willing to embrace the white middle class, oppose political correctness, and all the rest. From Bush onwards all that opposition has had to come from the outside (hence the Tea Party), from the lower rungs of the party, or from pols treated as outsiders (Jeff Sessions, Tom Tancredo, etc.)

    I can still remember Bush’s spokesman responding to the GOP defeat in the 2006 elections. He was all but dancing on their graves. One of the first things he noted was that it increased the chances of passing an amnesty bill.

    Obama happened because of Bush. Not just because of the war and the financial crisis. He happened because Republicans had spent eight years refusing to fight the ideological radicalization Obama represented.

    It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin, Das, Clyde
    • Replies: @David In TN
    "We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years."

    No one did more to pave the way for Barack Obama than George W. Bush.
    , @Corvinus
    "It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again."

    Only if Trump is elected president--which is a distinct possibility--and/or people like yourself run for political office riding on his coattails to push his agenda regardless of whether he captures the White House--deportation of illegal immigrants and a jihad against political correctness.

    Are you ready, citizen-soldier? Or are you all bluster? Because the ONLY way to fight again is to actually become involved on the front lines, rather than wait for someone else to roll up their sleeves.
  104. @Steve Sailer
    It's an obscure but colorful incident in 18th Century history:

    From Wikipedia: "Peter III (21 February 1728 – 17 July [O.S. 6 July] 1762) (Russian: Пётр III Фëдорович, Pyotr III Fyodorovich) was emperor of Russia for six months in 1762. He was born in Kiel as Karl Peter Ulrich, the only child of Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp and Anna Petrovna, the elder surviving daughter of Peter the Great. The German Peter could hardly speak Russian and pursued a strongly pro-Prussian policy, which made him an unpopular leader. He was deposed and possibly assassinated as a result of a conspiracy led by his German wife Princess Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, who succeeded him to the throne as Catherine II."

    Frederick the Great of Prussia was finally losing the Seven Years War, when a new czar came to the throne who worshipped him.

    "After Peter succeeded to the Russian throne (5 January 1762 [O.S. 25 December 1761]), he withdrew Russian forces from the Seven Years' War and concluded a peace treaty (5 May [O.S. 24 April] 1762) with Prussia (the "Miracle of the House of Brandenburg"). He gave up Russian conquests in Prussia and offered 12,000 troops to make an alliance with Frederick II of Prussia (19 June [O.S. 8 June] 1762). Russia thus switched from an enemy of Prussia to an ally — Russian troops withdrew from Berlin and marched against the Austrians.[7] This dramatically shifted the balance of power in Europe, suddenly handing the delighted Frederick the initiative. Frederick recaptured southern Silesia (October 1762) and subsequently forced Austria to the negotiating table."

    Down in the Bunker in 1945, Hitler and Goebbels together read Carlyle's biography of Frederick the Great and took much comfort from this incident.

    You will notice that Catherine didn’t actually return to alliance with Austria, which indicates that Peter’s policy change was not in fact as crazy as his enemies claimed.

  105. @Anonymous
    Avi Woolf is a israeli who writes for the Times of Israel and Charlie Cooke is a clueless Brit, who are they to tell what Americans should do?

    Avi has become unhinged the last few weeks, ranting & raving about Trump. He unfollowed, then blocked me when I told him to get a grip after Trump’s Nevada’s win.

    I think he had a breakdown not too long after. He wrote a long post about taking a break from Twitter.

  106. @Steve Sailer
    It's an obscure but colorful incident in 18th Century history:

    From Wikipedia: "Peter III (21 February 1728 – 17 July [O.S. 6 July] 1762) (Russian: Пётр III Фëдорович, Pyotr III Fyodorovich) was emperor of Russia for six months in 1762. He was born in Kiel as Karl Peter Ulrich, the only child of Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp and Anna Petrovna, the elder surviving daughter of Peter the Great. The German Peter could hardly speak Russian and pursued a strongly pro-Prussian policy, which made him an unpopular leader. He was deposed and possibly assassinated as a result of a conspiracy led by his German wife Princess Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, who succeeded him to the throne as Catherine II."

    Frederick the Great of Prussia was finally losing the Seven Years War, when a new czar came to the throne who worshipped him.

    "After Peter succeeded to the Russian throne (5 January 1762 [O.S. 25 December 1761]), he withdrew Russian forces from the Seven Years' War and concluded a peace treaty (5 May [O.S. 24 April] 1762) with Prussia (the "Miracle of the House of Brandenburg"). He gave up Russian conquests in Prussia and offered 12,000 troops to make an alliance with Frederick II of Prussia (19 June [O.S. 8 June] 1762). Russia thus switched from an enemy of Prussia to an ally — Russian troops withdrew from Berlin and marched against the Austrians.[7] This dramatically shifted the balance of power in Europe, suddenly handing the delighted Frederick the initiative. Frederick recaptured southern Silesia (October 1762) and subsequently forced Austria to the negotiating table."

    Down in the Bunker in 1945, Hitler and Goebbels together read Carlyle's biography of Frederick the Great and took much comfort from this incident.

    Thank you for improving my understanding of 18th Century military and diplomatic history. I do remember that Hitler somehow thought that the death of Franklin Roosevelt in April 1945 would reenact Frederick the Great’s good luck, with the Americans playing the part of the Russians and withdrawing from the war, or possibly changing sides. No such luck in the case of the Fuhrer.

    The reference by Charles Cooke to Peter III is, however, more troubling, because the probable assassination of a leader is involved. As I’ve posted elsewhere, I hope Donald Trump has first-rate, unbribable security. There are people who are becoming unhinged at his success.

  107. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Here is a brief list of foreigners who enjoy a prominent perch from which to pontificate on US politics:

    CCW Cooke, British
    David Frum, Canadian
    Conrad Black, Canadian
    Piers Morgan, British
    Sarah Kliff, Canadian
    Richard Wolffe, British
    Veronique de Rugy, French
    PE Gobry, French
    Fareed Zakaria, Indian
    Rupert Murdoch, Davos
    George Soros, Davos
    Milo Yiannopolos, British

    Curiously, many of these people are conservatives. Anyway, as the only person in the world who cares about this, you can follow me on twitter. We”ve already been blocked by CCW Cooke, so that’s a start.

    @buttoutalready

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Curiously, many of these people are conservatives.
     
    Really? What are they conserving?
    , @Anonymous
    Charles Krauthammer, Canadian
  108. @Anonymous
    Tom Rogan is another British guy currently at the National Review.

    National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O'Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.

    What’s hilarious about Rogan is he plays the role of international security expert on TV and on-line. I guess the high collars and James Bond accent is what sells it. In reality, his only job out of college, other than gadfly, was as a part-time security guard at Wimbledon. No kidding. He was a mall cop in college and now he plays the role of international security expert.

    That was another gag I used to enjoy at NR. In the comments of his articles, I’d post his resume. I stopped seeing his articles after a while so I assumed they got tired of me making sport of him.

    • Replies: @Jimorbid
    Lol, that's hilarious. I've seen some epic trolling from MPC types in the comments on National Review the last few months, but posting the cucks' resumes is the best yet.
    , @ben h
    He probably got a promotion.
  109. @tyrone
    NR don't write checks your ass can't cash.

    Looks to me that NR is really demanding that others write the checks.

  110. Doggone it, the GOP is trying to accustom its base–and ultimately Americans in general–to the new lower and declining living standards that a global economy necessarily imposes on them, and Donald Trump is inciting them to resist the attempted fait accompli. That’s outrageous!

  111. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.
  112. @Leftist conservative
    a very interesting development very recently in the primaries--on one of the news shows (fox, I think) Ted Cruz came on and was talking to the host (maybe Bill Oreilly, or Hannity, not sure), and was asked whether all the illegals were to be deported.

    Yes, said Cruz. And he would build a wall.

    This statement was a departure from what he had said earlier in debates. But there was something else that was even more important -- Cruz said that the illegals were depressing american wages. He said that twice. So evidently he is planning to make this his new tactic--attacking immigration purely on economic grounds. Not that I believe he would actually deport them and build a wall. He is an obvious liar.

    But I am very glad to see that this linking of immigration and wages is coming into play. I really think that if cruz pushes this hard, he will surge in popularity. The linkage of immigration and wages is something the establishment and the media don't like. I searched google news to see if the media had picked up on the mention of immigrants and wages by cruz. Nope.

    “The linkage of immigration and wages is something the establishment and the media don’t like.”

    The .01% (monopolists/rent seekers) hates taxes, regulations, wages and small business. They are constantly working to usurp the sovereignty of nation states so that they can be law givers. This is the thrust of Obama’s super secret trade deals. It’s feudalism. We have come full circle.

  113. @Diversity Heretic
    The Cooke piece is incoherent and scary, even if intended metaphorically. And the military metaphors tumble one after the other, with no obvious linkage. And that reference to the strategy of Peter III in the Seven Year's War--hell, I'm a history buff and even I have no idea to what he's referring. How many American readers even know that the Seven Year's War is the French and Indian War in North America? Why not refer to the brilliant strategy of Marlborough in the War of the Spanish Succession?

    Lock up the liquor cabinet or get Mr. Cooke back on his meds!

    I like it when Cooke says, “If I sound frightened or eschatological in my tone, that’s because I am.”

    I do not foresee the occasion on which I will apologize to an udience for sounding eschatological.

  114. @iSteveFan

    the Trump movement is unconsciously channeling the strategy employed by Peter III in the Seven Years War: Namely, to give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough, and to hand full political control to the enemy as a result.
     
    To give up just as there is a chance of a big breakthrough sounds a whole lot like what the GOP did when its base gave them huge Congressional victories in 2010 and 2014. Didn't they just cave and give Obama everything on his budget in exchange for the right of US oil drillers to export American crude?

    Wow, that's like right out of Jack and the Beanstalk.

    Incidentally the more and more I hear people attacking Trump, from a sitting US president to a sitting Pope, to practically all of my supposed betters on the left and right who have put the USA in the position we find ourselves in today, the more I believe he is the guy.

    I’ve got my doubts about Trump being the guy. But I know everyone else isn’t, and at least Trump pisses off all the right people, so he’s got my vote – if he can survive until November.

  115. @Anonymous
    Tom Rogan is another British guy currently at the National Review.

    National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O'Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.

    “National Review always seems to have a British mafia on its staff. Brimelow, O’Sullivan, Derbyshire, etc. wrote for NR.”

    They don’t now.

  116. That the treasonous Neo-Cohens are in such a lather is one more reason to vote for Trump.

  117. It never occurs to these guys that instead of the voters and Trump changing to suit the Bahamas beach types, why the Bahamas beach types should become more like Trump and the voters. Hilarious.

    Trump is actually saving a republican party that can’t win the presidency anymore.

  118. [Trump] becomes a cautionary tale about rocking the boat they command.

    And even this would be a monumental level of spin that would take The Narrative a generation to make “real,” and then only among the sheep; it doesn’t take a genius to see that Trump has thoroughly exposed the Emperor’s state of undress.

    Re: Romney’s innuendo, the funny part was that it wasn’t even interesting; reading between the lines, he was implying that Trump isn’t as rich, and doesn’t give as much to charity, as he claims. Oh the humanity!

    The GOP are doing a grand job of illustrating who’s really driving the bus. They’d never show so little respect to the Democrats, because their Media Masters would have them on their knees begging forgiveness in two shakes. But the lickspittles know perfectly well that Daddy doesn’t mind hysterical or violent rhetoric against Trump.

    Plus I imagine him packing a solid gold Desert Eagle.

    The movie almost writes itself, doesn’t it?

  119. @Grumpy
    What happened to National Review? It's in complete meltdown.

    Some people with common sense were purged in the 2000s. Coulter, Derb, Steyn.

  120. Yes, ballistic armor protects against rifle calibers and “AP” ammo. Wiki says Type III armor protects against 7.62x51mm, and Type IV protects against .30-06. (btw, online reviews show that when it comes to these ratings, protection really does mean protection; they’re relatively conservative) Yes, it comes in “covert” flavors. “Armor piercing” is basically a standard feature of the common military rounds sold over the counter in the US. (No, “teflon-coated bullets” and the like aren’t really a thing.)

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    I think rifle rounds need a ceramic trauma plate to be stopped. The big problem stopping pointed spitzer bullets is the incredible pressure at the point of impact versus relatively flat pistol bullets.
  121. In Britain the manic (moronic?) author of this article would have been liable for hate crime & a potential incitement to violence.

    The Home Office has very good reason to look at a ban for travel to Britain for this author. This would have never flown about any British politician, even Nigel Farage or the BNP chap..

    Other than that it was simply an incoherent piece; someone sent around a clip of Trump’s “funny moments.” It’s very obviously he’s a very wealth man, with an indomitable charisma & passionate patriotism, who says what he feels + what works. Kudos to him if he wins the Primaries; I think a Trump-Hillary showdown will actually be very reinvigorating for the Old Republic (Bernie’s a bit of a pansy & the Spanish chaps are still a little raw).. May even be Wasp America’s final decision on which path it wants to go down (more of the same with Hillary’s impeccable establishment credentials vs. Trump’s populist Paleo-conservatism).

    My professional training and faith sort of abhors volatility so my (weak) inclination is towards Hillary but luckily for readers of this blog I don’t have the right to vote. But then come June I’ll be voting to stay in Europe, Boris Johnson has really crossed the line with his shameless opportunism and I daresay he is no Trump (at least Trump triumphed in the world of business, BJ is simply a classics boffin posturing in the world of politics and academia). The blonde clown should have stayed Mayor of London but let’s hope Zac G is able to succeed him, he has this Zac’s backing

    • Replies: @OutWest
    You and Edmund Burke.
    , @5371
    [the Spanish chaps are still a little raw]

    Assless chaps ))

    [BJ is simply a classics boffin]

    No boffin. He's not stupid but far too lazy to ever learn anything.

    [let’s hope Zac G is able to succeed him]

    Well, credit to you for not plumping for your co-religionist, anyway.
    , @BB753
    Well, what moral virtues would you say Hillary posess? As for charisma or business success, she has none to her credit.
    , @Bill B.
    You do understand that the June vote is about the future of Britain; that this is not a vote for Boris Johnson or anyone else?
  122. @Steve Sailer
    It's an obscure but colorful incident in 18th Century history:

    From Wikipedia: "Peter III (21 February 1728 – 17 July [O.S. 6 July] 1762) (Russian: Пётр III Фëдорович, Pyotr III Fyodorovich) was emperor of Russia for six months in 1762. He was born in Kiel as Karl Peter Ulrich, the only child of Charles Frederick, Duke of Holstein-Gottorp and Anna Petrovna, the elder surviving daughter of Peter the Great. The German Peter could hardly speak Russian and pursued a strongly pro-Prussian policy, which made him an unpopular leader. He was deposed and possibly assassinated as a result of a conspiracy led by his German wife Princess Sophie Friederike Auguste von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg, who succeeded him to the throne as Catherine II."

    Frederick the Great of Prussia was finally losing the Seven Years War, when a new czar came to the throne who worshipped him.

    "After Peter succeeded to the Russian throne (5 January 1762 [O.S. 25 December 1761]), he withdrew Russian forces from the Seven Years' War and concluded a peace treaty (5 May [O.S. 24 April] 1762) with Prussia (the "Miracle of the House of Brandenburg"). He gave up Russian conquests in Prussia and offered 12,000 troops to make an alliance with Frederick II of Prussia (19 June [O.S. 8 June] 1762). Russia thus switched from an enemy of Prussia to an ally — Russian troops withdrew from Berlin and marched against the Austrians.[7] This dramatically shifted the balance of power in Europe, suddenly handing the delighted Frederick the initiative. Frederick recaptured southern Silesia (October 1762) and subsequently forced Austria to the negotiating table."

    Down in the Bunker in 1945, Hitler and Goebbels together read Carlyle's biography of Frederick the Great and took much comfort from this incident.

    I like history (Royal history to book) but comments like these make me suspect ur a bit of a polymath, Steve.

    In another life you would have made a popular, if colourful & contrarian, professor at a nice liberal arts college in flyover country..

  123. A large portion of the country is screaming out that they no longer trust their government or the media. If misfortune were to befall Mr. Trump in that environment, I don’t think it would be taken well.

  124. @Wilkey
    "Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008."

    Yeah, saying that 2008 was the disaster (he's referring to the elections, I presume) is to pretend that we didn't arrive at 2008 for a reason. We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years - the pointless wars, the flood of illegals, the housing bubble, the rapidly expanding government bureaucracy, and all the rest. Prior to Bush's 8 years no one was talking about how insanely wealthy and powerful the D.C. area was growing. Today D.C. metro ranks up there with Silicon Valley and NYC, and has almost certainly surpassed Chicago.

    If you were to try to fix the point in time at which American politics finally went off the rails, became brazenly about Wall Street instead of Main Street, and fully embraced the post-American/anti-white middle class agenda, it would be some time during Bush's tenure. Clinton was almost there, and was pushing the Democratic Party in that direction. Obama was that ideology's full realization.

    Bush was something even worse than Clinton or Obama: he was the complete abandonment of any attempt to fight that ideology. Bush surrendered, and his men seem to have convinced every other leading Republican to surrender, as well. Prior to Bush there were large numbers of Republican pols, up to and including party leaders, who were willing to embrace the white middle class, oppose political correctness, and all the rest. From Bush onwards all that opposition has had to come from the outside (hence the Tea Party), from the lower rungs of the party, or from pols treated as outsiders (Jeff Sessions, Tom Tancredo, etc.)

    I can still remember Bush's spokesman responding to the GOP defeat in the 2006 elections. He was all but dancing on their graves. One of the first things he noted was that it increased the chances of passing an amnesty bill.

    Obama happened because of Bush. Not just because of the war and the financial crisis. He happened because Republicans had spent eight years refusing to fight the ideological radicalization Obama represented.

    It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again.

    “We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years.”

    No one did more to pave the way for Barack Obama than George W. Bush.

  125. @Wilkey
    "Somehow, this still annoys me. The disaster happened in 2000. Or before. Nothing all that bad happened to the GOP in 2008."

    Yeah, saying that 2008 was the disaster (he's referring to the elections, I presume) is to pretend that we didn't arrive at 2008 for a reason. We arrived there because Bush governed like an imbecile for 8 years - the pointless wars, the flood of illegals, the housing bubble, the rapidly expanding government bureaucracy, and all the rest. Prior to Bush's 8 years no one was talking about how insanely wealthy and powerful the D.C. area was growing. Today D.C. metro ranks up there with Silicon Valley and NYC, and has almost certainly surpassed Chicago.

    If you were to try to fix the point in time at which American politics finally went off the rails, became brazenly about Wall Street instead of Main Street, and fully embraced the post-American/anti-white middle class agenda, it would be some time during Bush's tenure. Clinton was almost there, and was pushing the Democratic Party in that direction. Obama was that ideology's full realization.

    Bush was something even worse than Clinton or Obama: he was the complete abandonment of any attempt to fight that ideology. Bush surrendered, and his men seem to have convinced every other leading Republican to surrender, as well. Prior to Bush there were large numbers of Republican pols, up to and including party leaders, who were willing to embrace the white middle class, oppose political correctness, and all the rest. From Bush onwards all that opposition has had to come from the outside (hence the Tea Party), from the lower rungs of the party, or from pols treated as outsiders (Jeff Sessions, Tom Tancredo, etc.)

    I can still remember Bush's spokesman responding to the GOP defeat in the 2006 elections. He was all but dancing on their graves. One of the first things he noted was that it increased the chances of passing an amnesty bill.

    Obama happened because of Bush. Not just because of the war and the financial crisis. He happened because Republicans had spent eight years refusing to fight the ideological radicalization Obama represented.

    It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again.

    “It is quite clear that a huge share of the American electorate is ready to start fighting again.”

    Only if Trump is elected president–which is a distinct possibility–and/or people like yourself run for political office riding on his coattails to push his agenda regardless of whether he captures the White House–deportation of illegal immigrants and a jihad against political correctness.

    Are you ready, citizen-soldier? Or are you all bluster? Because the ONLY way to fight again is to actually become involved on the front lines, rather than wait for someone else to roll up their sleeves.

  126. @Anon
    Palin got blasted for putting cross-hairs on Democratic candidates.

    We've been told that 'ugly sentiments'' prepared the ground for Kennedy's assassination.

    But shiite, doesn't this beat all?

    No one would have said such stuff about Obama.

    But against a nationalist candidate, NR is using murder-metaphor.

    What the cuck!

    PS. They say Trump is vulgar, but NR now gives political commentary like Transformers.

    “murder-metaphor”…well worth stealing that

    I could easily see that as a Drudge headline: NR Promotes Murder Metaphor for Trump

  127. @disambiguated
    Yes - I'm worried that someone will try something against Trump, and I also worry that his Secret Service detail might not be as effective as they could be . . on purpose. I hope he has serious private security who're in his pay, and that they're routinely re-vetted.

    I read an account of a Trump event last Summer. Trump’s private bodyguards were a group of Rob Gronkowski look-a-likes.

  128. During that conversation, he told Stern he believes he could have slept with her and described her as having ‘supermodel beauty.’

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3464039/Donald-Trump-claimed-Princess-Diana-crazy-said-slept-without-hesitation-supermodel-beauty.html#ixzz41COF3PYJ
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    Just as I was thinking I would vote for Trump he lets himself down by proclaiming the hideous erstwhile Princess Diana as one of the hottest women on the planet, and revealing himself as a gold-digger and fawning acolyte of royalty.

    Oh, Donald!

  129. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    My Chihuahua accent does me more good with the womens in the English than mi legua materna.

  130. The epidemic of Trump Derangement Syndrome in the Beltway has reached unimaginable levels……clowns like Cooke think they are going to make the American public swallow the turd sandwich of mass immigration combined with constant war, whether we like it or not. But apparently they are wrong…

  131. I knew that Wine Club they’ve begun flogging at their site would come back to bite them.

    Charles, that wine was never intended for the Inner Circle; it’s for …..well, Buckley liked calling them “those people”. That bilgewater’s fulla sulfites!

    Drink enough of that shit and you’ll be calling in airstrikes on Trump.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    Well, he did ask for a Fat Man. An Enola Gay would presumably deliver it.
  132. That says it all about the establishment GOP. There refusal to adhere to the will of the people who elected them. The nepotism and self interest makes the proffesional Republicans interchangeable with the Democrats at this point..My fear is that if Trump becomes president he will be blocked from getting anything done by both sides of the aisle. Of course he may be able to get a hold of Obama’s magic pen. The next election the voters need to make a point by cleaning out the bums in Washington.

  133. @Anonymous
    Here is a brief list of foreigners who enjoy a prominent perch from which to pontificate on US politics:

    CCW Cooke, British
    David Frum, Canadian
    Conrad Black, Canadian
    Piers Morgan, British
    Sarah Kliff, Canadian
    Richard Wolffe, British
    Veronique de Rugy, French
    PE Gobry, French
    Fareed Zakaria, Indian
    Rupert Murdoch, Davos
    George Soros, Davos
    Milo Yiannopolos, British

    Curiously, many of these people are conservatives. Anyway, as the only person in the world who cares about this, you can follow me on twitter. We''ve already been blocked by CCW Cooke, so that's a start.

    @buttoutalready

    Curiously, many of these people are conservatives.

    Really? What are they conserving?

  134. … Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz must find their resolve and all-but-machine-gun the man to the floor.

    They have their snipress: Machine Gun Kelly.

    Machine Gun Megyn Kelly.

  135. @SFG
    No, that's not what he said, he said debating it was a way to teach critical thinking.

    I'm not so sure myself--I'd rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways--but that's not what Cooke is saying.

    “I’d rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways”

    So, we should debate everything, except of course where we already know there’s no evidence on the other side? I bet you have a pretty long list of those items.

  136. @Zachary Latif
    In Britain the manic (moronic?) author of this article would have been liable for hate crime & a potential incitement to violence.

    The Home Office has very good reason to look at a ban for travel to Britain for this author. This would have never flown about any British politician, even Nigel Farage or the BNP chap..

    Other than that it was simply an incoherent piece; someone sent around a clip of Trump's "funny moments." It's very obviously he's a very wealth man, with an indomitable charisma & passionate patriotism, who says what he feels + what works. Kudos to him if he wins the Primaries; I think a Trump-Hillary showdown will actually be very reinvigorating for the Old Republic (Bernie's a bit of a pansy & the Spanish chaps are still a little raw).. May even be Wasp America's final decision on which path it wants to go down (more of the same with Hillary's impeccable establishment credentials vs. Trump's populist Paleo-conservatism).

    My professional training and faith sort of abhors volatility so my (weak) inclination is towards Hillary but luckily for readers of this blog I don't have the right to vote. But then come June I'll be voting to stay in Europe, Boris Johnson has really crossed the line with his shameless opportunism and I daresay he is no Trump (at least Trump triumphed in the world of business, BJ is simply a classics boffin posturing in the world of politics and academia). The blonde clown should have stayed Mayor of London but let's hope Zac G is able to succeed him, he has this Zac's backing

    You and Edmund Burke.

  137. @antipater_1
    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #1 was by the Manson's Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme. However, she was unable to get a shot off as her gun jammed.

    The Gerald Ford assassination attempt #2 was just under 3 weeks later when Sarah Jane Moore tried it. She got one shot off but a bystander hit her arm and the bullet went astray.

    Charlie should have known better than to send a woman to do a man’s job.

  138. @Anonymous
    Cooke has argued in favor of Holocaust denial:

    "Charles C.W. Cooke's Shameful Screed on Holocaust Denial"

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/charles_c_w_cookes_shameful_screed_on_holocaust_denial.html

    With much disgust, I discovered that National Review Online has officially mainstreamed Holocaust denial. By publishing Charles C.W. Cooke’s blog that pronounces that it “is a damn shame” that a California school district caved to pressure and withdrew an assignment requiring students to argue that the Holocaust did not occur, NRO is supporting the dissemination of an unbelievably offensive ideology that was formerly only espoused by psychotic tyrants such as Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    Unlike the vast majority of respected opinions on the subject, Cooke bases his abhorrent position on claims that “There really is no better way of teaching critical thinking” than allowing debate on whether or not the Holocaust in fact occurred.
     

    *clutches prayer shawl*

  139. @Cagey Beast
    Just as a side note, we call it the Seven Year's War in Canada too. My high school teacher introduced it as "in many ways, the real first world war". He then when on to teach us what went on in India, Europe and the Caribbean, as well as around here.

    I too have read that the Seven Year’s War could be called the First World War, although I think the convention is too well established to change now. The American term “French and Indian War” is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side. A war that started in the Ohio River Valley eventually stretched to Europe and India. It is, however, a complicated war to follow in Europe.

    • Replies: @Ed
    " The American term “French and Indian War” is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side"

    This is a side note, but one weakness in how American history is taught is that it underplays how often in the eighteenth and even nineteenth centuries the thirteen colonies and the US was caught up in international power politics. The worst example is probably the War of Independence itself, where the British government started withdrawing its forces from North American in 1778 -and also started trying to negotiate a settlement with Congress- in order to concentrate on fighting the French in other parts of the world.

    Another example is that people don't know how much Russia took an anti-British and pro-American line during both the War of Independence and the Civil War, they were a big reason in limiting European intervention in support of the Confederacy.

    But during the colonial period, overtime there was a war between the UK and France/ Spain, there were campaigns involving the thirteen colonies. But in each instance the colonists had a local name for the war, while in the main theater of Europe historians call it something else:

    War of the League of Augsberg = King William's War

    War of the Spanish Succession = Queen Anne's War

    War of the Austrian Succession = King George's War

    Seven Year's War = French and Indian War

    The general rule was to name the war after the current British monarch, but for the last a different name had to be use, since King George's War had already been taken.

    Its also common for people to call a war after the name of the people they were fighting. The Americans were fighting the French and the Indians, hence the name. Also the Mexican War and the Spanish War, though in these cases "American" was tacked on. It will be interesting to see what the small wars in the Middle East fought after 1990 will be eventually named.

    Fighting between the UK and France started in North American earlier than war broke out in Europe in the case of the Seven Year's War/ French and Indian War, when the UK and Virginia tried to push the French out of what is now western Pennsylvania. It merged with the European conflict when the British and French picked sides there.
  140. @Anonymous
    Here is a brief list of foreigners who enjoy a prominent perch from which to pontificate on US politics:

    CCW Cooke, British
    David Frum, Canadian
    Conrad Black, Canadian
    Piers Morgan, British
    Sarah Kliff, Canadian
    Richard Wolffe, British
    Veronique de Rugy, French
    PE Gobry, French
    Fareed Zakaria, Indian
    Rupert Murdoch, Davos
    George Soros, Davos
    Milo Yiannopolos, British

    Curiously, many of these people are conservatives. Anyway, as the only person in the world who cares about this, you can follow me on twitter. We''ve already been blocked by CCW Cooke, so that's a start.

    @buttoutalready

    Charles Krauthammer, Canadian

  141. @Anonymous
    Avi Woolf is a israeli who writes for the Times of Israel and Charlie Cooke is a clueless Brit, who are they to tell what Americans should do?

    Amen. That is the job of a native, like Nikki Haley.

  142. @Zachary Latif
    In Britain the manic (moronic?) author of this article would have been liable for hate crime & a potential incitement to violence.

    The Home Office has very good reason to look at a ban for travel to Britain for this author. This would have never flown about any British politician, even Nigel Farage or the BNP chap..

    Other than that it was simply an incoherent piece; someone sent around a clip of Trump's "funny moments." It's very obviously he's a very wealth man, with an indomitable charisma & passionate patriotism, who says what he feels + what works. Kudos to him if he wins the Primaries; I think a Trump-Hillary showdown will actually be very reinvigorating for the Old Republic (Bernie's a bit of a pansy & the Spanish chaps are still a little raw).. May even be Wasp America's final decision on which path it wants to go down (more of the same with Hillary's impeccable establishment credentials vs. Trump's populist Paleo-conservatism).

    My professional training and faith sort of abhors volatility so my (weak) inclination is towards Hillary but luckily for readers of this blog I don't have the right to vote. But then come June I'll be voting to stay in Europe, Boris Johnson has really crossed the line with his shameless opportunism and I daresay he is no Trump (at least Trump triumphed in the world of business, BJ is simply a classics boffin posturing in the world of politics and academia). The blonde clown should have stayed Mayor of London but let's hope Zac G is able to succeed him, he has this Zac's backing

    [the Spanish chaps are still a little raw]

    Assless chaps ))

    [BJ is simply a classics boffin]

    No boffin. He’s not stupid but far too lazy to ever learn anything.

    [let’s hope Zac G is able to succeed him]

    Well, credit to you for not plumping for your co-religionist, anyway.

    • Replies: @Zachary Latif
    Co-ethnic rather..
  143. How likely is it that Cooke will suffer the same fate as Derbyshire and Coulter
    For his over-the-top use of violent images?

    Answer:about as likely as Trump picking Lindsey Graham his running mate.

  144. Vicente Fox has just said that Mexico won’t pay for the “F- Wall” and that Mexicans who voted for Trump are race traitors.

    So there is that.

    If anyone has read “This is London: Life in the World City” the subtext is slavery. Illegal immigrants get to the West by smuggling networks. Who enslave them in horrible conditions as slave labor for the threat of retaliation of family back home.

    Most of the “wealth” created and enjoyed by Cooke’s class is the fruits of modern slavery. Illegal immigrants from the Third World providing ultra cheap slave labor to the chattering classes. Who are every bit as bad as plantation owners they make “kill Whitey” movies about.

    That’s why Trump is so threatening. Like Lincoln he wants to end slavery. And send the slaves back home, where they belong.

  145. Ross Douthat got into trouble for tweeting about a Trump assassination:

    “NY Times Columnist Jokes About Assassination Attempt Ending Trump’s Campaign”
    “Good news guys I’ve figured out how the Trump campaign ends”

    http://www.infowars.com/ny-times-columnist-jokes-about-assassination-attempt-ending-trumps-campaign/

    • Replies: @Bill P

    Ross Douthat got into trouble for tweeting about a Trump assassination
     
    Pretty arrogant of Ross to think he could get away with that. If he keeps his job after this it will only confirm what Americans think of the press.
    , @Buffalo Joe
    Anonymous, Assassination as a political tool has an ancient heritage. I just watched a you Tube video of Hillary at a private function in So Carolina, where she is interrupted by a BLM woman protester unfolding a small cloth sign. The girl elbows her way through the gathering and is within arms reach of Clinton. One well dressed older white guy gently tries to persuade her to leave or desist. Startling lack of security . Later she was escorted out by Secret Service agents.
  146. @Harry Baldwin
    I used to think Romney was a decent guy, if an inept politician, but I've lost all respect for him. A year or two ago he actually said Obama's amnesty didn't go far enough--this from the guy who pretended to be the hardliner on immigration.

    Harry Reid struck a low blow when he claimed Romney hadn't paid taxes., based on no evidence. Dingy Harry just wanted to plant the thought. So what does the fine upstanding Mormon do? He says there's a bombshell in Trump's taxes, based on no evidence. Just wants to get the idea out there. Romney, you are a contemptible loser. Just go away.

    Romney is a Mormon as is Glenn Beck who is calling true Hitler a Nazi, a Goebbels, a guy who is training brown shirts etc.

    Maybe Beck is influencing Romney; after all, Beck says God talks to him….

  147. @5371
    [the Spanish chaps are still a little raw]

    Assless chaps ))

    [BJ is simply a classics boffin]

    No boffin. He's not stupid but far too lazy to ever learn anything.

    [let’s hope Zac G is able to succeed him]

    Well, credit to you for not plumping for your co-religionist, anyway.

    Co-ethnic rather..

  148. People have short memories, but I don’t. I remember the vitriol and hatred that the Bush League had for Reagan. He was the new Goldwater they said, and someone “serious” needed to be put in office. George Herbert Walker Joyner – Kersey Bush hisself talked about throwing Reagan to the curb so he could run for office. They should have done it. The GOP would be dead now if they did. Populism scares Lincoln’s Circus tent party. They’re all looking for poles to sit on or take, but governing and looking out for America is so never on the agenda.
    What’s the point of sending a Million Man Army to the Middle East if we fly them straight here? It makes a lot of money for the Military Industrial Complex. But this National Security is far too serious to be left to idiots like Government Workers.

  149. @Anonymous
    Ross Douthat got into trouble for tweeting about a Trump assassination:

    "NY Times Columnist Jokes About Assassination Attempt Ending Trump’s Campaign"
    "Good news guys I've figured out how the Trump campaign ends"

    http://www.infowars.com/ny-times-columnist-jokes-about-assassination-attempt-ending-trumps-campaign/

    Ross Douthat got into trouble for tweeting about a Trump assassination

    Pretty arrogant of Ross to think he could get away with that. If he keeps his job after this it will only confirm what Americans think of the press.

  150. @The Z Blog
    What's hilarious about Rogan is he plays the role of international security expert on TV and on-line. I guess the high collars and James Bond accent is what sells it. In reality, his only job out of college, other than gadfly, was as a part-time security guard at Wimbledon. No kidding. He was a mall cop in college and now he plays the role of international security expert.

    That was another gag I used to enjoy at NR. In the comments of his articles, I'd post his resume. I stopped seeing his articles after a while so I assumed they got tired of me making sport of him.

    Lol, that’s hilarious. I’ve seen some epic trolling from MPC types in the comments on National Review the last few months, but posting the cucks’ resumes is the best yet.

  151. @rod1963
    I agree.

    If you make a list of the people who hate Trump it's nothing short of amazing.

    The Pope
    The GOP
    The DP
    Obama
    NR
    TNR
    Neo-Cons
    Wall Street titans
    Hedge fund managers
    The Clintons and their murder machine(them I'd watch out for, because both of them face prosecution under Trump should he win).
    Chambers of Commerce
    Club for Growth
    The Davos set

    Although the EU bosses haven't said anything I am sure they are very worried about the political ramifications should Trump win.

    Trump better be very careful who he chooses as a VP, if it's a establishment type, it will green light bad things happening to him.

    Trillions are at stake if Trump wins. It's enough to get the wealthy thinking about a black bag operation.

    Add the Washington Post, Huffington Post and Vincente Fox to your list. Be prepared to make daily edits as the hysteria spreads.

  152. @Harry Baldwin
    What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    I didn't read the anti-Trump special issue, but I assume it fell short of calling for his assassination. BTW, about a week ago my liberal sister-in-law told me Trump should be assassinated. There's a lot of that kind of talk around.

    I’ve said it elsewhere (Taki), Trump needs to name Ann Coulter as his
    running mate now for his own safety. Ann could also get secret service
    protection free. Bonus.

  153. @Dave Pinsen
    Twitter famously banned Chuck Johnson for tweeting about "taking out" Deray Mckesson. I wonder if they'll exile Cooke for advocating "machine gunning".

    I know this sounds totally mom-ish, but having just driven past Newtown, what in the world are Trump-haters thinking with “machine gunning someone to the floor???” Lanza did just that, but to 20 small kids and 6 teachers.

    There’s weird “death wish,” talk, lately. The intense hatred over Trump is grotesque, suddenly…the ones who I know support him just stay mum.

    But, civilized people need to stop using words like machine-gun-the-man; bombing, blasting (heard decapitating Trump, hah, of all things! – yesterday, on NPR…some GOP guy; I was painting ferociously, so, sorry, spaced on the name) – show was on NPR @around 5:30pm EST.

    This is all very psychopathic (or creepy)….especially when these same people suggest that all Trump supporters are losers, bigots, dummies, trailer trash, crazy, meth-addled., etc.

    Lastly, the two parties have continually presented unappealing candidates for almost 2 decades. So, Dems and Repubs need to find better candidates, duh…Trump’s appeal to American people can not be violently wished away, and heavens, plotted away will really destroy the country.

  154. @Anonymous
    Ross Douthat got into trouble for tweeting about a Trump assassination:

    "NY Times Columnist Jokes About Assassination Attempt Ending Trump’s Campaign"
    "Good news guys I've figured out how the Trump campaign ends"

    http://www.infowars.com/ny-times-columnist-jokes-about-assassination-attempt-ending-trumps-campaign/

    Anonymous, Assassination as a political tool has an ancient heritage. I just watched a you Tube video of Hillary at a private function in So Carolina, where she is interrupted by a BLM woman protester unfolding a small cloth sign. The girl elbows her way through the gathering and is within arms reach of Clinton. One well dressed older white guy gently tries to persuade her to leave or desist. Startling lack of security . Later she was escorted out by Secret Service agents.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    That sort of thing always makes me suspect the "protester" is a plant, engaged in a pre-agreed-upon bit of media clowning.
  155. @The Z Blog
    What's hilarious about Rogan is he plays the role of international security expert on TV and on-line. I guess the high collars and James Bond accent is what sells it. In reality, his only job out of college, other than gadfly, was as a part-time security guard at Wimbledon. No kidding. He was a mall cop in college and now he plays the role of international security expert.

    That was another gag I used to enjoy at NR. In the comments of his articles, I'd post his resume. I stopped seeing his articles after a while so I assumed they got tired of me making sport of him.

    He probably got a promotion.

  156. @Sal Paradise
    The National Review goes from having the English/Canadian immigrant patriots of Derbyshire, Brimelow, O'Sullivan, and Steyn to the millennial hacks Tom Rogan and Charles Cooke. My God have they fallen.

    Steyn has apparently been blacklisted by American TV;
    http://www.steynonline.com/7479/nitwits-of-the-round-table

    Some American readers, observing the wide range of telly shows I’ve been doing in Australia, have written to ask why I’m not on US TV more. Well, the short answer is I never get asked. The phone never stops not ringing.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I just had a look at Mark Steyn's website. I found a recent article entitled "Bush Whacked" from four days ago on the fall of the house of Bush. I did a word search and found no instances of the words "war" or "Iraq". I find it impossible to stir up any concern for Mark Steyn's TV dry spell after doing that quick bit of research.
  157. @Leftist conservative
    a very interesting development very recently in the primaries--on one of the news shows (fox, I think) Ted Cruz came on and was talking to the host (maybe Bill Oreilly, or Hannity, not sure), and was asked whether all the illegals were to be deported.

    Yes, said Cruz. And he would build a wall.

    This statement was a departure from what he had said earlier in debates. But there was something else that was even more important -- Cruz said that the illegals were depressing american wages. He said that twice. So evidently he is planning to make this his new tactic--attacking immigration purely on economic grounds. Not that I believe he would actually deport them and build a wall. He is an obvious liar.

    But I am very glad to see that this linking of immigration and wages is coming into play. I really think that if cruz pushes this hard, he will surge in popularity. The linkage of immigration and wages is something the establishment and the media don't like. I searched google news to see if the media had picked up on the mention of immigrants and wages by cruz. Nope.

    The Best Username….Ever! contest is now officially over.

  158. @The Z Blog
    Charlie Cooke is a hilarious example of the weird American habit of assigning an additional 50 IQ points to people with an English accent. If he had a Midwestern accent, he would be writing obituaries for his town paper.

    I used to post this in the comments of his articles: http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/n_mj_cooke_130412.jpg

    It would always be one of the top rated comments. It's nearly impossible for an American to take seriously any man who wears a scarf indoors as a fashion statement. Throw in the hipster beard and mullet and hilarity ensues.

    The scarf, the carefully-groomed douchebag beard, the plummy speaking voice…..if ever a man was born to answer to “Benedict Cumberbatch”, it is Mr. Cooke.

    His bitterness at Capricious Fate must be all-consuming.

  159. How about the Grassy Knoll option?

  160. @Diversity Heretic
    I too have read that the Seven Year's War could be called the First World War, although I think the convention is too well established to change now. The American term "French and Indian War" is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side. A war that started in the Ohio River Valley eventually stretched to Europe and India. It is, however, a complicated war to follow in Europe.

    ” The American term “French and Indian War” is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side”

    This is a side note, but one weakness in how American history is taught is that it underplays how often in the eighteenth and even nineteenth centuries the thirteen colonies and the US was caught up in international power politics. The worst example is probably the War of Independence itself, where the British government started withdrawing its forces from North American in 1778 -and also started trying to negotiate a settlement with Congress- in order to concentrate on fighting the French in other parts of the world.

    Another example is that people don’t know how much Russia took an anti-British and pro-American line during both the War of Independence and the Civil War, they were a big reason in limiting European intervention in support of the Confederacy.

    But during the colonial period, overtime there was a war between the UK and France/ Spain, there were campaigns involving the thirteen colonies. But in each instance the colonists had a local name for the war, while in the main theater of Europe historians call it something else:

    War of the League of Augsberg = King William’s War

    War of the Spanish Succession = Queen Anne’s War

    War of the Austrian Succession = King George’s War

    Seven Year’s War = French and Indian War

    The general rule was to name the war after the current British monarch, but for the last a different name had to be use, since King George’s War had already been taken.

    Its also common for people to call a war after the name of the people they were fighting. The Americans were fighting the French and the Indians, hence the name. Also the Mexican War and the Spanish War, though in these cases “American” was tacked on. It will be interesting to see what the small wars in the Middle East fought after 1990 will be eventually named.

    Fighting between the UK and France started in North American earlier than war broke out in Europe in the case of the Seven Year’s War/ French and Indian War, when the UK and Virginia tried to push the French out of what is now western Pennsylvania. It merged with the European conflict when the British and French picked sides there.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Thanks for the education! I had never seen that European-North American war name equivalent table before. I think that the names of the wars in Middle East will be regional: I've heard Gulf War I, Afghan War, and Gulf War II. Here's hoping we can avoid a Gulf War III.
  161. @fnn
    Steyn has apparently been blacklisted by American TV;
    http://www.steynonline.com/7479/nitwits-of-the-round-table

    Some American readers, observing the wide range of telly shows I've been doing in Australia, have written to ask why I'm not on US TV more. Well, the short answer is I never get asked. The phone never stops not ringing.
     

    I just had a look at Mark Steyn’s website. I found a recent article entitled “Bush Whacked” from four days ago on the fall of the house of Bush. I did a word search and found no instances of the words “war” or “Iraq”. I find it impossible to stir up any concern for Mark Steyn’s TV dry spell after doing that quick bit of research.

  162. @Ed
    " The American term “French and Indian War” is especially bad because it implies that the fighting was between the French and the Indians, when in fact most of the Indians fought on the French side"

    This is a side note, but one weakness in how American history is taught is that it underplays how often in the eighteenth and even nineteenth centuries the thirteen colonies and the US was caught up in international power politics. The worst example is probably the War of Independence itself, where the British government started withdrawing its forces from North American in 1778 -and also started trying to negotiate a settlement with Congress- in order to concentrate on fighting the French in other parts of the world.

    Another example is that people don't know how much Russia took an anti-British and pro-American line during both the War of Independence and the Civil War, they were a big reason in limiting European intervention in support of the Confederacy.

    But during the colonial period, overtime there was a war between the UK and France/ Spain, there were campaigns involving the thirteen colonies. But in each instance the colonists had a local name for the war, while in the main theater of Europe historians call it something else:

    War of the League of Augsberg = King William's War

    War of the Spanish Succession = Queen Anne's War

    War of the Austrian Succession = King George's War

    Seven Year's War = French and Indian War

    The general rule was to name the war after the current British monarch, but for the last a different name had to be use, since King George's War had already been taken.

    Its also common for people to call a war after the name of the people they were fighting. The Americans were fighting the French and the Indians, hence the name. Also the Mexican War and the Spanish War, though in these cases "American" was tacked on. It will be interesting to see what the small wars in the Middle East fought after 1990 will be eventually named.

    Fighting between the UK and France started in North American earlier than war broke out in Europe in the case of the Seven Year's War/ French and Indian War, when the UK and Virginia tried to push the French out of what is now western Pennsylvania. It merged with the European conflict when the British and French picked sides there.

    Thanks for the education! I had never seen that European-North American war name equivalent table before. I think that the names of the wars in Middle East will be regional: I’ve heard Gulf War I, Afghan War, and Gulf War II. Here’s hoping we can avoid a Gulf War III.

  163. @Ragno
    I knew that Wine Club they've begun flogging at their site would come back to bite them.

    Charles, that wine was never intended for the Inner Circle; it's for .....well, Buckley liked calling them "those people". That bilgewater's fulla sulfites!

    Drink enough of that shit and you'll be calling in airstrikes on Trump.

    Well, he did ask for a Fat Man. An Enola Gay would presumably deliver it.

  164. @Anon
    Something tells me that very few establishment Republicans will be getting jobs in the Trump administration, and it's going to be entirely their own fault for burning bridges with Trump in the stupidest way possible before the election.

    I really can't believe they're that paranoid about Trump. Honestly, it's ridiculous. The Republican establishment is more afraid of what a long-time businessman will do to the country than screechy socialist nutjobs like Hillary or Bernie, despite their lack of even the vaguest grasp of economic math.

    You’ve put your finger on it precisely:

    “Something tells me that very few establishment Republicans will be getting jobs in the Trump administration”

    This is why people put their weight behind this or that candidate: with an eye to future job prospects.

    Hebb’s, what, $140 million? What did that buy? Professional services. Those “professionals” all keep each others’ bread buttered worldwide.

    Trump is so far outside all of that, all they can do is screech.

    Interestingly, re: your “burning bridges” comment, back in 1990, when DJT was interviewed in Playboy, he spoke of how important he considered loyalty.

    Check it out:

    https://thecorporateculture.com/2015/playboy-interviewed-donald-trump-25-years-ago/

    He also manifest quite a clear understanding of the genetics of success.

  165. @Buffalo Joe
    Anonymous, Assassination as a political tool has an ancient heritage. I just watched a you Tube video of Hillary at a private function in So Carolina, where she is interrupted by a BLM woman protester unfolding a small cloth sign. The girl elbows her way through the gathering and is within arms reach of Clinton. One well dressed older white guy gently tries to persuade her to leave or desist. Startling lack of security . Later she was escorted out by Secret Service agents.

    That sort of thing always makes me suspect the “protester” is a plant, engaged in a pre-agreed-upon bit of media clowning.

  166. Anonymous, Assassination as a political tool has an ancient heritage. I just watched a you Tube video of Hillary at a private function in So Carolina, where she is interrupted by a BLM woman protester unfolding a small cloth sign. The girl elbows her way through the gathering and is within arms reach of Clinton. One well dressed older white guy gently tries to persuade her to leave or desist. Startling lack of security . Later she was escorted out by Secret Service agents.

    I met John McCain when he was running for president. Can’t remember where it was on the campaign timeline – after he’d announced, but still early. We were outdoors and he broke from his aide and walked alone at least fifty feet to greet me and a couple other guys. We had gone through no security at all, and I don’t remember seeing anyone that even looked like security. I was kind of amazed by that, after I’d had time to think about it later.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    Svigor, Hillary is used to having Secret Service protection, all through Bills two terms, and then as a former first lady, Sec'y of State and now as the primary Dem candidate for POTUS. I wonder if McCain had been assigned security when this occurred.
  167. @Ed
    One type of VP pick that I've never really liked is the "party unification" pick.

    Pretty much Americans are expected to believe that political assassinations never happen in the US. In other countries, OK. But in the US, its always deranged lone gunmen. Somehow even the Lincoln assassination gets slotted into this, despite the "official" story describing a conspiracy organized by a well-known public figure to not only kill Lincoln, but to decapitate the upper echelon of the federal government, and it happening civil war/ armed insurgency.

    There were eight assassination attempts on US presidents that got as far as gunshots being exchanged. Of these eight attempts:

    1. Three happened after the newly elected President had put his main rival for the party nomination on the ticket as his running mate (FDR, JFK, and Reagan).

    2. A fourth happened after the newly elected President put someone tied to the rival faction in the party on the ticket as his running mate (Garfield), the assassin actually said afterwards that he was trying to make the VP the president and to put his faction in power.

    3. A fifth was after the winning presidential ticket was a national unity ticket, involving a presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate from different parties (Lincoln). These happened a few times in the nineteenth century but are no longer done, for obvious reasons.

    If your are curious, for the other three, two involved what we would now call terrorists (McKinley and Truman), and the eighth actually involved a deranged person associated with the Manson family (Ford).

    Adlai Stevenson and John Kerry survived putting their chief rival for the nomination on the ticket by using the clever technique of losing the election.

    Anyway, given some of the rhetoric we are hearing about Trump, his main priority of his vice presidential pick is to find someone who would pretty much carry out his program if anything happened.

    A few presidents used the tactic of picking a running mate that no one in their right mind would want to see president, but that can cost a lot of votes, and they made Nixon get rid of Agnew before Watergate came to its conclusion.

    What of Jackson’s attempt? Opponents of the dismantling of the Bank? The bullets didn’t want any part of Ol Hickory, though.

  168. @iSteveFan
    Didn't NR do a cover piece on Trump a few weeks ago in which all the editorial staff laid out the case against him? They seemed to throw everything at Trump in that issue, yet Trump rolled through February's primaries/caucuses. What makes Charlie think this will be different?

    If Trump were to win, I do hope he banishes the neocons. They not only stunk up the Bush admin, but they have managed to stay around during Obama too. Besides immigration and trade, if Trump could effectively end the influence of the neocons, he would do this nation a great service.

    You’ve touched on the main reason the establishment Republicans are against Trump. Trump said that we should let Putin handle ISIS, and that he could work with Putin. This is 100% at odds with the neocon agenda, and the neocons still control the Republican Party. They would rather see Hillary win than Trump. Hillary would all but certainly be more pro-Israel and anti-Putin than Trunp. I still think the biggest threat to Trump right now is Cruz. The neocons can trust Cruz with their foreign policy agenda, and the big donors might be willing to gamble that once he’s in office, he’ll cave on immigration (which is far less a likelihood with Trump).

  169. @BenKenobi
    Is that an oblique reference to what Worth said in Cube?

    Not consciously. Although I think it was an excellent movie, and is applicable to much of modern civilization.

  170. @Svigor
    Yes, ballistic armor protects against rifle calibers and "AP" ammo. Wiki says Type III armor protects against 7.62x51mm, and Type IV protects against .30-06. (btw, online reviews show that when it comes to these ratings, protection really does mean protection; they're relatively conservative) Yes, it comes in "covert" flavors. "Armor piercing" is basically a standard feature of the common military rounds sold over the counter in the US. (No, "teflon-coated bullets" and the like aren't really a thing.)

    I think rifle rounds need a ceramic trauma plate to be stopped. The big problem stopping pointed spitzer bullets is the incredible pressure at the point of impact versus relatively flat pistol bullets.

  171. @Zachary Latif
    In Britain the manic (moronic?) author of this article would have been liable for hate crime & a potential incitement to violence.

    The Home Office has very good reason to look at a ban for travel to Britain for this author. This would have never flown about any British politician, even Nigel Farage or the BNP chap..

    Other than that it was simply an incoherent piece; someone sent around a clip of Trump's "funny moments." It's very obviously he's a very wealth man, with an indomitable charisma & passionate patriotism, who says what he feels + what works. Kudos to him if he wins the Primaries; I think a Trump-Hillary showdown will actually be very reinvigorating for the Old Republic (Bernie's a bit of a pansy & the Spanish chaps are still a little raw).. May even be Wasp America's final decision on which path it wants to go down (more of the same with Hillary's impeccable establishment credentials vs. Trump's populist Paleo-conservatism).

    My professional training and faith sort of abhors volatility so my (weak) inclination is towards Hillary but luckily for readers of this blog I don't have the right to vote. But then come June I'll be voting to stay in Europe, Boris Johnson has really crossed the line with his shameless opportunism and I daresay he is no Trump (at least Trump triumphed in the world of business, BJ is simply a classics boffin posturing in the world of politics and academia). The blonde clown should have stayed Mayor of London but let's hope Zac G is able to succeed him, he has this Zac's backing

    Well, what moral virtues would you say Hillary posess? As for charisma or business success, she has none to her credit.

  172. @Zachary Latif
    In Britain the manic (moronic?) author of this article would have been liable for hate crime & a potential incitement to violence.

    The Home Office has very good reason to look at a ban for travel to Britain for this author. This would have never flown about any British politician, even Nigel Farage or the BNP chap..

    Other than that it was simply an incoherent piece; someone sent around a clip of Trump's "funny moments." It's very obviously he's a very wealth man, with an indomitable charisma & passionate patriotism, who says what he feels + what works. Kudos to him if he wins the Primaries; I think a Trump-Hillary showdown will actually be very reinvigorating for the Old Republic (Bernie's a bit of a pansy & the Spanish chaps are still a little raw).. May even be Wasp America's final decision on which path it wants to go down (more of the same with Hillary's impeccable establishment credentials vs. Trump's populist Paleo-conservatism).

    My professional training and faith sort of abhors volatility so my (weak) inclination is towards Hillary but luckily for readers of this blog I don't have the right to vote. But then come June I'll be voting to stay in Europe, Boris Johnson has really crossed the line with his shameless opportunism and I daresay he is no Trump (at least Trump triumphed in the world of business, BJ is simply a classics boffin posturing in the world of politics and academia). The blonde clown should have stayed Mayor of London but let's hope Zac G is able to succeed him, he has this Zac's backing

    You do understand that the June vote is about the future of Britain; that this is not a vote for Boris Johnson or anyone else?

    • Replies: @Zachary Latif
    You do understand that June isn't about meaningless rhetoric?
  173. @Bill B.
    You do understand that the June vote is about the future of Britain; that this is not a vote for Boris Johnson or anyone else?

    You do understand that June isn’t about meaningless rhetoric?

  174. How long has this Cooke chappy been living in the US? Is he even a citizen?

  175. I can’t believe Unz is publishing this stuff. Why not just give George Will a regular column?

  176. @rod1963
    I agree.

    If you make a list of the people who hate Trump it's nothing short of amazing.

    The Pope
    The GOP
    The DP
    Obama
    NR
    TNR
    Neo-Cons
    Wall Street titans
    Hedge fund managers
    The Clintons and their murder machine(them I'd watch out for, because both of them face prosecution under Trump should he win).
    Chambers of Commerce
    Club for Growth
    The Davos set

    Although the EU bosses haven't said anything I am sure they are very worried about the political ramifications should Trump win.

    Trump better be very careful who he chooses as a VP, if it's a establishment type, it will green light bad things happening to him.

    Trillions are at stake if Trump wins. It's enough to get the wealthy thinking about a black bag operation.

    Trump is just a stand-in for their real hatred: rank and file Americans and Europeans who, for the past century-plus, have resisted the increasingly globalized and granular reach of central banking and its chosen elites, and their errand boys.

  177. @SFG
    No, that's not what he said, he said debating it was a way to teach critical thinking.

    I'm not so sure myself--I'd rather pick something where the evidence goes both ways--but that's not what Cooke is saying.

    There is some evidence the holocaust never took place. It’s not very strong evidence, and there’s plenty of evidence the holocaust did take place, but if you know enough of an event, any event, you’ll be able to argue it never happened. Like, if 99% of the evidence flows in one direction, then if you only know 5 or 20 facts, pretty much all will confirm it, but if you know 300 facts, a few of them will be against it. Also, if you are good enough, you can spin some of the evidence as proving nothing, and some as proving the opposite.

    So I don’t think it’s a very bad exercise.

  178. I think rifle rounds need a ceramic trauma plate to be stopped. The big problem stopping pointed spitzer bullets is the incredible pressure at the point of impact versus relatively flat pistol bullets.

    Yes, rifle vests use plates (though I think steel is used sometimes, too). IIRC they’re assumed to be part of Level III and Level IV vests, including the covert ones. And the big problem (from what I read) is velocity.

  179. @Svigor

    Anonymous, Assassination as a political tool has an ancient heritage. I just watched a you Tube video of Hillary at a private function in So Carolina, where she is interrupted by a BLM woman protester unfolding a small cloth sign. The girl elbows her way through the gathering and is within arms reach of Clinton. One well dressed older white guy gently tries to persuade her to leave or desist. Startling lack of security . Later she was escorted out by Secret Service agents.
     
    I met John McCain when he was running for president. Can't remember where it was on the campaign timeline - after he'd announced, but still early. We were outdoors and he broke from his aide and walked alone at least fifty feet to greet me and a couple other guys. We had gone through no security at all, and I don't remember seeing anyone that even looked like security. I was kind of amazed by that, after I'd had time to think about it later.

    Svigor, Hillary is used to having Secret Service protection, all through Bills two terms, and then as a former first lady, Sec’y of State and now as the primary Dem candidate for POTUS. I wonder if McCain had been assigned security when this occurred.

  180. @gruff

    Didn’t Trump get assigned a mandatory ‘protective’ squad of Secret Service agents? I’ve always wondered what prevents them from acting as the Roman Legions, determining who’s going to remain Emperor.
     
    You're thinking of the Praetorian Guard, whose emperor-making power was a slightly different matter than that of the legions and more analogous to the Secret Service. In any case power then was based on swords. Even if it were based only on guns today, the Secret Service would be easily destroyed by the many other armed state organizations.

    I’m not so much thinking of raw power – even if the Secret Service is genuinely elite they’d be wildly outnumbered – as having direct access to the families of major politicians.

    Even then, it’s mostly a joke, of course. But I remember several years ago someone making a joke that new Presidents became political conformists so rapidly once elected that it was as if they were taken into a room in the White House and shown a filmstrip about what would happen to them if they didn’t toe the line.

    I took it as a complete joke at the time. I mostly take it so, now… but I have to wonder.

  181. I wonder if McCain had been assigned security when this occurred.

    If you mean in the instance I described, no. Unless they were pulling a serious ninja deployment. We were in a sort of plaza that was mostly empty, and he had one guy with him, and he looked like an aide, not security. Plus the guy waited while McCain walked over, any security this side of Paul Blart wouldn’t do that.

  182. It’s not metaphorical, America has huge business interests selling US Citizenship and the debt load that comes with socialist invasion, our -20 Trillion in debt is somebody else’s +20T annuity, and they’d like to buy more slaves if allowed, they like the status quo, they like the invasion income and deportation “toll” income, they have a vested interest in maintaining trade deficits and handicapping America with both invasion and green energy, they like the rent increases and their water rights aren’t for sale, only rent.

    People have killed for far less.

    WHAT IS THE ANNUAL INVASION VALUE OF THE UNITED STATES?
    Trump is a threat to that revenue stream.

    What is the deportation toll value for the United States?
    Trump is a threat to that revenue stream too.

    Imagine summary deportations while lawyers and judges and bureaucrats that were looking at decades of income evaporate.

    Trump is a threat to the invasion looters vig.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2