2/24/2016, 4:23 pm
[img]/images/Trump_Feel_The_Earn_Again.jpg[/img]
[ PROG OFF ]
Please notice that I haven't once used the Cube to bash or promote any of the GOP candidates, even though some others have tried. I respect our members and their opinions. I also waited for the field to clear and see where the primaries would end up.
I also like all the remaining candidates and believe that any one of them would be a much better president than the current one, or any of the two wannabes on the Left (the Bolshevik and the Menshevik).
I noticed that some of us, mostly Cruz supporters, have a thing against the other candidates, especially against Trump. They certainly have the right to do so, but my biggest fear is that our side will self-destruct and there will be no one left to stand against the Democrats in the general election.
I agree that Trump is not perfect, but no other candidate is perfect either. I just wish Cruz would make a deal with Trump for a VP or an AG ticket, so they would stop damaging each other's credibility.
I also think that Ben Shapiro is giving Cruz terrible advice (reiterated by Rush) to attack Trump in the coming debate. He may have as well advised Cruz to jump in front of a moving tank with a baseball bat. No one who has attacked Trump so far has prevailed. Cruz may damage Trump, but it will cost him his own campaign. I hope he has more sense than that.
I don't want to turn this into a long treatise, so I'll stop here. If you're wondering about the reasons why I chose to side with Trump, check back later for an update, which I'll post below.
* * *
UPDATE, AS PROMISED:
First, let's look at the bigger picture.
We can all agree that the current national discourse, the list of debated issues, and even the vocabulary in which we debate them are a more or less recent creation of the "progressive" Left. The same forces have also fractured our society into collectivist pressure groups, to whom the Democrats and the Republicans alike must now pander in order to survive politically. The causes the Republicans must support and the questions they must publicly answer mostly come from within the "progressive" frame of reference. As politicians, they live and die within the "progressive" paradigm, complying with political correctness which they personally despise.
The only political actor on the national stage since Reagan who has been able to shatter that paradigm, frame, and narrative, is none other than Trump. He has created his own narrative, his own issues, and continues to frame the debate on his own terms. He rejects the game the establishment is playing on both sides. Trump plays his own game by his own rules. People like it and that's why he is leading in the polls.
Ted Cruz may have great conservative ideas which he articulates better than Trump, but today's cultural landscape has been rigged with traps for conservative ideologues. Even if "ideologically pure" Cruz ever wins presidency, he will have to live in that adverse landscape, which the Left will transform into a toxic quagmire before he can say "pro-life." What good will his great ideas do if they are bogged down in the enormous government bureaucracy staffed with "progressive" Democrats?
The media, academia, and Hollywood cultivate polarization and mutual partisan resentment as an antidote against conservative ideologues. Partisanship only benefits Democrats. Doing anything within this framework is counterproductive; the best thing a conservative president can do is rename the "progressive" swamp into a "conservative" swamp, which will hardly make the swamp a better place. What's really needed here is a complete overhaul of the cultural landscape. The next president will fail unless he drains the noxious "progressive" swamp in its entirety.
This job can only be effectively done by a non-ideological and forceful president-bully with a popular appeal, who can unite and inspire the nation across the partisan lines and has the license to call things what they are, according to common sense and not political correctness. Trump has earned that license and proved that he has the above qualities. As a bonus, he has also proved that he is immune to media criticism.
Trump attracts large crowds because people who have been bullied by the "progressives" for too long are finally excited to see a bully on their side. It takes a bully to stand up to other bullies. Ted Cruz, with all his intellect and "pure" conservative credentials, is not a bully.
This brings me to the pious advocates of "pure" conservatism who like to blame the GOP establishment for the current mess. I'm all for shaming political whores, but it wouldn't also hurt to take a closer look at their own icon William Buckley, the celebrated creator of today's conservative movement. Buckley also seemed to put a lot of effort into splitting hairs over the question of who is a "real" conservative and who is not. But was his movement a success? Let's look at the outcome: all commanding positions in the American culture, media, and education have been surrendered to the "progressives," the economy is sliding towards socialism, and conservatives are now the pariahs of the 21st century. Last time I checked, conservatives measured success by the outcomes, not by good intentions.
Furthermore, Buckley placed religion as the cornerstone of conservatism, where it doesn't belong - which becomes obvious if you look at the proliferation of "progressive" churches and reverends like Sharpton, Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright. Obsessed with "purity," Buckley "excommunicated" atheist author and thinker Ayn Rand - the greatest and possibly fatal loss for the conservative movement - as well as other "unpure" ones, including the anti-communist, anti-UN John Birch Society for being "too extreme." As a result, to qualify as a "true conservative" one almost has to be a castrated monk, which is pretty close to our public image and, for some, a self-image as well. Good luck winning the culture wars, holy brothers!
Buckley's "pure" vision is continued today by his brainchild, National Review, which has assumed the role of announcing to the nation who is a "true" and who is "not a true" conservative. Following in their founder's tradition they recently attempted to excommunicate Donald Trump. This cost them a large chunk of their audience and a great deal of mental anguish, which will hopefully prompt them finally to look outside their ivory tower and see how the rest of us live.
Everyone who has attacked Trump so far has lost: National Review, the RNC, Fox News, Jeb Bush, and even the Pope. The latest attacker licking his wounds is now Glenn Beck. When a certified psycho like Alex Jones tells Beck to get a straightjacket, it's got to be serious.
Did I enjoy watching Trump bash the Bushes on the WMD and WTC? Absolutely not. Upon reflection, however, as much as it pains me to say it, Trump gave George W. Bush what he deserved - a taste of the popular narrative created in the absence of any effort by the former president to clear his own name from false accusations when he was in office.
Like many others on our side I spent way too much time debunking the anti-Bush fallacies and ridiculing the Bush Derangement Syndrome - something Bush himself could have done more effectively. But he didn't. He just quietly stepped down, allowing the lies to take hold and solidify into an internationally accepted narrative. That made me, among many others, feel betrayed and deflated. Remember Limbaugh's comment about being tired of carrying Bush's water? I'm pretty sure he felt the same way.
To make matters worse, the unopposed anti-Bush hysteria also gave the White House to Obama, who still blames Bush for all his troubles. Bush's refusal to fight has given his opponents so much fuel that seven years later Obama still runs on the anti-Bush platform and gets great mileage.
That probably explains why voters rejected Jeb: they were afraid to live through the same scenario with another Bush.
That may also explain why they'd rather have Trump - a Teflon bully.
[ PROG OFF ]
Please notice that I haven't once used the Cube to bash or promote any of the GOP candidates, even though some others have tried. I respect our members and their opinions. I also waited for the field to clear and see where the primaries would end up.
Now that Trump has won Nevada and Drudge declared him "the nominee" - apparently because The Donald is likely to win most other states - I thought it was time to post this "Feel the Earn" banner and suggest that we start uniting behind one candidate.
I also like all the remaining candidates and believe that any one of them would be a much better president than the current one, or any of the two wannabes on the Left (the Bolshevik and the Menshevik).
I noticed that some of us, mostly Cruz supporters, have a thing against the other candidates, especially against Trump. They certainly have the right to do so, but my biggest fear is that our side will self-destruct and there will be no one left to stand against the Democrats in the general election.
I agree that Trump is not perfect, but no other candidate is perfect either. I just wish Cruz would make a deal with Trump for a VP or an AG ticket, so they would stop damaging each other's credibility.
I also think that Ben Shapiro is giving Cruz terrible advice (reiterated by Rush) to attack Trump in the coming debate. He may have as well advised Cruz to jump in front of a moving tank with a baseball bat. No one who has attacked Trump so far has prevailed. Cruz may damage Trump, but it will cost him his own campaign. I hope he has more sense than that.
I don't want to turn this into a long treatise, so I'll stop here. If you're wondering about the reasons why I chose to side with Trump, check back later for an update, which I'll post below.
* * *
UPDATE, AS PROMISED:
Donald Trump vs. "True Conservatives"
This may appear to some of you angry at times, but I was prompted, in part, by the incessant FB messages and emails I have been receiving for some time - mostly from Cruz supporters - ridiculing Trump, Rubio, and other Republican candidates as not "true conservatives" while often relying on "progressive" sources for their arguments.First, let's look at the bigger picture.
We can all agree that the current national discourse, the list of debated issues, and even the vocabulary in which we debate them are a more or less recent creation of the "progressive" Left. The same forces have also fractured our society into collectivist pressure groups, to whom the Democrats and the Republicans alike must now pander in order to survive politically. The causes the Republicans must support and the questions they must publicly answer mostly come from within the "progressive" frame of reference. As politicians, they live and die within the "progressive" paradigm, complying with political correctness which they personally despise.
The only political actor on the national stage since Reagan who has been able to shatter that paradigm, frame, and narrative, is none other than Trump. He has created his own narrative, his own issues, and continues to frame the debate on his own terms. He rejects the game the establishment is playing on both sides. Trump plays his own game by his own rules. People like it and that's why he is leading in the polls.
Ted Cruz may have great conservative ideas which he articulates better than Trump, but today's cultural landscape has been rigged with traps for conservative ideologues. Even if "ideologically pure" Cruz ever wins presidency, he will have to live in that adverse landscape, which the Left will transform into a toxic quagmire before he can say "pro-life." What good will his great ideas do if they are bogged down in the enormous government bureaucracy staffed with "progressive" Democrats?
The media, academia, and Hollywood cultivate polarization and mutual partisan resentment as an antidote against conservative ideologues. Partisanship only benefits Democrats. Doing anything within this framework is counterproductive; the best thing a conservative president can do is rename the "progressive" swamp into a "conservative" swamp, which will hardly make the swamp a better place. What's really needed here is a complete overhaul of the cultural landscape. The next president will fail unless he drains the noxious "progressive" swamp in its entirety.
This job can only be effectively done by a non-ideological and forceful president-bully with a popular appeal, who can unite and inspire the nation across the partisan lines and has the license to call things what they are, according to common sense and not political correctness. Trump has earned that license and proved that he has the above qualities. As a bonus, he has also proved that he is immune to media criticism.
Trump attracts large crowds because people who have been bullied by the "progressives" for too long are finally excited to see a bully on their side. It takes a bully to stand up to other bullies. Ted Cruz, with all his intellect and "pure" conservative credentials, is not a bully.
This brings me to the pious advocates of "pure" conservatism who like to blame the GOP establishment for the current mess. I'm all for shaming political whores, but it wouldn't also hurt to take a closer look at their own icon William Buckley, the celebrated creator of today's conservative movement. Buckley also seemed to put a lot of effort into splitting hairs over the question of who is a "real" conservative and who is not. But was his movement a success? Let's look at the outcome: all commanding positions in the American culture, media, and education have been surrendered to the "progressives," the economy is sliding towards socialism, and conservatives are now the pariahs of the 21st century. Last time I checked, conservatives measured success by the outcomes, not by good intentions.
Furthermore, Buckley placed religion as the cornerstone of conservatism, where it doesn't belong - which becomes obvious if you look at the proliferation of "progressive" churches and reverends like Sharpton, Jackson, and Jeremiah Wright. Obsessed with "purity," Buckley "excommunicated" atheist author and thinker Ayn Rand - the greatest and possibly fatal loss for the conservative movement - as well as other "unpure" ones, including the anti-communist, anti-UN John Birch Society for being "too extreme." As a result, to qualify as a "true conservative" one almost has to be a castrated monk, which is pretty close to our public image and, for some, a self-image as well. Good luck winning the culture wars, holy brothers!
Buckley's "pure" vision is continued today by his brainchild, National Review, which has assumed the role of announcing to the nation who is a "true" and who is "not a true" conservative. Following in their founder's tradition they recently attempted to excommunicate Donald Trump. This cost them a large chunk of their audience and a great deal of mental anguish, which will hopefully prompt them finally to look outside their ivory tower and see how the rest of us live.
Everyone who has attacked Trump so far has lost: National Review, the RNC, Fox News, Jeb Bush, and even the Pope. The latest attacker licking his wounds is now Glenn Beck. When a certified psycho like Alex Jones tells Beck to get a straightjacket, it's got to be serious.
Did I enjoy watching Trump bash the Bushes on the WMD and WTC? Absolutely not. Upon reflection, however, as much as it pains me to say it, Trump gave George W. Bush what he deserved - a taste of the popular narrative created in the absence of any effort by the former president to clear his own name from false accusations when he was in office.
Like many others on our side I spent way too much time debunking the anti-Bush fallacies and ridiculing the Bush Derangement Syndrome - something Bush himself could have done more effectively. But he didn't. He just quietly stepped down, allowing the lies to take hold and solidify into an internationally accepted narrative. That made me, among many others, feel betrayed and deflated. Remember Limbaugh's comment about being tired of carrying Bush's water? I'm pretty sure he felt the same way.
To make matters worse, the unopposed anti-Bush hysteria also gave the White House to Obama, who still blames Bush for all his troubles. Bush's refusal to fight has given his opponents so much fuel that seven years later Obama still runs on the anti-Bush platform and gets great mileage.
That probably explains why voters rejected Jeb: they were afraid to live through the same scenario with another Bush.
That may also explain why they'd rather have Trump - a Teflon bully.




)