With Amy Lindsay, Ted Cruz, standing for president, had an opportunity to support a charming, gracious and smart lady, who had acted in one of his campaign ads (below), later to be pulled by the senator’s campaign because Ms. Lindsay had also starred in a naughty film or two.
The libertarian-leaning Ms. Lindsay is, by her own admission, extremely conservative fiscally, likes Ted Cruz—so she was doing his ad because it comported with her beliefs—and intends to vote Republican.
Here was Cruz’s opportunity to show his support for our kind of woman: doesn’t nag, doesn’t rely on welfare, doesn’t think she has the right to dictate to anyone how they use their resources and thus supports Cruz’s right to pull her ad. Can you image the fuss Sandra Fluke would make in her place?
Politically, here was Cruz’s chance to show Democrats what it means to dignify a woman’s right to make a living as she sees fit.
He blew it.
Donald Trump should employ Amy in his next ad against the three establishment Amigos: Jeb, Marco, John K.
“Wish fulfillment is “the satisfaction of a desire through an involuntary thought process.” This Freudian term encapsulates the coverage of the riveting 2016 primaries by the Megyn Kelly wing (or coven) of the Murdoch Media.
Yes, a news personality—a showgirl really—is running more of Roger Ailes’ show than she should. And, as Newsmax reports, not everyone in the org is pleased with Kelly’s “Trump-fueled stardom.”
Since the anchoring philosopher in Kelly’s life is Oprah Winfry’s protégé, TV pop-psychologist Dr. Phil—the anchor ought to appreciate a psychological idiom that encapsulates her coverage of the New Hampshire primary, in particular, and of Donald Trump in general.
Look, no-one is discounting the news-worthy value of good leg and hair action and some, but not much, fine couture. However, Kelly File coverage is defined by little to no analysis approximating reality, hence “wish fulfillment.”
What the likes of lightweight Dana Perinno, Mega-ego Kelly and their male friendlies have made manifest is that: 1) Navigating the shoals of reality is hard for them, and 2) They’re hoping against hope that someone will politically slay The Donald dragon.
The central question around which these Marco-Rubio enamored performers have thus framed the New Hampshire primary’s results is: Who is going to beat Mr. Trump, the Republican front runner, who’d just triumphed “bigly” in NH.
The headline on kingmaker Kelly’s Fox News website was, “What’s the anti-Trump strategy now?” (It has since vanished.) And, “Who will the lead GOP establishment?” On February 10, Kelly scolded Jeb Bush for “having his eye on the wrong guy,” and failing to take on the “quarterback who’s running with the ball.”
To the extent The Kelly File covers the Trump phenomenon, coverage is given over to plotting against the candidate and, by extension, the Americans he represents.
The desire among select members of the Murdoch Media for a Marco Rubio victory is in plain view. Kelly and her carefully selected compadres are hoping against hope that Trump will stop winning. Their focus, to the exclusion of all else, is on who’ll stop their political bête noire.
Coverage that is directed toward desired outcomes is no coverage at all. …
Today, there is nothing on Der Spiegel Online about the en masse rapes-by-Muslim, reported across Germany, from Cologne to Hamburg to Stuttgart (the paper leads with a story on gender inequality in corporate Germany). BBC News does still do news, offering this headline on the front page of the website: “Cologne sex attacks require police rethink.” I wonder what is being reconsidered? Promiscuous Asylum and immigration policies? Perish the thought.
Let’s see what we have here: Girly German men in power complain of a “lack of resources,” point to “a completely new dimension of crime,” apparently hitherto not encountered in Germany (before mass importation of rape-by-Muslim).
Oh yeah, and one of the girls, Ralf Jaeger, interior minister for North Rhine-Westphalia, said that “right-wing poisoning of the climate of our society” is “at least as awful as the acts of those assaulting the women.”
I don’t know about you, but I would rather be subjected to a “right-wing” harangue than to rape.
And I thought Germans were smarter that Americans. Lots of American women would be carrying concealed. I would.
UPDADE III: Merkel’s a disgrace. Germany’s chancellor for life—she’s been in power since November 2005—has set a high bar for the deportation of migrants who had no natural right to be in Germany in the first place:
I can see why women—biologically programmed to like powerful men who can take care of them—would find Muslim men more attractive than the West’s soft, repulsive, liberal men. Indeed, from this Jerusalem-based imam comes excellent locution and logic to describe an emasculated, feminized West, primed for a muscular, masculine Muslim takeover. His “Europe has become old and decrepit” is three minutes and 11 seconds into the supremely reasoned sermon.
So where are the West’s manly leaders? “I have a blond wife, a blue-eyed child and a … shotgun,” said one European, residing near a refugee encampment, to InfoWars’ correspondent. But he (and his hearsay) is but one (and if he defended his fair flock; he and European males like him would be jailed). Most men just hand their women over. Yuk.
And by the way, the Imam strikes a better pose than, say, Father Michael Pfleger and the prototypical white, liberal, male preacher. Be honest: Who looks better? The ascetic-looking Muslim in his white flowing robes, speaking in that deep manly voice, or this emasculated thing (which is what the West’s religious leaders generally look and sound like):
The Western, radical liberal preacher:
The Muslim Manly Preacher:
To follow on the report of Paul Joseph Watson, InfoWars’ young correspondent (some four minutes into the broadcast): Indeed, if you accept and want the growing “superstate bureaucracy,” you accept and want its imported populations. I’ve debunked the demographic argument, which is an extension of the argument from statism:
… Exemplified by Mark Steyn, Wilders’ worthy supporters in the US make sure he knows they love him for standing tall for speech, women, and individual rights—no-brainers all. Like Steyn, they generally steer clear of addressing the perils for their own country of mass, third-world immigration (legal and illegal).
I am told that I don’t understand Mr. Steyn of the dooms-day demographics. So I listened to his “End of Europe” lectures, in which he vividly describes the multitudes of Muslims going forth to North America and Western Europe to be fruitful and multiply and push for Islam. Their Pan-Islamist identity trumps their new assumed identity. Because of numbers, Mark asserts, History is on the march in the Muslim direction. By 2030 much of what we think of as the developed world will be part of the Muslim world.
Here Steyn hits a brick wall. Other than making babies at home and total war abroad, Steyn used to propose nothing much at all. Oh yes, if you’re not already fighting (futilely, in my opinion) in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can show your marbles by publishing offensive cartoons, making rightwing movies, and writing right-wing text.
The “One-Man Global Content Provider” is wrong. Demographics need not be destiny. The waning West became what it is not by out-breeding the undeveloped world. We were once great not because of huge numbers, but due to human capital — people of superior ideas and abilities, capable of innovation, exploration, science, philosophy.
Declining birth rates—and their antidote; the mass immigration imperative—are the excuses statists make for persevering with immigration policies that are guaranteed to destroy western civil society and shore up the State.
It would be productive if Steyn were to also demand, asap, as this writer has, the implementation of an immediate, defensive, libertarian, negative-rights, leave-me-alone strategy: don’t let the homie Jiahdis who hold western passports back in. Government-issued papers do not a natural right confer. Citizenship is no natural right; staying alive is.
