It Takes A Village Idiot To Vote For Hillary

Donald Trump, Elections, Federal Reserve Bank, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Russia

“It Takes A Village Idiot To Vote For Hillary” is the current column, now trending on Townhall.com. An excerpt:

If you strapped Bill Clinton to a polygraph (or some lie detector that can’t be fooled by the Clintons)—I suspect he, too, might confess to a preference for Vladimir Putin over Barack Obama.

Mr. Clinton had been appropriately scathing, in 2008, about Obama’s mythical status in the media. A “fairy tale,” he called the current president.

However, his wife and her supporters on The Hill and in media have ruled that any remotely realistic utterance about the Russian president—such as that he’s a strong leader who’s popular with his people and acts in their interests—puts you outside the camp of the saints.

Mrs. Clinton is making it a habit to tell Americans what to say and how to think if they want to qualify as … Americans.

In particular, Hillary’s AltRight screed, best described on Twitter as the Control-Alt-Delete speech, focused on Mrs. Clinton’s crusade against deviationists. Provided by a twitter handle called “Hillary’s PR Team,” here’s a distillation of the interminable smear against Trump and his supporters, peddled as “substantive” by the moron media:

Prejudice and paranoia, hate groups, harmful stereotypes, hateful supporters, systemic racism, dark conspiracies, dark conspiracy theories, racist lies, bigotry, racist, white supremacist bigot, white nationalist leader, KKK, racially tinged rumors, Alex Jones. …

Yes, Hillary’s Control-Alt-Delete harangue began with the biggest deviationist of all, Donald J. Trump. Trump “disregards the values that make our country great,” fumed the fire-and-brimstone Mrs. Clinton on that occasion.

To his great credit, Trump flunked another test of “true American principles,” established by Hillary, following the NBC’s “Commander-in-Chief” forum, on September 7.

As the media reminds us, Trump disqualifies himself for the presidency daily. This time it was for speaking the truth about Putin at the forum. The Russian people’s approval of their president stands at 82 percent. But the correct American values, as decreed by our northeastern elites, depend on disparaging Putin and his people. After all, Russians are stupid. They need Clinton and her Radical Republican counterpart, Speaker Paul Ryan (or a color-coded revolution organized by both), to induct them into the American government’s ways.

Enforcer Hillary (and Speaker Ryan) was having none of it. A preference for the Russian president over our American president was plain “unpatriotic and scary,” to be stamped out and marginalized.

“Hillary Rodham Clinton,” argues historian Clyde N. Wilson, whose métier is American intellectual history, “is a museum-quality specimen of the Yankee—self-righteous, ruthless, and self-aggrandizing.”

Wilson uses the term Yankee “historically to designate a peculiar group descended from New Englanders, who can be easily recognized by their arrogance, hypocrisy, greed, lack of congeniality, and penchant for ordering other people around.”

By Yankee, Dr. Wilson does not mean “everybody from north of the Potomac and Ohio. The firemen who died in the World Trade Center on September 11 [commemorated this weekend] were Americans. The politicians and TV personalities who stood around telling us what we are to think about it are Yankees.”

In their journey from the “hyper-Calvinism of their early days,” to “their present atheism,” Yankees like Hillary have long ago replaced religious zeal with a progressive’s political fanaticism. And while they’ve “abandoned anything that might be good in their religion,” contends Wilson, bossy busybodies like Clinton have never given up the notion that “they are the chosen saints whose mission is to make America, and the world, into the perfection of their own image.”

Again, by continuously enforcing the “standard of all things American and good,” Hillary is not that different from her Republican colleagues. They, too, deploy the values cudgel as energetically, to whip the base into shape. Or, to read many of us out of the American family.

To compound his unorthodoxy, Trump failed to fall back on the American exceptionalism exemption, in judging the actions of American leaders—good by default—relative to other world leaders. At the “Commander-in-Chief” forum, Trump intimated that Mr. Putin’s transgressions were “no less troublesome than Mr. Obama’s transgressions.” Quite right. Ask the innocent victims of Obama’s energetic drone program ongoing: villagers in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya and Yemen. …

… Read the rest. The complete column is “It Takes A Village Idiot To Vote For Hillary.”  Read it on Townhall.com, where it’s trending.

A Rear Admiral Gives ‘Rear’ A New Meaning

Donald Trump, Elections, Hillary Clinton, Military

She worked for and supported George Bush, master and commander of futile, unconstitutional, immoral invasions in the Middle East. But Rear Admiral Deborah Loewer, “a 31-year Navy veteran and director of the Situation Room during the September 11th attacks,” will be voting for Hillary, not least because Donald Trump—a civilian until now with no policy making background—is not making the right SOUNDS about Vladimir Putin, who, says the rear admiral, invaded his neighbors.

Remind me what “Rear” stands for in “Rear Admiral.”

Crazy Clinton Decrees, Don’t Talk About The Fed

Debt, Donald Trump, Federal Reserve Bank, Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton has issued a decree about the Federal Reserve Bank, to the extend she understands that the Fed’s monetary policies are what monetize the debt she and her kind run up.

According to Clinton, the tool that greases the operations of government “should be off-limits for U.S. presidents and presidential candidates. You should not be commenting on Fed actions when you are either running for president or you are president,” commanded this illiberal, controlling, presidential candidate.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, gets that the Fed is “keeping the rates down so that everything else doesn’t go down,” and that, “We have a very false economy.”

And he says so.

To contrast with the lack of awareness of monetary policy among his rivals, Donald Trump’s awareness of the destruction created by the Federal Reserve system was commended in “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed”:

“The consummate homo economicus, Trump is a rational actor in the market place. Unlike the rest of the GOP contenders who’re guided by political calculations; Trump speaks like a man to whom rational economic choices are second nature. And so he gets that the ‘stock market is bloated’; that the Stock Exchange is a laughing stock, and that soaring stock prices are a consequence of centrally planned, monetary stimulus.” (p. 45.)

‘Hillbilly Elegy’: Why Liberals & Faux Conservatives Converge About This Book

Conservatism, Donald Trump, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Political Correctness, Race

“Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis” is a culturally compliant account of poor, white America. Its thesis approaches not at all the one advanced (well in advance) in a chapter of “The Trump Revolution”: “Trump’s Invisible Poor Army’s Waiting On The Ropes.”

The politically proper utterances of its eloquent and smart author illustrate that you can write a national bestseller to the resounding approval of left-liberals, libertarians, neoconservatives and other excuse-for-conservatives provided your thesis allows a convergence over agreeable story lines.

This storytelling must sport major lacunae—mainly about the racial and ethnic dispossession of poor whites—to pass muster with all these factions. (Today, the author of “Hillbilly Elegy” could be heard relating to the MSNBC gendarme of PC how poor whites still had some white privilege to fall back on, when compared to poor blacks. Into The Cannibal’s Pot demonstrates that it is the EXACT opposite.)

When encountering the perennial nonsense of a self-styled conservative at The American Conservative, I’m reminded of how I miss the ornery but astute Lawrence Auster. The American Conservative was his self-imposed beat; he used to eviscerate its non-thinkers. Oh, I already said that in “Why I Miss Lawrence Auster, RIP,” where I noted how,

Brilliantly did the late Larry Auster dissect the demise of Russel Kirk’s conservatism at The American Conservative (TAC) magazine. Division of labor being part of a natural intellectual order that arises, Auster would have likely left it to me to point out the pimped intellectual principles this AC “writer” evinces in her meandering Mandela entry, in which “Madiba” is contrasted, in a manner, with George Washington. (Compare that AC crap with “Mandela Mum About Systematic Murder Of Whites.” You can’t!)
Auster was at his rhetorical best when deconstructing the “typically shapeless pieces”—or “weird and solipsistic” was another of his wonderful coinages—that this unthinking “conservative” crowd disgorged. About the American Conservative’s pipsqueak writers, Mr. Auster wrote with the studied contempt they deserve.

Here’s an Auster excerpt, which I hope will stay online. Writes the late Larry:

The founding editor of The American Conservative (known here as The Paleostinian Conservative), Scott McConnell, who has twice endorsed Obama for president yet continues to call himself a conservative, has written a typically weird and solipsistic article about me in which, among other things, he cluelessly calls me a European-style pagan fascist like Julius Evola and dismisses my work as a specimen of “radical right-wing disillusion with post-millennial America.” Because McConnell is a thoroughly emotion-driven, negative, and reactive personality, he sees me in the same light. He is incapable of grasping that I am someone who argues for standards based on truth and the good, and evaluates society according to those standards. That is not “disillusionment.” That is moral and intellectual judgment.
Also, Mencius Moldbug has a typically shapeless piece on me in which he pays me extravagant compliments which have precisely zero content. I defy anyone to say what Moldbug’s 2,600 word article means.
I’d like to write full responses to the two, but lack the energy right now. My purpose would not be to pursue the subject of myself, but to illustrate a “conservative” mindset and writing style that have become disturbingly dominant in certain quarters, as people of approximately conservative disposition have become so alienated from contemporary reality that they have given up on making sense of the world themselves, or on seeking a better and truer way. All they desire is to express their sense of superiority to the existing order of things, and they do this by spinning out whatever nonsense they feel like. And if they spin out the nonsense with enough verbal energy and pseudo-conceptual flair, they will find a devoted readership who feel that they share the writer’s superiority. It is very decadent.

Anyhow, the thesis of “Hillbilly Elegy” is sufficiently opaque and politically correct to  skirt the Big Lies and The real Truth.

In case anyone is listening to me, I would recommend a scholarly alternative, not so much for its perspective, but for the richness of the data: “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010,” by Charles Murray.