Wednesday, December 9, 2015

They're Finally Starting to Get Trump

At National Review, of all places - the premier cuckservative nest.
Critically, the Overton Window was smashed not by a politician but by a very American hybrid of corporate/entertainment titan — a man rich and powerful enough to be immune to elite condemnation and famous enough to dominate the news media. How many people can commandeer live television simply by picking up the phone and calling in? How many politicians can cause Twitter to detonate seemingly at will?  
While many of Trump’s actual proposals are misguided, nonsensical, or untenable, by smashing the window, he’s begun the process of freeing the American people from the artificial and destructive constraints of Left-defined discourse. Serious and substantive politicians like Ted Cruz will get a more respectful hearing, and PC shibboleths about allegedly boundless virtues of Islam and immigration will be treated with the skepticism they deserve.
Of course, French goes on to say that 'Trump should not rule the world he made'. But who should replace him? Marco fucking Rubio? Jeb!? Someone else with a golden leash around their neck, answering to donors with the same sympathies they've always had, but perhaps singing a different tune? Should we trust National Review's judgment, after they spent months trying desperately to protect the Overton Window they now praise the destruction of?

I'll gamble on Trump, thank you very much. Since he, you know - actually accomplished all this.

Come to think of it, all of the successes worth talking about lately have come from the section of the right that 'proper' conservatives and Republicans hate. Outfits like Breitbart. Writers like Milo 'Flamingly Gay Catholic' Yiannapolous. Vox Day, while he's promoting the Cuckservative label that -outrages- Republicans. Taki's Mag, home to guys like Derbyshire, who were ejected from National Review because liberals complained.

Meanwhile, in the mainstream right, Jeb Bush can speak in Spanish and Marco Rubio's young and peppy. How could I ever pass up that action?

Somehow, I'll find a way to do just that. And you should too.


8 comments:

rOnIn said...

Crude,

I found this link interesting...

http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/12/10/fox-amp-friends-defends-trumps-anti-muslim-clai/207404

Edgestow said...

It appears that im-skeptical is reading your blog. He posted a link to this conversation, labeling you and the other participants as persons of "low intelligence"!

Crude said...

Hey,

Yeah, Murdoch backed Trump on that one. Frankly I think he may be playing a long game, since at this point attempts to destroy Trump didn't pan out. He doesn't want Trump to reach the nomination stage and decide to shut him out.

Crude said...

Edge,

Hey there, welcome, I don't believe we've met.

Regarding Skeppy - seriously, as someone who's talked with him for a very long time, I can assure you: he is what learned philosophers and esteemed scientists refer to as a "harmless retard". I've already said all that needs to be said about both him and his blog platform of choice.

Edgestow said...

I can see what you mean (about Skeppy). I've been discussing immigration with him all day, but it's like he doesn't understand plain English, or maybe he just has a five second attention span. You show him how he's dead wrong about something one minute, and the next minute he repeats himself like nothing's been said. Very frustrating. Impossible to make any progress. He even linked at one point to a site that backed up my argument as a defense of his own! It was clear that he had no idea what the thing was saying. Very weird.

Crude said...

Yeah, I'm not kidding when I say he's incredibly dumb. I argued with him for years - this isn't me saying he's dumb because I disagree with him. I give credit where it's due. This is a guy who will insist that an author said X, not Y, even if you literally contact the author by email and ask him if he meant X or Y and the author replies Y. He'll just say he knows what the author 'really meant'.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

Feel free to disagree.

I'd go with Carly or Cruz myself.

Trump seems a little unstable for my tastes (he is still better than Lady Macbeth/Hillary). Also my gut tells me he is like a right wing Obummer. He might be good at campaigning but I am not sure he can run the country.

I do like that he has sunk Jeb & discredited the RINO Establishment whom I hate more than the Progressive Libs.

If the Establishment wants to sink Trump they better get behind Carly or Cruz.

Because these McCain, Romney, Dole Bush "moderate" "electable but they always loose" guys are getting old.

Select a conservative you RINO jerks or get out of the way!

Peace out Crude my brother.

Crude said...

Ben,

Also my gut tells me he is like a right wing Obummer. He might be good at campaigning but I am not sure he can run the country.

I think four years of Trump defying the press and the established political parties openly and repeatedly would overrule just about anything he could do, save for nuclear war. Which I'd sooner suspect Hillary of.

Carly, I see no value in. Cruz I like, but he's very crafty. I've had my fill of crafty.