I haven’t been in the mood to talk presidential politics; who the GOP nominee turned out to be is certainly a factor in that. Nonetheless, after much deliberation (and assuming circumstances do not change drastically), I have decided to cast my vote for Trump. The reasons are too diverse to present systematically (it would be a very long post) so instead, below are some ‘vignettes,’ as it were.
I should mention that this is autobiographical and not put forth as a persuasive piece. Still, there are certain people–liberal progressives come to mind–who are not within my assumed ‘target’ audience. I have no interest in justifying myself to them. Let’s get started:
A lot of people thought that this woman, identified as Annaliese Nielsen, showed herself to be a complete nutjob in this incident. Even liberal progressives thought that ‘maybe’ she had gone a little overboard with her conduct and her perspective is on the bizarre side. Well, yea.
Now, two things came to my mind when I watched this that I didn’t see anyone else talk about. First of all, there is her expectation that she will be perceived as the morally appropriate person in this situation, as indicated by her comments at about 1:30 that the video [time might not be accurate anymore as Youtube deleted the original] will be happily thrown up on the Gawker site. “Why would she think that?” one wonders.
The other thought that came to my mind was: “How are such people produced in the first place?”
The answer to both are roughly the same, and we know that answer will not at all involve conservative Republican Christian white males. No, this is the product of a liberal progressive worldview that Nielsen has received and feels no shame in acting on.
So, perhaps this little video doesn’t scare you all that much. Ok, imagine a million more people just like Annaliese Nielsen.
Now imagine them with police powers.
If that vision doesn’t send shivers down your spine, not much will.
These are precisely the kinds of people that the Democrat party produces, and then places into power. How do you combat this lunacy? How do you prevent this lunacy from manifesting into something far, far worse? The GOP seems unwilling… afraid? … to challenge it. Only Trump seems to have the backbone to stand up to such fascism.
* * * * *
Speaking of fascism. Few people know what fascism really was. Its equated with the ‘right wing’ when it was really, ideologically speaking, a creature of the left. The only thing that makes it ‘right wing’ is the somewhat arbitrary decision to make ‘authoritarian’ regimes on the ‘right’ side of the political scale. So, even though the Nazis were National Socialists, since it was an ‘authoritarian’ regime, Annaliese Nielsen believes that it is the conservatives who are closer to implementing Hitler’s policies–by Hitler’s methods. Just because ‘conservatives’ are described as being ‘right wing.’
In fact, it is the opposite.
Since very few people (certainly your typical liberal has no idea) know anything about the Nazis or Mussolini (or the Bolsheviks, or Chavez… or, anything really) beyond what they read in one paragraph in a text book in eighth grade, they can’t possibly know that they are acting with the same kind of self-righteous rage, on behalf of the ‘common good’, as their forebears.
You can expect a country governed by people like Hillary Clinton to continue to fan these fascist flames. The actual fascists, of course, will not know they are fascists, and will continue behave violently, and increasingly so, with the full approval of their consciences.
Meanwhile, the GOP stands timidly by, trying to satiate the bloodthirsty jackboots, instead of standing up to them and telling them exactly what they are, or, better yet, de-funding the programs and institutions that breed such attitudes in the first place. Only Trump dares to stand up to them.
* * * * *
The Christian Conscience
I have heard many Christians talk about ‘voting their conscience.’ There is nothing intrinsically wrong with that. I’m very concerned about that, myself. Clearly, Trump isn’t the sort of guy that I would have preferred. I voted for Ted Cruz — who has his own problems.
But this election has exposed a flaw in my own expectations, eg, whether or not I am right to expect to have a morally sound person to vote for in the first place. For decades, a Christian could expect that politicians would be sensitive and respectful to ‘value voters.’ But that’s only true in the United States, and its only true in this modern era.
I began thinking about all the instances throughout history where Christians were ruled by people who were not at all concerned about addressing the concerns of their Christian ‘constituents.’ The right to influence who the ruler is by voting is itself a relatively new phenomena. As John Zmirak put it, “If We Reject Trump, We May Be Inviting Persecution: When the election is Constantine vs. Diocletian, Christians don’t get to stay home.” The Christians of c. 300 AD didn’t really have any say in deciding between the two, as we do today.
But then I started thinking about Christians in countries like, say Iraq, while it was ruled by Hussein. Christians voted for Hussein. Probably because he would have killed them if they hadn’t! But a new possibility has emerged in my mind: maybe the Iraqi Christians, enjoying a certain measure of freedom to practice their religion, knew full well that being ruled by Hussein was far more preferable than being ruled by the ones that would gladly step into leadership, given the opportunity…
You know, folks like ISIS.
What about those countries where Christians only have the choice of Muslims to choose from when they cast their vote? (If they get to vote at all.)
I’m just not so sure that we ever really had the right to expect that, when voting, we could be reasonably confident that the person was a decent chap. Nor do I think it is right to say–as is implied by many Christians refusing to vote for Trump–that a vote for Trump is an endorsement of his attitudes and behaviors.
Honestly, if our vote represented that kind of endorsement, I dare say we really ought not ever cast a vote for anyone.
I am not saying that the vote does not signify a certain level of ratification of that person, because it is at least that, by definition.
But it seems to be blown way out of proportion with Trump. Most disturbing of all, to me, are occasional Christians who normally vote Republican who are preparing to vote for Clinton. What?!?!? Are you insane?
Don’t vote for Trump on account of your conscience, but don’t vote for Clinton, either. Don’t vote at all. In fact, to be consistent, I think you should probably never vote again.
Anyway, there is no question in my mind that Hillary is going to continue to turn the screws on Christians and her fascist followers will gleefully pile on–all the more, since they will feel like society has their back. Which perhaps it does, since it voted for Hillary in the first place.
* * * * *
Don’t Judge Me, Bro
I can’t help but notice that many of the same people who told me in 2012 that I needed to vote for Romney, despite the fact that he was a Mormon and a RINO… you know, saying, “Not voting is a vote for Obama” are now firmly in the “Never Trump” category, even going so far as to say they will ‘judge’ people like myself who do cast a vote for Trump.
I have trouble accepting the idea that Trump is anywhere near as bad as Clinton or Obama.
* * * * *
We’re in this mess because of the GOP. Never Forget It.
I blame the GOP for bringing us the point where Trump is the nominee in the first place. The only reason Trump had the support he did was because Republicans finally felt that there was someone standing up for them and the principles that were important to them. This only begs the question: why wasn’t the GOP standing up for them and the principles that were important in the first place?
The 2010 election was a Republican landslide. The GOP did nothing to capitalize on it. Indeed, when the newly elected “Tea Party” representatives tried to act on their principles, elitists in the GOP joined the Dems in slandering them, saying the TP folks refused to ‘govern.’ As if ‘governing’ meant continuing to support and expand bloated government intrusions into American life! God forbid an elected official act according to the principles that got him elected in the first place!
2012 was another Republican landslide. Many Republicans nonetheless did not cast a vote for Romney, ticked that the GOP once again had put up RINO as the candidate.
In 2014, the electorate once again showed its overwhelming support for the small government message initiated and sustained by Tea Party conservatives.
Despite 3 consecutive landslides for the GOP, in 2015, the GOP elite tried to give us… Jeb Bush.
You’ve got to be kidding me.
I think people misconstrue the support that Trump has been getting. I was pleased that many of my fellow conservatives were as peeved as I was, thus accounting for the fact that Cruz stayed in as long as he did. But I don’t think people understand that the rejection of Cruz, who for better or for worse would not have burned the system down, means that the ‘base’ has lost all confidence in the system–and the GOP’s role in perpetuating it.
If Trump does not win, I honestly can’t see the GOP coming back. Even if Trump does win, I think it is just delaying the inevitable. The elites are not on our side.
* * * * *
Yes, Clinton Probably Will Start WW3, and I have 3 Boys Approaching Military Age
People express concern about the harm that a President Trump can do, without balancing it against the harm that a President Clinton can–and would–do. I agree with those who fear that a Clinton presidency will spiral inevitably into a war with Russia. Clinton, you see, has much to prove, while Trump has nothing to prove.
Clinton, like most liberals, thinks she is the smartest person in the room. In the meantime, the smartest person in the galaxy–Barack Obama–has been constantly out-smarted by that dolt, Putin.
Clinton and Obama both presided over the burning of the Middle East. Remember, these are the geniuses!
You could literally put a dog catcher in charge of our military and not have to worry that the world will get screwed up any more than when Clinton and Obama were at the helm.
* * * * *
A GOP Congress Makes a Startling Discovery: Checks and Balances!
There is another aspect of this concern about a dangerous President Trump.
I wonder that no one has had the presence of mind to question the wisdom of having a position that embodies so much power and influence distilled into a single person and his agents in the executive branch. Are we really so stupid as to think it is a good idea to put the whole fate of the economy, our schools, etc, in the hands of ONE person?
It really is stupid.
It didn’t start out that way, and for good reason. But it raises the point that if the checks and balances of the US Constitution were actually in place, there would be far less concern about the damage any one person could do. Sure, the president couldn’t give us a ‘roaring’ economy if he were deprived access to the levers of the economy, but then, he can’t torpedo it, either. The president couldn’t usurp our rights and liberties if his influence was subjected–in actual practice–to the US Constitution.
And this is where it gets crazy.
The House, Senate, and even the judiciary (for a time) were firmly in the hands of the Republicans during Obama’s reign, and they did almost SQUAT to stop Obama’s plainly unconstitutional over-reaches. (Granted, this is in part because of the precedent set by allowing Republican presidents over-reach, too.)
The pressure was on, and they still didn’t act. Remember Eric Cantor’s fate? John Boehner’s?
But in a Trump presidency, a miracle will happen: the US Congress, led by Republicans, will suddenly grow a backbone and decide to apply the checks and balances that they had legitimate access to all along.
They will do that, because the GOP elites will still, after a Trump election, fear the liberal media more than those who elected Trump.
If Hillary is elected, no backbone will miraculously appear. The GOP will once again become a rubber stamp for liberal policies, offering nothing more than words of protest.
Its one more reason the GOP’s days are numbered; as a party, it is run by people more concerned for their own interests than the people they claim to represent. The proof is always in the pudding.
* * * * *
Trump Is ‘Bad’ but Not Nearly As Bad as He Has Been Made Out to Be
Poor Donald Trump has been hammered in the media. Just hammered. But many people, including Republicans, think that Donald Trump deserves it. You know, because of his low character, or what not. The idea is that Donald Trump is a certain kind of cretin, worst of the worst. A threat to democracy in the way that no other GOP candidate would be.
But we would be made to think that no matter who the GOP candidate is.
That’s kind of the point.
Every. Single. Election., the Democrats set out to utterly destroy whomever the GOP candidate is. They destroyed Bush. They set out to destroy McCain/Palin. They set out to destroy Romney.
This was highlighted for me by the recent Project Veritas release where the guy (Scott Foval) was bragging about how they incited violence at Trump rallies. In typical Saul Alinsky fashion, Foval (financed by the DNC, albeit indirectly) says, “It doesn’t matter what the friggin legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherfucker.”
Don’t deceive yourself. This is what every liberal progressive secular humanist thinks. There is no objective moral code, right? Of course the ends will always justify the means for such people. It always has, and yet Republicans continue to think that the people on the other side of the ideological spectrum are more or less decent folk who, when the chips are down, still behave honestly and with integrity. And sure, your average Dem on the street may be just that–but he’s just a dupe who hasn’t really thought out his own worldview. If he had, he’d be just as manipulative as Alinsky, Obama, and Hillary.
But I digress.
The point is that they were going to destroy whomever was put up. In this video, at about 11:32, Scott Foval brags about how they went after Scott Walker at the Iowa state fair.
I suppose there are people who will find this kind of thing shocking.
If that is you, you evidently have not been paying attention.
We are not dealing with good people, here. We’re talking about bad people who are perfectly happy to employ violence in the service of promoting their agenda. They will continue to do so, for as long as we tolerate it.
It doesn’t matter who the nominee would have been. It would have been made to look like our nominee is worse than Hitler and it is not inconceivable that we would be having this same kind of debate.
Full Circle Fascism
A liberal I know floated a post on Facebook about the underlying violent tendency of the average Trump supporter. Regardless of the fact that we now know that many of the violent outbursts by Trump supporters were deliberately instigated, we can see with our own eyes that the real perpetrators have, more often than not, been people opposed to Trump.
It is not hard to understand why. If you believe the line that being a Republican or conservative makes you a racist bigot, practically by definition, and you have been told throughout your upbringing that the worst crimes imaginable are ‘micro-aggressions,’ and opponents of Obamacare are selfish pigs beneath contempt (ie, ‘deplorables’), then of course you feel quite justified in handing out punishment–violently, even.
Examples abound once you know how to look for them.
But here is the rub.
No matter how the election goes, this fascism is going to increase.
If Hillary wins, the social justice warriors will ramp up, emboldened.
If Trump wins, I think you can expect the left to become positively rabid, openly discussing and hoping for his assassination. These people are nuts.
So, does it make a difference who is elected?
Only in this sense: a Trump election will buy us another couple of years to try to figure out how it is that Annaliese Nielsens and Scott Fovals are made, and STOP MAKING THEM.
I am not at all convinced that the situation is reversible.
* * * * *
A Polite Recognition
To conclude this weary post, one thing that I don’t think has been given proper weight to is the fact that Trump himself seems to be sensitive to the awkward bind that folks like myself are in. He is crass, and rude. He isn’t exactly the small government type. He knows this. But instead of tossing us to the side, he has embraced us. He may not be a genuine Christian (I have trouble believing his conversion story) but he seems to be genuine in his respect for us. He may not be an orthodox pro-lifer, but he didn’t throw us under the bus.
Every other GOP candidate has marginalized the Tea Party constituency and done everything in their power to disassociate themselves from them. The GOP is ashamed of its base.
But Trump produced a list of judges that as near as I can tell, would definitely support conservative interpretations of the law (read: a plain reading of it) and as such would not undermine the Constitutional protection of free speech, freedom of religion, gun ownership, etc.
Trump has brought conservative Christians into his campaign to serve as advisors, and taken their counsel seriously.
Trump has extended an olive branch to us time and time again, and people on my side have rudely smacked it away.
Now, it could very well be the case that Trump is just using us for our vote. This wouldn’t be any different than what the GOP has been doing for decades, and certainly the likes of Jeb Bush would have done the same. But it smells genuine to me.
He could have tried to build his campaign without the pro-life, small government constituency, but instead has doubled down on it, and even defended us publicly, as he did in the third debate.
We know that Clinton will continue to regard us with contempt, as nearly every progressive does. And, frankly, as the GOP elite does.
It seems kind of strange that Trump would go down swinging on issues that are actually my issues, and I will reward that loyalty by letting him go down swinging, alone.
Do any of us think that any of the other candidates would have defended our values as audaciously as Trump has, albeit imperfectly?
Sorry, but as much as I like Scott Walker and Ted Cruz, I can still see them selling me out so as to appear ‘respectable’ to the media.
On balance, I would have preferred them, but that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have known what they were doing.
We will never get our values instituted if we don’t have someone willing to endure being called stupid by the media.
Donald Trump is one of the first, if not the only, persons who not only willingly endures such treatment, but doesn’t take it laying down. Its probably our first shot in a long time for seeing our agenda actually implemented. At any rate, it is probably our last shot.
So, I’m going to take that shot, with a clean conscience.
Win or lose, my friends, there is much, much, much work to be done. The Trump ascendancy ought to signal that if we don’t get cracking on it, the next go around, the person who steps into Trump’s role of ‘system-slayer’ will be happy to throw us under the bus, and won’t take take Christian counsel, at all.