"Pretty girls, huh!"
One asked me.
"Pretty? Don't you know some of these girls are sold by their own families at age 15? And they have to have sex with dozens of men a day?"
"Oh, yeah, some even younger," one replied nonchalantly.
And it was brought home to me how flimsy a shared nationality or culture can be: barbarians are to be met with everywhere.
This came to mind just now as I was chatting with a Trump supporter who calls himself "Glacier," appropriately:
Glacier: In their entire history conservative Republicans have never conserved anything. Trump offers us the possibility of conserving our borders against illegal invaders, conserving our prosperity against job destroying trade deals, and conserving our nation against globalist elites. Conservatism has been exposed as the fraud that never did anything to stop the march of the progressive left and instead has only served as a means for elites to secure high paying jobs in the media, lobbying firms, and think tanks.
DM: Your first sentence is patent nonsense divorced from historical reality; no need to read further.
I have lived during, and observed, numerous fantastic conservative victories, which had a huge effect in the real world. Winning the Cold War was just one.
Glacier: Then tell us what conservative Republicans have conserved. It is certainly not our borders, culture, demographic majority, or Constitution.
DM: Stopping the communists preserved the whole planet from despotism, glacier. Isn't that enough for you?
But the present Republicans also stopped much of the Obama agenda and decreased the debt by two thirds. And yes, they did what they could to stop Obama's attacks on the Constitution -- do you think he'd have left us ANY freedom if it had been up to him? The system is one of checks and balances -- a feature not a bug.
Glacier: Communism would have eventually fallen on its own. The Republicans have both houses of Congress and the majority of state houses and governors. Yet the agenda of Obama and the progressive left marches on. Mass immigration from the third world, supported by Republicans, has ensured that a conservative can never be elected as president again.
DM: Not just "al right," "alt history," too. That's small -minded. You asked what Republicans have done, and I told you. Rather than giving credit, you move the goal posts and say, oh that would have happened anyway.
You move pretty fast for a glacier -- but AGW alert! -- you're moving in retreat.
Glacier: It is interesting that some of the former Communist nations are most likely to survive against the globalist onslaught. Honestly, I don't care about the form of government that foreign nations profess. I don't care about raising the standard of living of third world peoples or whether girls in Afghanistan can attend school or the well being of Israel either.
DM: Glaciers are cold, too. I am a human being and a Christian, and I do care. I have known some of the victims of communism, tortured and imprisoned and who lost loved ones. You may be an American, but clearly, I have more in common with those heroes than with you. Have your Trump, you deserve him.
But of course ending communism also meant lowering the chance of the whole world getting nuked -- which kind of includes the US. And I don't know what you mean about former Communist countries - if you mean the ugly, nasty thug in Moscow is a role model for your man in Washington, I can well believe it. But Russia's really not doing that well, right now.
********
Trump is a nationalist. I, and most American Christians and conservatives, are patriots. This year is demonstrating starkly the difference between the two, and the superiority of the latter.
10 comments:
"Trump is a nationalist. I, and most American Christians and conservatives, are patriots. This year is demonstrating starkly the difference between the two, and the superiority of the latter."
And Hilary is a...?
I'm no Trump guy buy since you quite fairly raised the "superiority" of patriotism over nationalism perhaps you could weigh in on the superiority
of the respective ideologies of the two people that are actually running for President.
Trump's "ideology" appears to be pure narcicism. Get what you can from women and ditch them. Get what you can from the voters and taxpayers and investors (or Trump U students) and screw them. He seems to think that he can fool all the people, all the time, by telling lies loudly and without shame. He thinks people will believe that a man who brags about his affairs, who probably sleeps with underage women ("rape," that's called), and who has supported abortion on demand, can now fool conservatives into thinking he's pro-life.
Whether or not that's much different from HC's philosophy, I don't know. I say to hell with both of them.
The problem with "to hell with both of them" is that one of them is going to be President. So, you can't just dismiss them both as one of them as President whether you like it or not. And further, is that what we're called to do as Christians. Say "to hell with them"?
I mean, of course, "to hell with the idea of supporting either of them." I don't literally wish either to go to hell, still less (what concerns me now), bring a little more of hell to Earth.
Neither is anywhere near fit to be president. See my new e-book, The Trump Bible: Why no Christian Should Vote for Donald Trump, for the facts in the one case. I see it as my duty, therefore, to support another candidate -- whatever long odds he or she may face in defeating these two clowns. I don't think it's impossible, though, because if a strong Third Party candidate wins some electoral votes, the issue will be thrown into the House of Representatives, which may well make the correct choice.
David, I am not commenting on your article but would like to see if you could help me with an apologetics issue regarding "Myth Growth Rates" by Kris Komarnitsky. I am trying to refute the argument that the Gospels are unreliable. I know you have addressed it in passing.
Thanks for any help you might offer. A better email if you would be willing to comment on the issue would be lattema@icloud.com
"In their entire history conservative Republicans have never conserved anything."
This is totally true. We won the cold war and yet today America has gay marriage, abortion, obamacare, and endless wars that ultimately benefit radical Islam. Where were the conservatives when these things became approved by the government?
Besides our victory in the cold war had much more to do with the failure of communism than the "conservatives" who are failing to fight against socialism, gay marriage, and abortion.
Whatever you think of Trump remember that:
-The liberal media hates him.
-He would be better than Hillary Clinton, a woman who defended two rapists.
-He's a successful businessman.
-He will show the lazy "conservative" establishment that they need to work for their bread.
CC: I gave three examples proving that it is untrue. You don't disprove any of them (you can't, because they're historically accurate), so how can you say it is "totally true?"
"Endless wars that benefit radical Islam?" Oh, what, rolling over and letting them conquer the world would hurt them?
Trump's girls have certainly had many abortions, let's not fool ourselves. He doesn't care about gay marriage. And he calls himself "very militaristic." So it's just weird that you list all the positions that he couldn't care less about, complain that conservatives haven't succeeded in stopping what Trump has often supported, and want to vote for the SOB.
It is not an argument for Trump that "the liberal media hates him." They hate Hitler and cancer, too, does that I mean I should be for them? Anyway it is the liberal media that MADE Donald Trump.
I do not know that he would be better than Clinton. I see them both as about equally vile: Clinton more consistently liberal, Trump more consistently nasty, vulgar, and obscene.
It is not an argument for Trump that he is a "successful businessman." He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and now won't release his tax records. No one knows what the man is really worth -- he lies so much, you can't trust a word he says.
The "conservative establishment" is hardly "lazy," if it exists at all. Where does that accusation even come from? Who are you talking about? The word "establishment" is lazy, as is your vague, evidence-free accusation.
Please do read The Trump Bible: Why no Christian Should Vote for Donald Trump -- even if you are not a Christian.
"But the present Republicans also stopped much of the Obama agenda and decreased the debt by two thirds. And yes, they did what they could to stop Obama's attacks on the Constitution."
what part of the obama agenda did they actually stop?
Despite all the republicans' apparently hard work, we still got obamamnesty, obamacare, and the omnibus bill.
Trump is anti-illegal immigration and supports trade protectionism. Two positions that are beneficial to the american economy.
Trump is the anti-establishment pick, his success shows the GOP establishment that they'll have a very hard time winning elections if they continue to be lazy and roll over on all the issues that matter.
Carl: Do you understand the concept of divided government? With a willful president in power, and for the first couple years a Democratic Congress, the Republicans did not have the power to prevent Obamacare. They ALL voted against it. It is assinine to vote for a liberal now (Trump) with no moral standards at all, because the Republicans were true to their principles, but lacked the power (thanks to voters) to stop Obama!
They did bring the deficit way down, though not in the ideal way -- because Obama was in power.
They essentially halted any progressive legislative agenda Obama dreamed of enacting in his second term -- which is why he's been going around the Law with so many illegal "executive orders" lately.
Trump HIRED illegal aliens. He's a hypocrit and a liar, who plays people for fools, then doublecrosses them. How many of his positions has he already changed? He'll change the rest when he feels the whim, and justify it by saying, "Of course I need to change my mind sometimes." Haven't you been paying attention? You've ALREADY been betrayed.
"Establishment" is a stupid propaganda word which means nothing. There are good and bad people in and outside the so-called "establishment," whose existence is much exagerated. It's just a word used to fool people, because it doesn't mean a thing. It's essentially Marxist -- locating good and evil in classes, not in individuals. To hell with Marx, already.
"the Republicans did not have the power to prevent Obamacare."
They had the power to stop the omnibus bill, and yet they didn't. It passed.
The least "conservatives" of the establishment could do is win hearts and minds the way Trump has.
"They essentially halted any progressive legislative agenda Obama dreamed of enacting in his second term."
http://time.com/4154635/rand-paul-paul-ryan-omnibus-spending/
The fact that "conservatives" could win tiny victories against obamacare doesn't mean anything if they can't win hearts and minds and refuse to fight for major victories.
"Trump HIRED illegal aliens"
Yes, that ONE time Trump hired illegals compares to the many establishment "conservatives" who have no problem letting everyone in the world into America and putting them on welfare.
Besides, that doesn't matter when you consider that Trump is the toughest on illegal immigration and keeping terrorists out.
Trump supporters are diverse in terms of precise political views, but we all agree that the value of Trump comes most from the fact that he is going against the mainstream (establishment) "conservatives".
It's easy to bash Trump, but it's very hard to defend the current mainstream republicans and "conservatives" who have failed America. They aren't willing to fight for conservative principles the way that democrats are willing to fight for liberal principles.
Post a Comment