Don’t believe the #cuckservative lie

posted at 12:31 pm on July 26, 2015 by Taylor Millard

The pejorative du jour on social media these days is “cuckservative.” The word is a combination of cuckold, i.e. the husband of an adulteress, and a conservative. There are those who promise it’s used to describe Republicans in Congress and conservative media figures who are sell outs. They claim it’s similar to “RINO” or “squish.” Matt Lewis at The Daily Caller and Erick Erickson have been called ones for shining light on the term. One person described it as people on the right who are actually trying to conserve Marxism.

The only issue is this isn’t the case and people should be careful before using the “cuckservative” term. Looking into the actual history of the term shows it has nothing to do with “sell outs” and everything to do with race. Specifically white supremacy. Gregory Hood at American Renaissance writes “cuckservatives” advocate positions which really humiliate them and whites (emphasis mine).

While the Beltway Right obsesses about non-issues like the Export-Import Bank, the Dissident Right is creating a vocabulary to fight “conservatives” who are more eager than their supposed leftist enemies to destroy racially conscious whites. While cuckservatives claim to adhere to abstract principles, wiser men and women understand that ideology is often the echo of racial, cultural, and ethnic interests. And since cuckservatives no longer bother concealing they care nothing for their own white supporters, frustrated whites are looking for alternatives.

Alfred W. Clark at Occam’s Razor basically calls “cuckservatives” self-hating whites (emphasis mine).

Although the cuckservative is eager to show his PC bona fides by openness to other races, he really doesn’t want to know about other races. Human biodiversity terrifies the cuckservative, as deep down he has bought into blank-slatism and egalitarianism. The cuckservative would rather just have a Herman Cain or Clarence Thomas poster on his wall than actually have to honestly think about race.

There are scores of tweets on the #cuckservative which fall along these lines.

To quote Jazz Shaw, “#headdesk.” This is just absolute idiotic thought and tribalism at its worst. It flies in the face of what the hallowed document which helped form this nation proclaimed (emphasis mine).

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

A part of the problem those screaming “cuckservative” have is they are just blind in their belief the only place for conservatism is the white race. Someone wrote a response to Ace’s great piece on the “cuckservative” term, by claiming blacks aren’t worth talking politics to.

And let’s be frank, Ace. Blacks are never going to vote for liberty. The GOP loves to point to its sterling record of supporting and improving black civil rights from 1865 through Eisenhower. The Democrats blast them with gibsmedat in 1965…and well, we see where their loyalties lie.

This is horrifically shortsighted. It was amazing, yet unsurprising, how much agreement there was between FreedomWorks and Center for American Progress representatives during their joint summit on justice reform in DC. This wasn’t talking government spending, it was talking freedom, liberty, and getting the government out of things they shouldn’t be involved in. Rand Paul speaks at Bowie State and Howard universities and gets people nodding their heads in agreement. He’s discussing the importance of government getting out of the lives of others, not placating them or speaking about reparations. Paul is thinking long term and hopes to eventually get more conservative and libertarian African-Americans, instead of the current crop of leftists. It may take 30 to 50 years, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth the effort.

Ace is correct in saying there are always racists next to the movement, who really hope to influence what the Right could become. See David Duke. Ace is also correct in noting the Left wants the Right to “own” the racists, even though 97% of the right wants nothing to do with them. A part of this is tactics because conservatives and libertarians have always had a tough time turning questions around. It’s possible they don’t want to come off as cold hearted or just expect accusations of pandering. They’ve got to be willing to get beyond this or else the Right will keep shrinking. To suggest the Right should just ignore other races just isn’t going to work and will hurt more than help.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

MarshFox!!!

Bmore on July 27, 2015 at 9:11 AM

Did this word exist 3 weeks ago?

roy_batty on July 27, 2015 at 9:17 AM

Honestly, I have no idea about this stupid twitter hashtag.

However, IF we are seeing increases in actual white power/supremacy/pride/pickwhatevertermyoulike, the politicians have no one but themselves to blame.

When all you see is race or ethnicity, don’t be surprised when people not in your “target audience” start acting the same.

It’s particularly sad, because this was and ought to be a vibrant, colorblind society. But politicians (especially the left, but not limited to it) wanted to create divisions for their own political gain.

Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

makattak on July 27, 2015 at 9:43 AM

Race doesn’t matter! If whites become a minority in this country, or any other country, it doesn’t matter! If politicians want to replace all whites with non-whites it won’t matter! If white Americans cease to exist I won’t complain or do anything about it, because I sure don’t want to be called a racist!

*This is what you people actually believe. You are cuckservatives.*

Riposte on July 27, 2015 at 10:41 AM

I suspect that much of what is called “racism” is but the natural abhorrence of an corrupted inner-city culture that is rushing toward self-destruction and dragging much of America down with it.
Perhaps that is why the political pimps in Washington are seeking immigrants for their next group to play their godawful pied-piper tunes to.

Don L on July 27, 2015 at 10:44 AM

Yeah, until a minute ago, I had never heard of this goofiness. Why do we let these people influence anything we say or do?

Fallon on July 27, 2015 at 10:47 AM

Yeah, until a minute ago, I had never heard of this goofiness. Why do we let these people influence anything we say or do?

Fallon on July 27, 2015 at 10:47 AM

Right on.

BoxHead1 on July 27, 2015 at 10:56 AM

Never heard of the term and strongly suspect that it’s been made up by a RINO looking to deflect from their lies and their actions.

Vince on July 27, 2015 at 11:06 AM

It’s particularly sad, because this was and ought to be a vibrant, colorblind society. But politicians (especially the left, but not limited to it) wanted to create divisions for their own political gain.

Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

makattak on July 27, 2015 at 9:43 AM

The only time our country was “colorblind” was when it was overwhelmingly white. Whites are, generally speaking, the only people who aspire to such ideals. Every other ethnic group always puts the interests of itself first, unapologetically. That is reality, not ideological fantasy.

Thresher on July 27, 2015 at 11:10 AM

I’m so confused.
I’m not even sure what a neocon is.
Don’t people have jobs and better things to do?
Oh, wait.

ORconservative on July 27, 2015 at 11:20 AM

What is the acceptable % that the ethnically european people that build this country be allowed to go below? 50%? 40%?

The country took a nosedive after Ted Kennedy’s Immigration act in 1965 and the cuckservatives are all terrified to notice, right as they slide into demographic oblivion.

Tax reform and free trade won’t fix this.

spec_ops_mateo on July 27, 2015 at 11:24 AM

Wanting to keep the USA ethnically euro-white is no more racist than Japan wanting to keep it’s own nation ethnically Japanese.

spec_ops_mateo on July 27, 2015 at 11:29 AM

does taylor millard identify as a man or a woman?

ThisIsYourBrainOnKoch on July 27, 2015 at 11:34 AM

The white guilt cuckolds are mostly on the democrat side. They don’t pay attention to the massive wave of violence against whites and the tremendous discrimination against whites. They just want to appease the people of color’s never ending demands for more stuff.

Mormontheman on July 27, 2015 at 11:46 AM

Note that Taylor Millard has a history of approvingly quoting left-wing smear groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center when it suits his agenda.

“The Southern Poverty Law Center says the group [trying to help property owners at the border] isn’t on their radar, but compared it to the Cliven Bundy protests in Nevada. The ACLU of Texas is calling them “anti-immigrant, hate-based vigilante groups.” Strong words, which will no doubt get an even stronger reaction at some point.”

-Pro-amnesty and outspoken Rand Paul supporter Taylor Millard

http://realraw.us/2014/07/border-crisis-anger/

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 11:56 AM

Rand Paul supporter and pro-amnesty Hot Air contributor Taylor Millard retweets comments calling “majority” of Trump supporters “racist whack jobs.” See below. Millard is most interested in smearing Trump supporters and people who oppose amnesty:

So it turns out the majority of Trump supporters are white supremacist, anti-Semitic, conspiracy theorist whack jobs. Shocking, huh?

I would’ve NEVER guessed! …. Said no one ever.

“I’m shocked, I say, SHOCKED!”

-Taylor Millard

Source: https://twitter.com/taylormvlr/status/624122563849928704

Taylor Millard is a lazy, dishonest writer.

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 12:16 PM

Taylor Millard, known for Rand Paul boosterism and efforts to brand Trump supporters as “racist whack jobs,” says he will vote third party if Trump is the Republican nominee

Source:
https://twitter.com/taylormvlr/status/624748275074109441

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 12:21 PM

The folks over at ‘The Right Stuff’ have a response to Taylor Millard here. Let’s see how many people here even grok the substance instance of falling into leftist name-calling.
http://therightstuff.biz/2015/07/26/cuckservatism-response-to-taylor-millard/

flawedskull on July 26, 2015 at 9:12 PM

That starts off OK by rightfully pointing out that the Left is anti-white and supports racist policies, but it takes a pretty bad turn when it gets into the black vote, IQ, and such. Not a fan

Well I thought the same thing until I saw that map at the end. It doesn’t really matter if he is right about IQ. The voting patterns are all that matters. His analysis of leftist tactics makes too much sense. Cuckservative basically sums it all up.

jusstjones on July 27, 2015 at 12:21 PM

Tell that to the Breitbart followers. I stopped going over there because the commenters were clearly populated with AmRen groupies. It became intolerable and made me wonder why I would be associated with conservatism. Why bother being around people who would judge people on the basis of race? That’s what drew me to conservatism in the first place: ideas and character, not race. But, apparently, there are enough of these terrible people to drag this entire thing down. And too many “conservatives” cheer them along.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 12:35 PM

Uh huh.

All the “racists” are cuddling up next to the Right? Your bias is showing, my dear.

The Left is frigging founded on racism and exclusion, and here’s another half-baked apologist making sure we all know about the danger of racialism to the conservative cause.

*yawn*

Read anything by American Renaissance and you know that this is the truth. They’re not predominant, but they are a nuisance that needs to be dealt with. Don’t be obtuse.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 12:37 PM

Someone just made that word up so as to be similar to something more vulgar.

TerryW on July 27, 2015 at 12:48 PM

I believe the term has some merit to it. The prime goal of the left, to establish a permanent minority voting bloc, is painfully obvious, yet only people like Ann Coulter has the nerve to ever speak this verboten truth publicly. Why is that?

awake on July 27, 2015 at 1:08 PM

A part of the problem those screaming “cuckservative” have is they are just blind in their belief the only place for conservatism is the white race.

It’s not that conservatism serves white interests. It’s that the only other viable party is openly anti-white in the most hostile terms that politics currently allow, and it keeps getting worse. And yes, we should point that out to white-voting Democrats whenever possible. We’re not a white supremacist party just because we don’t actively court votes from the “hate-whitey” crowd.

Rusty Nail on July 27, 2015 at 1:23 PM

It’s not that conservatism serves white interests. It’s that the only other viable party is openly anti-white in the most hostile terms that politics currently allow, and it keeps getting worse. And yes, we should point that out to white-voting Democrats whenever possible. We’re not a white supremacist party just because we don’t actively court votes from the “hate-whitey” crowd.

Rusty Nail on July 27, 2015 at 1:23 PM

That should be the message, but it often gets drowned out by orgs like AmRen and vDARE and those ilk. Those guys actually defended Dylann Roof’s views, though they were careful to distance themselves from his actions. It’s those people that the average voter will see up front and the left exploit that to paint all conservatives as racist. And there are a bunch of people on here who think it really doesn’t happen or those people are just leftist trolls. Being willfully obtuse to such a problem is going to bite us later on. We need to deal with that element like Buckley did with the Birchers.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 1:32 PM

I am interested to know whether pro-amnesty pundits like Taylor Millard or Ed Morrissey have ever condemned the actual racism (and open hatred for white people) at the root of the push for illegal alien amnesty.

See below for the true face of the amnesty movement:

“You old white people. It is your duty to die.” -Cebada

PRO-ILLEGAL ALIEN AMNESTY ACTIVISTS SHOW THEIR TRUE COLORS!

Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets; “Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die … Through love of having children, we are going to take over. ”

Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council. “They’re afraid we’re going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They’re right. We will take them over … We are here to stay.”

Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico, “The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot.”

Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas and La Raza founder; “We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population … I love it. They are shitting in their pants with fear. I love it.”

Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party, “Remember 187 — proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens — was the last gasp of white America in California.”

Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor, “We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country … I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, “I’m going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back.”

Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton, “California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn’t like it should leave.”

Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General , “We are practicing ‘La Reconquista’ in California.”
Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University; “We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos …”

It’s revealing to hear from pro-illegal alien amnesty activists. These are Democrat allies and the people pro-amnesty Republicans like Marco Rubio side with over American citizens. I hope that most legal Hispanic and Latino Americans are rightly disgusted, not only by the attempts to enact mass illegal alien amnesty, but also by the racist, anti-white behavior of amnesty supporters.

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 1:33 PM

You each of you are the new Apache.

They come for your land, your gold, they come to your camps guided by members of your own tribe who are paid little trinkets of gold, they did pay $100.00 gold for the scalp of Apache’s, men, women and children all the same.

The Apache fought the unlimited immigration invasion by the Spanish, Mexico and last the U S A for 400 years.

Let U S hope freedom loving Americans will put up even 1/2 that fight.

So far the “scouts” who guide the unlimited immigrant invaders to our homes are winning the battle and do receive lots of gold. They are called U.S. Congressmen and U.S. Senators sorry to say.

The will to fight must come first.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 27, 2015 at 1:56 PM

It seems to me, that the purpose of complaining about the term cuckservative is little more than a propaganda campaign designed to shame conservatives into returning to the GOP Establishment plantations. Shut up and got back to your farms you dirty stinky conservative peasants or we shall insult you again…

oscarwilde on July 26, 2015 at 1:09 PM

Agreed. It is very interesting that the first reaction to this epithet is “they’re racists!”. Because the non racial aspect is just another version of calling someone an establishment sellout. One that hits very close to home apparently for many in the conservative chattering classes.

But you know, its raciss!

oryguncon on July 27, 2015 at 2:36 PM

We need to deal with that element like Buckley did with the Birchers.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 1:32 PM

So, who looks more correct these days? The birchers or Buckley’s crew at National Review? Thats the scary thing isn’t it?

oryguncon on July 27, 2015 at 2:40 PM

“Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage—the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry. Which means, in practice, that a man is to be judged, not by his own character and actions, but by the characters and actions of a collective of ancestors.”

“Racism claims that the content of a man’s mind (not his cognitive apparatus, but its content) is inherited; that a man’s convictions, values and character are determined before he is born, by physical forces beyond his control. This is the caveman’s version of the doctrine of innate ideas—or of inherited knowledge—which has been thoroughly refuted by philosophy and science. Racism is a doctrine of, by and for brutes. It is a barnyard or stock-farm version of collectivism, appropriate to a mentality that differentiates between various breeds of animals, but not between animals and men.”

~~ Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

RedPepper on July 27, 2015 at 2:49 PM

~~ Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

RedPepper on July 27, 2015 at 2:49 PM

The vast majority of the people who favorably respond to Ayn Rand are white. Why is that?

You may not be interested in race, but race is interested in you.

Thresher on July 27, 2015 at 3:33 PM

We need to deal with that element like Buckley did with the Birchers.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 1:32 PM

So, who looks more correct these days? The birchers or Buckley’s crew at National Review? Thats the scary thing isn’t it?

Are you saying that the AmRen crowd has a point, that conservatism should be for those of white European descent and that’s it, because Buckley’s old paper has gone on to sweeten the pro-amnesty pot? If that’s what you’re saying, then I cannot hold to that. If the “new” conservatism is ignoring the illegal immigrants on our shores in increasing number, I want no part of it. And if the “new” conservatism feels that America is only for white Europeans and cannot stand to interact with those outside of that lineage, then you can count me out of that as well. If those are becoming the faces of conservatism, then conservatism will be dead.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 3:37 PM

Rand Paul supporter and pro-amnesty Hot Air contributor Taylor Millard retweets comments calling “majority” of Trump supporters “racist whack jobs.” See below. Millard is most interested in smearing Trump supporters and people who oppose amnesty:

So it turns out the majority of Trump supporters are white supremacist, anti-Semitic, conspiracy theorist whack jobs. Shocking, huh?
I would’ve NEVER guessed! …. Said no one ever.
“I’m shocked, I say, SHOCKED!”

-Taylor Millard
Source: https://twitter.com/taylormvlr/status/624122563849928704

Taylor Millard is a lazy, dishonest writer.

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 12:16 PM

Taylor Millard, known for Rand Paul boosterism and efforts to brand Trump supporters as “racist whack jobs,” says he will vote third party if Trump is the Republican nominee

Source:
https://twitter.com/taylormvlr/status/624748275074109441

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 12:21 PM

Thanks, bluegill; I didn’t know that.

Taylor Millard saying nobody should say “cuckservative” is like a guy wearing a Che t-shirt and a Mao cap saying nobody should say “commie”.

David Blue on July 27, 2015 at 5:07 PM

The prime goal of the left, to establish a permanent minority voting bloc, is painfully obvious, yet only people like Ann Coulter has the nerve to ever speak this verboten truth publicly.

awake on July 27, 2015 at 1:08 PM

Which has a lot to do with her being barred from NRO and generally being held un-respectable by the pro-mass-immigration establishment pseudo-right — let’s just say the cuckservatives.

Even though over and over, she, the one that shouldn’t appear at a conservative political action conference and so on, is the one that’s telling the truth. How well did Chief Justice John It’s-a-tax Roberts work out, after everybody on the right said “home run!” but Ann Coulter said “watch out!”?

David Blue on July 27, 2015 at 5:15 PM

You each of you are the new Apache.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on July 27, 2015 at 1:56 PM

I will wear my feather with pride.

David Blue on July 27, 2015 at 5:23 PM

Note that Taylor Millard has a history of approvingly quoting left-wing smear groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center when it suits his agenda.

http://realraw.us/2014/07/border-crisis-anger/

bluegill on July 27, 2015 at 11:56 AM

You certainly do your research bluegill, and I appreciate you getting hits for realraw.us and my friend Liz Harrison.

But I think you’re misinterpreting my opinion. You say I’m approvingly quoting SPLC. That’s not what I did in the piece. I simply gave their side of the story after writing about what the militias were doing. Or did you conveniently forget the sentence before the one you cite. I’ll put the full paragraph below in case no one bothers to look at the link:

The reaction isn’t surprising. The Southern Poverty Law Center says the group isn’t on their radar, but compared it to the Cliven Bundy protests in Nevada. The ACLU of Texas is calling them “anti-immigrant, hate-based vigilante groups.” Strong words, which will no doubt get an even stronger reaction at some point.

I think it’s important for people to see what both sides are saying. People may not agree with what I’m writing, which is fine. I don’t want an echo chamber.

You also ignore the fact I then blame the government for not doing its job. Again, I’ll post the paragraphs:

President Barack Obama is an easy target for letting this happen. It’s on his watch and he did nothing about it. To quote Democratic Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar, the administration was one step behind and is now playing catch up.

But it’s worse than that. The President wasn’t paying attention at all to what was going on, even though there’s a law saying he should have. The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 says the federal government is supposed to provide services including appropriate shelter, medical care, and protection from the trafficker. It also allows them to stay in the U.S. if it’s determined they can be a witness at the trafficker’s trial. The administration should have been ready and they weren’t.

I’m also curious, where do you get that I’m a “pro amnesty” supporter. Is because I’m in favor of immigration reform dealing with how people can come into the U.S.? Or is it because I’m not sitting here in my chair writing, “DEPORT THEM ALL!” or “THEY TERK ER JERBS!” when discussing illegal immigrants?

Just curious.

Taylor Millard on July 27, 2015 at 6:47 PM

Are you saying that the AmRen crowd has a point, that conservatism should be for those of white European descent and that’s it…

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 3:37 PM

I think people are starting to notice that respect for human rights and the fundamentals of western civilization aren’t easily transferable.

The WesternCiv Country Club isn’t exclusively white and European, but it largely is. An uncomfortable truth. The colonies that were granted independence got rid of all that nonsense as soon as they could. Cairo University is a case in point…

How the Veil Conquered Cairo University

Maybe it was simply western hubris, but what makes you think that other peoples even want these ‘civil rights’ and the code of western civilization? Islam has been a few hours across the Mediterranean Sea for more than a 1,000 years and they haven’t adopted it. It’s not as if they haven’t been exposed to it, or that they don’t know what it is. They know and they reject it.

Nation building and teaching civil rights was tried in Iraq and Afghanistan and it failed. The Europeans held their colonies in some cases for over a hundred years, and it failed.

Do you have some magical formula, or mystical combination of words that will do the trick that has eluded so many others for so long?

If you don’t, then what are you saying? That folks should just accept becoming part of some third world dictatorial pest-hole like Detroit cuz ‘social justice’?

sharrukin on July 27, 2015 at 6:53 PM

If you don’t, then what are you saying? That folks should just accept becoming part of some third world dictatorial pest-hole like Detroit cuz ‘social justice’?
sharrukin

Obviously your typical SJW isn’t following that syllogism–it’s too “wathist” to be seriously considered (crimestop, if you will). They are simply told, “social justice is good, therefore…social justice.” And that’s the extent to which their “though process” works.

MMK on July 27, 2015 at 7:16 PM

One could be for both immigration reform and the deportation of everyone who is currently here illegally, no? I don’t believe the two are mutually exclusive.

awake on July 27, 2015 at 7:17 PM

They are simply told, “social justice is good, therefore…social justice.” And that’s the extent to which their “though process” works.

MMK on July 27, 2015 at 7:16 PM

That seems to be about the extent of it. It’s like they are some sort of Cargo Cult who think all the nice things we have just arrived somehow, and kicking at the foundations can’t possibly lead to any ill effects.

sharrukin on July 27, 2015 at 7:21 PM

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 12:35 PM

Are you reading the comments HERE? We’ve got people boldly using the slur on one end and people like sharrukin defending them on the other while simultaneously claiming those people don’t exist in this thread and are “fake” elsewhere. This thing is a cancer and must be excised.

CanofSand on July 27, 2015 at 8:21 PM

This thing is a cancer and must be excised.

CanofSand on July 27, 2015 at 8:21 PM

Proclaim a crusade! It’s the only thing to do. If you can get the Pope (especially this Pope) on-board you could unite the Social Justice Warriors and Christians!

God Wills It

sharrukin on July 27, 2015 at 8:26 PM

Or is it because I’m not sitting here in my chair writing, “DEPORT THEM ALL!” or “THEY TERK ER JERBS!” when discussing illegal immigrants?

Just curious.

Taylor Millard on July 27, 2015 at 6:47 PM

“THEY TERK ER JERBS!”

Based on that, you have no problem with slurs, since you are comfortable going to the leftist well for slurs against people opposed to mass immigration.

You just don’t like it when the right-wingers whose intelligence you despise push back.

David Blue on July 27, 2015 at 9:33 PM

We need to deal with that element like Buckley did with the Birchers.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 1:32 PM

So, who looks more correct these days? The birchers or Buckley’s crew at National Review? Thats the scary thing isn’t it?

Are you saying that the AmRen crowd has a point, that conservatism should be for those of white European descent and that’s it, because Buckley’s old paper has gone on to sweeten the pro-amnesty pot? If that’s what you’re saying, then I cannot hold to that. If the “new” conservatism is ignoring the illegal immigrants on our shores in increasing number, I want no part of it. And if the “new” conservatism feels that America is only for white Europeans and cannot stand to interact with those outside of that lineage, then you can count me out of that as well. If those are becoming the faces of conservatism, then conservatism will be dead.

Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 3:37 PM


William Buckley on Ayn Rand & Atlas Shrugged

Interesting reprint of a letter from Ayn Rand to Barry Goldwater concerning the National Review, Buckley and Whittaker Chambers:

William F. Buckley, Jr.: The Witch-Doctor is Dead

(the article is written by an associate of the Ayn Rand Institute.)

I don’t agree with some of the advocacy of the Ayn Rand Institute, and I don’t disagree with most of what Buckley said over the years. The central issue of the Buckley-Rand controversy is that Buckley attacked Atlas Shrugged and Ayn Rand over religion. But, Buckley seems to have focused on that one issue and ignored everything else in her thesis concerning Socialism…that’s odd. Was he just throwing out the baby with the bath water, or was he really a neo-Con statist at heart?

I’d go with the latter. Many Conservatives (neo-Cons especially) are suspicious of anything that isn’t validated by Washington. Ayn Rand warned us that Washington cannot be trusted, that they will sell us out for special interest groups and for the sake of squishy feel-good ideologies that actually harm people rather than help them.

People like Buckley didn’t like that message. They view Washington as the ultimate do-gooder in American society. That Washington could be an advocate for their particular brand of social justice…if only they could get enough guys elected. But, that works for the Marxists as well.

The John Birch Society rejected the power of Washington beyond what was held in the original Constitution. That’s something not palpable even to many modern Conservatives nowadays. “What do you mean the President was wrong in sending troops down there to let those poor black kids go to the white schools? You racist!”

Immoral or moral is not the point. The point is that whenever we let Washington’s heavy hand fall anywhere in this country, even for what probably is a very good cause, we lose a little more of our Liberty. The 50 states represent the most direct form of democracy that we have above the local level. When the power of the individual state is reduced, there is a trickle down effect of oppression.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 28, 2015 at 5:22 AM

Dr. ZhivBlago
We need to deal with that element like Buckley did with the Birchers.
Indefatigable on July 27, 2015 at 1:32 PM
So, who looks more correct these days? The birchers or Buckley’s crew at National Review? Thats the scary thing isn’t it?
Are you

Your analogy is so off, it is laughable. Since the 14th was to mame sure the Bill of Rights was to apply to the states and the states were creating a “separate but equal” (but not really equal) scenario, then having black children, whether poor or rich, bring abe to go to schools or live in communities without bring intimidated by government and citizens was the purview of government and was right. Keep your racism to yourself and the Birchers

Indefatigable on July 28, 2015 at 7:50 AM

People like sharrukin are the type who won’t even be around a minority who happens to be a conservative because, “They are not really one of us” , meaning a white European. Then they wonder why conservatives lose.

Indefatigable on July 28, 2015 at 7:59 AM

People like sharrukin

So you cannot really address the argument, can you?

are the type who won’t even be around a minority who happens to be a conservative because, “They are not really one of us” , meaning a white European.

I am a quarter Native American so not associating with a minority would be sorta tricky, but what I am not, is someone afraid to take a hard look at reality.

Then they wonder why conservatives lose.

Indefatigable on July 28, 2015 at 7:59 AM

I guess we would have to run one to find out wouldn’t we? Last one I recall was Reagan and he didn’t do too badly.

sharrukin on July 28, 2015 at 10:52 AM

Or is it because I’m not sitting here in my chair writing, “DEPORT THEM ALL!” or “THEY TERK ER JERBS!” when discussing illegal immigrants?
Just curious.
Taylor Millard on July 27, 2015 at 6:47 PM

This kind of sneering response from Taylor Millard really says it all.

Taylor Millard endorses the idea that immigrants should replace American workers. See below. It’s trendy among the pro-amnesty set to deride Americans as “lazy” and to hold up immigrants and illegals as “hard-working” and virtuous.

“I have a 2 for 1 [immigration] plan. I’ll take 1 hardworking wants to be here immigrant and punt out 2 lazy Americans who hate it here

“#endorsed”

-amnesty-supporting Hot Air contributor Taylor Millard

source: https://twitter.com/taylormvlr/status/625744936315424768

What would Taylor Millard do with the lazy illegal aliens and those on welfare? Do they get deported, or would that just be out of the question?

See below for more info on illegal aliens and welfare programs.
Surprise! Most illegal alien families collect welfare:

source: http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/04/most-illegal-immigrant-families-collect-welfare/

Surprise, surprise; Census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies.Even before the recession, immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, according to the extensive census data collected and analyzed by a nonpartisanWashington D.C. group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the U.S. The results, published this month in a lengthy report, are hardly surprising. Basically, the majority of households across the country benefitting from publicly-funded welfare programs are headed by immigrants, both legal and illegal. States where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates are Arizona (62%), Texas, California and New York with 61% each and Pennsylvania(59%).The study focused on eight major welfare programs that cost the government $517 billion the year they were examined. They include Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the disabled, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), a nutritional program known as Women, Infants and Children (WIC), food stamps, free/reduced school lunch, public housing and health insurance for the poor (Medicaid).Food assistance and Medicaid are the programs most commonly used by illegal immigrants, mainly on behalf of their American-born children who get automatic citizenship. On the other hand, legal immigrant households take advantage of every available welfare program, according to the study, which attributes it to low education level and resulting low income.The highest rate of welfare recipients come from the Dominican Republic (82 %), Mexico and Guatemala (75%) and Ecuador (70%), according to the report, which says welfare use tends to be high for both new arrivals and established residents.

bluegill on July 28, 2015 at 2:18 PM

Your analogy is so off, it is laughable. Since the 14th was to mame sure the Bill of Rights was to apply to the states and the states were creating a “separate but equal” (but not really equal) scenario, then having black children, whether poor or rich, bring abe to go to schools or live in communities without bring intimidated by government and citizens was the purview of government and was right. Keep your racism to yourself and the Birchers

Indefatigable on July 28, 2015 at 7:50 AM

You’re expecting people, including Americans, to sort out their problems and to evolve at lightning speed. You also seem to be saying that the individual states, thus the people of America cannot be trusted to make decisions on their own. Uncle Sam has to be the final arbiter of what is right and wrong then?

I take it you’re happy with Washington’s influence on education, abortion, marriage, gun laws and so on?

Using the racist tag is exactly what the Leftists do, and there’s been a couple of you to do the same over my defense of the John Birch Society. If you guys haven’t, you should join your friends at the SPLC because they think the same way. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid and see where that gets you.

I implied that the “separate but not equal” thing was not OK. Didn’t think I had to come out and say it. But for those who live in a fantasy land where Washington is the ultimate arbiter of decency and want to pick a fight when someone questions their big government memes, I guess it’s necessary to say so. Wow. I may as well deal with the Lib trolls as some of these neo-Cons out there that refuse to admit they’re actually pretty close in ideology to Obama and the other statists.

No wonder we’re screwed and get nothing but a succession of RINO Neo-Cons to run for high office. It’s becoming increasingly clear that it takes elements from both sides to bring about the erosion of our liberty.

Dr. ZhivBlago on July 28, 2015 at 3:20 PM

Or is it because I’m not sitting here in my chair writing, “DEPORT THEM ALL!” or “THEY TERK ER JERBS!” when discussing illegal immigrants?

Just curious.

Taylor Millard on July 27, 2015 at 6:47 PM

Just curious, considering the illegal part, are those sentiments to be considered unreasonable, ignorant, racist, bigoted, and wacky, in whole or in part?

The first may be impractical considering the numbers we are dealing with. But overall is it unreasonable to expect that ILLEGAL immigrants be deported? Is the failure of our government to enforce immigration laws sufficient to make that position deserving of ridicule and contempt?

And whatever jobs they are doing, in one way or another it is a job a legal immigrant/resident or citizen will not be doing. You know we still give people legal residency to work here. That is, unless the alternative is no one would other than an illegal would do the job. I remember when kids in high school did many of these jobs. In fact, some of the jobs I had in high school are now done only by illegals.

And, for the record, I’m not in either camp.

farsighted on July 28, 2015 at 6:31 PM

Just call them CluckConservatives, the other has already been hijacked.

Or Quackconservatives. Not to be confused with Quacko er whacko.

This whole thing is ridiculous.

MaggiePoo on July 30, 2015 at 2:03 PM

Well here’s your chance Taylor Millard. You can put an end to all the speculation on your position. I won’t call it amnesty so not to hurt anyone’s feelings. Do you support a path to citizenship for the people who have entered illegally or are here illegally by overstaying their visas?

Big Orange on July 31, 2015 at 1:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6