How Not To Fight Our Enemies by David Horowitz:
The mob that came to disrupt the Trump rally in Chicago was neither spontaneous nor innocent, nor new. It was a mob that has been forming ever since the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization in 1999, whose target was global capitalism. The Seattle rioters repeated their outrages for the next two years and then transformed itself into the so-called “anti-war” movement to save the Saddam dictatorship in Iraq. Same leaders, funders and troops. The enemy was always America and its Republican defenders. When Obama invaded countries and blew up families in Muslim countries, there was no anti-war movement because Obama was one of them, and they didn’t want to divide their support. In 2012 the so-called “anti-war” movement reformed as “Occupy Wall Street.” They went on a rampage creating cross-country riots to protesting the One Percent and provided a whipping boy for Obama’s re-election campaign. Same leaders, same funders and troops. In 2015 the same leftwing forces created and funded Black Lives Matter and lynch mobs in Ferguson and Baltimore who targeted “white supremacists” and police.
Behind all the mobs was the organized left – MoveOn.org, the public sector unions run by Sixties leftovers, and the cabal of anti-American billionaires led by George Soros. The mobs themselves were composed of the hate-filled foot soldiers of the political left. [...] The plan is defeat Republicans in November so that the destructive forces they have set in motion in the Democratic Party can finish the wrecking job that Obama started.
And what has been the reaction of the presidential candidates, particularly those who propose to save the country? It is to blame Trump as though he and not the left had instigated the riot. If you play with matches like Trump did, opined Hillary Clinton, you’re likely to start a fire. [...]
According to the proudly positive John Kasich, it was Trump who created the “toxic environment” that led to the riot – not the fascist movement that has been metastasizing in our universities and streets for more than a decade.
Great stuff. I agree.
Cruz and Rubio also said bad stuff about this like Kasich.
He is often guilty of over-reach – “punch him in the nose” directed at one disrupter, but this is hardly the sin his detractors suggest in comparing him to Mussolini. That is a much great violence to the man who is its target. Aside from Trump’s compulsive over-reach what is wrong with anger in the current political context?
An aside: it's not a compulsion. It's bad ideas. Those bad ideas have consequences. It's not an isolated mental illness to treat as a singular quirk and ignore. It matters. It doesn't matter that much relative to a lot of the other election issues. But one should argue that Trump is mistaken rather than dehumanize him as sick (a human being that is, in this aspect, broken) because he thinks differently than you do.
as someone who until very recently held high opinions of Rubio and Cruz
But why have a high opinion of Rubio? Rubio has been such a lying amnesty-pusher for years. Cruz went to the senate and actually stood up for good ideas. Rubio, like most politicians, isn't willing to fight for good ideas and actually get things done. Instead, he betrayed his campaign promises and worked with the Democrats to advance their agenda.
And as to Cruz, yes he's getting the mob "protestors" issue wrong. But he's still the best candidate by far. Trump has said much worse, as Horowitz must know. See:
‘SHE’S DOING A TERRIBLE THING FOR OUR COUNTRY!’ – TRUMP BLAMED PAM GELLER FOR GARLAND TERRORIST ATTACK
Trump: I'm All For Free Speech, But Anti-Islam Cartoon Contest Was 'DUMB!'
Geller works with Horowitz, so he's definitely familiar with this.
Geller wrote a new piece about this yesterday, making the connection between Trump's attack on her free speech and then complaining about having his own speech at a rally shut down:
Trump Decries Attack on His Free Speech – What About Garland, Donald?
Flashback: Donald Trump said, “I watched Pam earlier, and it really looks like she’s just taunting everybody. What is she doing drawing Muhammad? I mean it’s disgusting. Isn’t there something else they could be doing? Drawing Muhammad?…They can’t do something else? They have to be in the middle of Texas doing something on Muhammad and insulting everybody? What is she doing? Why is she doing it? It’s probably very risky for her — I don’t know, maybe she likes risk? But what the hell is she doing?”
Cruz got Garland right. Trump got it horribly wrong. Trump's mistake on Garland is worse than Cruz's current mistake. Yet Horowitz is writing like Cruz is somehow now not as good as Trump. None of the candidates are perfect – not even close – but Cruz is much better overall.
Trump isn’t the enemy. Like you he is opposed to the Iran deal, supports a secure border, recognizes the Islamist threat, wants to reduce taxes and make the country solvent, and is greatly expanding the Republican base.
This is the most interesting part of Horowitz's article to me, because it gets to the heart of Trump. If only Trump was actually like this I'd be pretty happy with him as a second choice. If Trump actually was like the people voting for him believe, he'd be a pretty good candidate.
The problem is he's not.
Trump is squishy on the Iran deal, as Cruz revealed at the last debate. Trump won't rip it to shreds immediately, like Cruz. Instead, Trump plans to try to renegotiate a better deal. As if Iran could be a negotiation partner. Iran doesn't want a deal and doesn't want peace, they want to kill us – the "Great Satan" – as they frequently say in public.
Trump doesn't recognize the Islamist threat correctly, as revealed with his Garland comments and his "neutral" position on Israel and the Palestinians. Cruz is a great friend of Israel. Trump absolutely isn't. Trump thinks that the Palestinians, like the Iranians, can be partners in peace to negotiate with.
Is a guy who dislikes Israel, and dislikes Pamela Geller, going to be all that good on Muslim issues generally? That doesn't make sense.
Trump has made it clear he can change his mind to whatever he wants. He's malleable. Will he really go through with the moratorium on Muslim immigration? I doubt it. Trump reportedly told the New York Times, off the record, that he doesn't mean all of what he's been saying about immigration. And then he told Ben Carson that he doesn't believe all the outlandish stuff he's been saying.
The problem with Trump is he's a leftist at heart and if he's President we're going to get little if any of the hard-right policy-making we want. Trump will make deals, make compromises, and actively pursue a variety of leftwing agendas from funding Planned Parenthood with taxpayer dollars to having the taxpayer take care of everyone's healthcare to preventing any cuts to entitlements to generally refusing to cut down the government at all. Trump only wants to remove waste, fraud and abuse, not actually have a smaller government. Trump wants the government to be better run and make better deals, but he doesn't want to fundamentally change it much. That won't make our country solvent.
And Trump easily caves in to pressure and whims – and lifelong New York values – because he lacks strong classical liberal principles. Hence he called Scalia a racist. And Trump was in favor of letting in Syrian refugees before he was against it.
Will Trump be good on capitalism? No, he's a protectionist. Will Trump even be good on immigration? He gave two pro-amnesty CPAC speeches. One of the few areas Trump might actually be good – which no one is talking about – is energy.
Trump funded and praised the likes of Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid. And he praised Obama in 2009. Is this a guy who is really going to reverse Obama's policies and fight for Republican ideas?
Trump has spent a lifetime being a leftist participating in crony capitalism. He doesn't know how to confront and flush out the administrative state. He's going to get to DC and be surrounded by the fourth branch of government – unelected leftists who run everything – and he's going to start making deals and getting along with everyone instead of fighting them and burning it down. He won't take no prisoners.
Ted Cruz has a track record of standing up to the establishment Washington Cartel. Trump has no credibility that he will do that, and actually has repeatedly said he won't. Trump says he'll get along with people like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and even the Democrats who Trump mistakenly believes are reasonable people that you can work with.
Trump fundamentally doesn't understand our adversaries. You can't make a deal without common ground and some shared values. You can only work together when you share some goals. Either Trump shares a lot of values with the left, or he's naive and misunderstand how thoroughly evil the left is. Or, I think, both. As Daniel Horowitz put it:
Trump keeps saying we need to make deals just like Reagan did with Tip O’Neill. What he needs to understand is that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the entire modern Democrat Party are nothing like O’Neill. You can’t work with them and he needs to learn that.
u make Trump sound like some kind of squish. I just read this speech from the other day:
what have u to say about that? coz it ain't sounding squishy to me. nor is this:
so u say Trump doesn't really mean to implement what he is saying? cuz he allegedly confessed that to the NYT? I think he recognises that Isis needs to be smashed and is serious about doing it.
Trump's made awful comments about Israel *this year*. It's not that hard to hire a speech writer.
Trump is very squishy on most of the issues. Click the links in the blog post for some examples.
what did you mean "It's not that hard to hire a speech writer"?
it's questioning whether Trump could have said all the stuff from his AIPAC speech himself without hired help telling him what to say.
if trump is getting the sort of hired help that can produce speeches like that it is a good thing. if he keeps those sort of people on his team i see reason for optimism.
he said he'd be neutral with palestine. he's awful on this. AIPAC is where people lie they don't hate Israel.
I salute Trump for being an America patriot and for his huge achievement becoming the presumptive GOP nominee. May he win the presidency.
Coulter deserves credit - she was right to support Trump. She differentiated herself from all the naysayers and ridiculers. You need to learn more from her.
how was she right? Trump is really iffy on half the issues, and really bad on some like Israel and, yes, *Muslim terrorism*: http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/04/trump-blames-geller-for-being-attacked-by-jihadis-what-is-she-doing-drawing-muhammad/
Cruz was and is a LOT better than Trump on the issues.
(Though I've always admitted Coulter may be right that Cruz is ineligible to be President due to being born in Canada.)
people wrote Trump off as a joke and said he couldn't win. they were very wrong. Trump exposed major mistakes. he has been far more effective than Cruz in that regard.
also in exposing those mistakes Trump has made lots of enemies of scum and filth on all sides of the political spectrum. he has balls.
basically Trump has more balls than Cruz. Coulter saw that.
Geller herself said she would vigorously support Trump if Cruz lost. she too sees Trump has balls.
> people wrote Trump off as a joke and said he couldn't win. they were very wrong.
i know this. i knew it at the time.
Cruz has balls too. maybe you don't know anything about his career.
i will of course support Trump for President (that is, prefer he win) and have said the whole time he's my 2nd choice. that will not stop me from writing about Trump's major, worrying flaws. Cruz is AMAZING. Trump is way better than Obama or Hillary, and we'll see what he ends up doing.
I said Trump has more balls than Cruz, not that Cruz has none.
I respect Cruz.
and sure Cruz has good conservative values and all but I often thought one weakness he had was that he campaigned with an entitlement mindset.
Cruz has shown a lot of balls regarding the senate.
Trump has done things like praise some of the very establishment bastards Cruz stood up to. Like mcconnell and ryan. Trump has said stuff about getting along with them. Trump has called Cruz crazy and nasty for standing up to them.
In some ways Trump has given the impression he will go to Washington like a wrecking ball with the most balls we've ever seen. But he's also said he'll get along with everyone.
We'll have to see what Trump actually does. He says quite a mix of good and bad things, and contradictory things.
my point was Cruz has actually lived up to the hype, while Trump we don't really know yet.
Do you think Trump has lived up to the hype now? Is he as squishy as you thought? Also what happened to Cruz? Why is he so silent? He ought to be supporting Trump much more. I say thank God Trump won rather than Cruz. Trump is awesome.
Wake me up when Trump starts building a wall or Obamacare is dead or Iran is dead. But I'll wait (not like I have a choice), it's not hopeless that he'll get stuff done later.
Cruz would have been better at draining the swamp and some other things. It's not clearcut; it's possible he would have been worse overall. Hard to say.
Either way, at least it's not Hillary. That buys us more time for Coulter to write some more books, Bannon to level up Breitbart, Horowitz to finish his black book of the left series, FI to figure out how to spread, etc. Maybe something will make a difference.
#5087 - Do you now admit Trump could write that speech without hired help and he meant what he said? The main post got many things wrong and Trump has been a good friend of Israel.
What did I get wrong? Trump has done a few good things in relation to Israel but he remains squishy on Israel like he is also squishy on most other things, and he has in fact said awful things related to Israel, Islam, etc, fairly recently (e.g. his Garland comments blaming Geller for getting attacked by a terrorist, and I believe there are some specific to Israel but I don't know them off hand.)
Why do you damn Trump with faint praise? Eg."a few good things in relation to Israel". He's done better on Israel than other president. That good needs to be clearly called out like Netanyahu does: