Wow. Matt Walsh Calls It Like He Sees It; Do His Readers Survive?

Matt Walsh lets us know what he thinks about Trump and the supporters who admire his "straight talk". This is in the warm-up:

Over the course of this campaign season I’ve said many harsh words about you and your leader, all of which I stand by, but you’ve never respected my harsh words, or the harsh words of any Trump critic. Indeed, you insist that our tough criticism of you only vindicates your support of Trump, while Trump’s vulgar and dishonest criticism of everyone else also vindicates your support of Trump. You’re tired of people being critical, but you love Trump because he’s critical. You say you like Trump for his style, but you hate his style when it’s directed at him or you.

That was merely a ranging shot. Here we go:

You say you’re angry about the corruption in Washington, but you support a slimy swindler and fraudster who boasts of his bribery schemes and makes no apologies for shamelessly exploiting political corruption for personal gain.

You say you’re angry about illegal immigration, but you rally around a guy who supported amnesty as recently as 2013, employed illegal immigrants, and donated millions of dollars to open borders politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton.

You say you’re angry about the establishment, but you worship a candidate who said only a few weeks ago that “you got to be a little establishment” in order to get things done, and who admits he “was the establishment” right until he ran for president.

You say you’re angry that Republicans won’t fight, but you hail as a warrior the same guy who says he’ll happily “work with the Democrats,” which probably explains why Sen. Harry Reid praised him and Jimmy Carter called him “malleable.” It is not uncommon for me to hear from Trump fans that they’re angry at “GOPe” Republicans for “cutting deals” and “compromising” in one breath, and in the very next that they want Trump because he’s really good at cutting deals and compromising.

Right down the list, you are blithely embracing every single thing you say you’re so angry about. Trump is the very embodiment of corruption, deception, cowardice, and elitism. He is precisely the sort of man you supposedly detest. Trump is exploiting America’s frustration with men like Trump. Trump is running against Trump. You are voting for Trump because you hate Trump. You are angry at politicians because they act like Trump and make deals like Trump and go to cocktail parties with men like Trump and look down on the little guy like Trump and possess the integrity of Trump, and so you’re solution is to elect Trump. Your anger at Trump leads you to Trump. Perhaps this explains why you’re so worried about politicians who are “controlled by donors,” but you aren’t at all concerned about a politicians who is the very donor you didn’t want controlling the political process. “I’m sick of these donors influencing the government! I have an idea: let’s make one president!” 

I'll put him down as "Undecided". And his Big Finish:

Unless, like I said, you’re stupid. But you aren’t stupid, and a non-stupid person, a serious person, who truly, deeply, intensely loathes the current state of affairs, who genuinely desires that his country be revived for the sake of his children, would not be turning to a blustery, boorish reality TV character with a catchphrase and a fake tan for answers.

I’m just telling it like it is here, friend. I’m telling you what’s on my mind. I’m being completely and painfully honest with you. I don’t believe your anger.  I think you want a spectacle, not a solution. A celebrity, not a statesman. A circus performer, not a leader. I think you want to be entertained. I think you’re not taking this seriously enough. I think you’re intellectually lazy so you’ve accepted authoritarianism as a stand-in for strength. I think you’re following the trend of the day. I think you’re wrapped up in media hype.

In other words, I think your anger, if it exists, is misplaced. You should be angry at yourself, because if this country falls finally and irrevocably into despotism, it’ll be your fault. You’ll have chosen it. You’ll have elected it and applauded it. That, my friend, is what makes me angry.

And that’s just how it is.

I'm still rooting for my Marcobot, but if push comes to shove I used to say I'd vote for Trump over Hillarity! without hesitation. Now I suspect I'll hesitate until I am sure Matt Walsh is nowhere around. But I'll still never vote for another Clinton.

Comments

[Centralcal on iPad]

Ther is a lot of truth in his words.

[Jeff Dobbs]

NV Caucus Time!

[Jeff Dobbs]

Megyn says we could know the winner by midnight eastern?

Dang cuacusuesususes.

[Tony D]

Who's Matt Walsh? Is he the guy from America's Most Wanted?

[henry]

Peering into the wind. If you say Trump is too establishment / not Conservative enough / and untrustworthy -- you need someone to point to among the others that speaks to the main issues and can be trusted. Heck, point to someone that fits either criterion. Kasich (of expanding Medicaid)? Rubio (ole gang of 8)? Cruz (VAT)? Three varieties of GOP consultant mush. It may be Trump can't be trusted on the issues of the day (or anything else), but at least he knows what they are and talks about them.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Who's Tony D? Is he the guy from Who's the Boss?

[henry]

I don't even like Trump, but Walsh's argument is dumb.

[Beasts of England]

I read that piece earlier today. He commits the same mistake as all the other TDS sufferers: he insults them.

"I don't believe your anger." "...I think your anger, if it exists, is misplaced."

And then goes into a bizarre blaming spree about imagined despotism. Despotism? Are you fucking kidding me?

The very attitude he displays is what helped create Trump - disdain for regular people who have given up on the current establishment. People who are tired of being ignored.

Sen. Sessions - who is revered almost unanimously around the conservative blogosphere - isn't afraid of Trump. He is pleased that Trump is bringing new faces to the party. Be like Jeff.

[seapea]

Seriously, who is "Matt Walsh" ?

[Tom Veal]

Thank God I live in Illinois, where my vote doesn't count. In a Trump vs. Hillarity/Sanders vs. (maybe) Bloomberg contest, I'll be able to cast a ballot for some crazy libertarian or out-of-touch Bible thumper without a twinge of guilt over the outcome of the election.

[Miss Jane Marple]

Beasts,

Just got done reading this post from a link on Twitter. I agree with you.

Why in the world was Trump mocked when he first declared? Why wasn't he welcomed as a competitor and engaged on the issues?

Oh, no, he was a clown, a fraud, a buffoon, an ignoramus, etc.

And, according to Cooke, Wilson, and a bunch of others, so were his supporters.

Virtue signaling amongst the conservative literati isn't any more attractive than when I see it amongst the Journolistas. And this is what this is.

"Please keep me in the cool crowd! I hate Trump and here's why!"

Pfft.

[Captain Hate]

[Redacted for Lent] straight, Beasts; Trump has truly been blessed with the people who hate him.

[clarice]

I'm with you, Tom.

[And pulled out a plum.]

How could he type all that while sucking his thumb?

[DaveP.]

Because badmouthing me is gonna make me change my mind, loser... er, Matt.

If the Republican Party hadn't spent the past twenty years trashing its reputation and alienating its core supporters, there would be no Trump. When you gonna get around to doing something about that, Matt?

[Miss Jane Marple]

Time for a second glass of wine. Twitter is full of complaints from every candidate's supporters.

[PD]

Matt Walsh, what makes you think I care in the slightest what your opinion of me is?

[Theo]

I ask -- in all seriousness -- just what are the arguments FOR Trump?

[Rick Ballard]

The "core" supporters are so irritated that the GOP holds historic majorities in state legislatures across the country. Much credit should go to President Obama and there is no glory in following Napoleon's dictum to 'Never interrupt an enemy when he is making a mistake" but your idea of who constitutes the 'core' might be just a tad narrow.

[PD]

Okay, full disclosure: I read Tom's comments on Matt Walsh first. Then, having never heard of Matt Walsh before, I clicked the link to his article. Where, what to my wondering eyes should appear, but this:

Matt Walsh is a blogger, writer, speaker, and professional truth sayer.

Those last three words erased even the miniscule interested I might have had in reading his article, and I stopped right there before getting to the first word.

[PD]

I ask -- in all seriousness -- just what are the arguments FOR Trump?

He's not Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.

[PD]

This Democrat town hall on CNN seems identical with the previous ones, with minor differences in the softball "up close and personal questions."

[Miss Jane Marple]

Theo,

The basic argument FOR Trump is as follows, from what I have heard here and read on the internet:

1. He is not obligated to donors
2. He understands finance and business
3. He will close the border with a wall
4. He will stop Muslim immigration until we can see who is safe and who is not
5. He will straighten out the VA
6. He opposes Common core
7. He will make better trade deals, helping the American worker
8. He isn't a GOP politician

There are probably more. One can argue about these points, as many do. However, this is what I have picked up and what motivates them.

[Theo]

PD

Nor are Rafael Cruz or Marco Rubio or John Kasich. (Or me.)

But what is it about Trump that would make someone think that he should be the nominee?

[PD]

H.C.: A lot of low-wage workers don't make much.

[Beasts of England]

There a huge difference between state GOP lawmakers and the ones who go to DC and lose touch with reality.

[PD]

Theo, you asked what the arguments were for Trump, not why someone thinks he should be the nominee. (I myself would prefer he not be the nominee.)

MM summarized his appeal nicely, I think.

[Centralcal on iPad]

MJM: your items 3, 4, 5 and 7 - "will" should probably be changed to "says he will".

[Threadkiller]

9. He is a Birther and it hasn't hurt his chances.

[glasater]

I don't know how in the world The Donald can screw things up worse then 0bama has.

[Miss Jane Marple]

Centracal,

I was reporting what people have said, not whether or not it is true.

It is what people believe.

[narciso]

so how is it I reasonable concluded who the new jayvee franchisee, is with about five minutes of googling, yet stars and stripes has not,

http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/267-ahmad-abd-al-rahman-ahmad

he was the only one transferred to spain in 2004, and sent to gitmo in 2002

[Stephanie]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-seeks-to-force-apple-to-extract-data-from-about-12-other-iphones-1456202213

Wasn't the argument that it was only the one phone? Liars.

[Miss Jane Marple]

By the way, complaints about poll workers wearing Trump shirts are pointless.

It is legal in Nevada to wear such stuff at the polls, unlike my state or many others.

[Centralcal on iPad]

Donna, sorry, but I thought we were looking for someone to improve things, not just compete in screwing up.

[Theo]

Miss Jane --

Thanks.

Numbers 1,2 and 8 are even more true of Michael Bloomberg. Numbers 3, 4, 5 and 7 are mostly bluster. I assume others oppose Common Core as well.

I guess it comes down to a belief that he can actually do what he says he can do.

[Threadkiller]

.

[Beasts of England]

Matt Walsh is pajama boy? Figures.

[narciso]

yes, I would say surprise, surprise, but that's gotten old,

[PD]

I guess it comes down to a belief that he can actually do what he says he can do.

Being able to achieve his stated goals is not completely in his control. For me to support him, it'd be more important that I believe he means what he says when he says what he wants to do. I'm not certain I do, although I'd like to.

Nevertheless, should he be the nominee, I vote for him in a heartbeart over either HC or BS.

[glasater]

Heh, C-cal..

You gave me away!1!!!

I hear you about wanting to make things better but I'm out on the ledge with OL and the rest of the gang :-)

[Rango]

I liked Trump in the beginning when he perpetually vexed the media and the GOPe, but I see the same thing happening that happens when revolutionaries take over or when dogs catch the car. He's great at stirring things up but fixing stuff is a whole different ball of wax.

[peter]

going out on the Ledge. OL is there music? beer?

[Threadkiller]

There's a mechanic, peter.

[PD]

So Matt Walsh is not only a self-proclaimed professional truth sayer, but a self-proclaimed radical thinker.

What's that word that's attempting to come to mind? Putz?

[Centralcal on iPad]

Glasater, oops. Out on the ledge with ya girlfriend. I fear Trump is not the "savior" folks are looking for.

[PD]

Crawl on FOX re: Supreme Court: WHITE HOUSE SAYS NOT HOLDING HEARINGS WOULD BE UNPRECEDENTED

I remember when Obama came into office, his breathless supporters couldn't get enough of applying the word "unprecedented" to all things Obama. So unprecedented is a good thing. Right?

[narciso]

so I was having trouble pulling up documents from
Microsoft Starter 2010, even though I boosted my speed, so I uninstalled it, got a click 2 configuration error, and installed libre, now I have access to them, did I do the right thing,

[glasater]

C-cal, I adhere to the Chinese curse.. 'may you live in interesting times..' and we certainly are in the midst of it.

[Rick Ballard]

Matt Walsh is the blogger whom Tom Maguire (a blogger) chose to highlight in this blog. I'm still searching for Tom Maguire's actual disparagement of anything written by Matt Walsh but I keep chuckling over the ten links which Tom Maguire (a blogger) chose to highlight from the blog written by Matt Walsh (a blogger).

I'll keep looking.

[Miss Jane Marple]

We are going to have to have such a large Ledge that it will look like Shangri-La.

[DebinNC]

What happened to Matt's zip-up onesie, mug of hot chocolate, and cheeks with less hair than one of Jeff's cue balls?

[Stephanie]

Always one of my favorite arguments. "Drop your candidate and support mine so THEIR candidate will lose!"

Um, no.
======================

Seems to be the sentiment on FB right now. And a really good answer to MWalsh.

[narciso]

So on last weeks shannara, after the skullbearer impostor eventine, was killed by his son, and he became king, the young heroes found themselves in a strange throwback techno party, to our current day,
of course, you know this can't end well, so they are almost sacrificed to said skullbearers,

[DrJ]

narc,

If LibreOffice works for you, then it is fine. It is not compatible enough with Office (and all of my collaborators use that) so for me it works only for a quick read on my email computer.

I've been following the Kalamazoo shootings with quite some interest. Most of you may know that is my home town, and it is a heck of a way to get it into the news. I know most of the places where it all happened, though from quite some time ago.

Nothing much seems to be known yet. The constabularies say he sorta admitted to it, and the late-breaking news is that he did not have a concealed carry permit. Married, a couple of kids. No history of mental illness or anything else noteworthy.

We'll see how it unfolds. (No, I didn't know any of the people involved.)

[derwill]

Theo, a lot of his support comes from those who are so pissed off they want to smash the system--or to at least kick over the table. Since he's already smashed through the GOPe (Jeb! was supposed to be inevitable, remember?), so far he's giving them what they want. And every attack on him in the same vein as what we see from this Matt Walsh person just reconfirms that impression. They aren't thinking about tomorrow yet and what comes after inauguration day, but maybe they're so fed up that at this point smashing the system is both the end all and the be all.

It's a revolution of a sort and like all revolutions it has acquired a life of its own, and

[rse]

I think OL has downloaded some more books to his kindle.

We can keep a historical perspective from the ledge. With drinks. Good liquor.

Clarice and I can cook as long as someone keeps the wineglass filled as we saute.

[derwill]

oops.

. . . and is likely to end up in a place none of us can see coming yet.

[narciso]

well he is one, as the expression goes,

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/hillary-spokesman-says-judge-in-email-scandal-part-of-right-wing-conspiracy-even-though-bill-clinton-appointed-him/

[Miss Jane Marple]

One more glass of wine, as I wait for the Nevada results!

[Threadkiller]

Wasn't TM just being faithful to Walsh's links?

[narciso]

somethings he says for affect, like that line about 5th avenue, and some other remarks,

[narciso]

rush was arguing with a rubio supporter, that would vote for hillary, if trump was nominated, that doesn't really compute, then again neither does erick erickson,

[narciso]

seeing how this whole thing came up recently,

https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/02/06/cias-merlin-was-arranging-fake-nuclear-deals-on-an-aol-account-shared-with-his-wife-and-kids/

[Stephanie]

The pundits talk about Trump and Trumpertantrums, but ISTM that the GOPe fainting couches are full of folks like Walsh having tantrums - screaming, demanding, threatening to take their vote and go home, stompy feet, look at me histrionics. I'm surprised they haven't resorted to stealing each other's binkies.. reminds of the SJW temper tantrums but from the right.

[Miss Jane Marple]

narciso,

People are getting too emotional, which is probably to be expected after 2 terms of Obama.

I don't know that it can be dialed back, but it should be. It's creating bad feelings, which are not helpful for November.

[narciso]

so this is going around,

https://twitter.com/elainaplott

[Miss Jane Marple]

Stephanie,

I had a friend on the internet called Common Tator. He used to post on Free Republic. He passed away 4 years ago.

One of the things I learned from him is that if
a candidate cannot count on your support, he will look from support from others, maybe those who you don't agree with.

So, if Trump wins without the support of these GOPe tantrum throwers, why would he pay attention to what they want?

[Stephanie]

Eric's still hoping TPTB will punch his e-ticket for the Dumbo ride.

Another of the 'do as I say or I will have a stompy fit pundits.

It really is kinda funny. They set up all these conferences, snag a ballroom and control who can get in, schedule each other as the 'inside crowd' on the podiums for the crowd to fawn over and get all upset when the crowd gets bored and heads to the exits.

[Dave (in MA)]

Guy who got free weight reduction lap band surgery twits:

Howie Carr ‏@HowieCarrShow 53m53 minutes ago
Turn on Fox, first thing I see is 3-chin girly man Eric Erickson. Guess why he's on w/Megyn... he hates Trump. Quel surprise! #Nevadacaucus

[narciso]

I was thinking more if tony stark would run a national campaign would it really turn out differently,

http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/23/trump-the-deadpool-of-national-politics/#disqus_thread

[narciso]

I know it looks like they 'are looting the food court'

[Beasts of England]

Looks like record turnout once again for a Republican primary or caucus. I'm sure we can find something to bitch about in that regard, right?

I keed, I keed!!

[narciso]

rabbits just run out of hats,

http://www.alanalentin.net/2016/02/22/open-letter-on-peter-tatchell-censorship-and-criticism/

[narciso]

a kangaroo trial with more pouches

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/did-clinton-aides-try-to-pick-states-inspector-general/article/2583890

[YourMaster]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoAmll3ViQA
Things must not be going well for either Bernie or Hillary Mwahahahahahaha this is reason enough to vote Trump... look how demoralized/disheartened liberals are at Trump... it sends them into full meltdown mode. do you get this from Ted Cruz? nope.

and now, I am going to have to be painfully honest back...

Everything you said about Trump, is most people's view of the entire GOPe (McCain, Rubio, Bush, Romney, and yes even Ted Cruz)
you all have appeased the dems too much, for anyone to be convinced Ted Cruz or Rubio will be any different.

I'll try to explain briefly why the Majority is sick of both the GOP and the DNC elite.
First, the GOP betrayed ppl on 0bamacare and didn't even try to successful repeal it. ...when the GOP was essentially put in power with a mandate to do this (before 0bama leaves office)
wanna know why? So he can PERSONALLY experience all the misery and suffering when it's ripped away and he cant do anything about it/not even veto just before he's kicked from office permanently.

so essentially.. the GOPe are 'enablers' and have proven that rather consistently for the last couple of years/decades.

so ppl turn to an outsider to fix things.

also immigration... hate to break it to you, but Ted Cruz was literally talking about building a wall WHEN HE RAN FOR HIS SENATE SEAT....
why aren't people supporting his run for president you wonder? ...well, did you see Ted Cruz deliver on that promise after he won... to Build that wall? did you even see him attempt to enforce the borders? Nope.

So two things come to mind with Ted Cruz with that.... 1st he must not be as anti-immigration as you think he is... or as he tries to portray himself to be. -keep in mind, he is both a lawyer/politician... so he'll glad lie to your face with a smile.-
(his lack of actions on it prove such... and until he does otherwise, most people won't take him ...at his word)
secondly, he has no accomplishments what lil conservatism you say he has... involves voting against a bill ....notice I say 'voting against', and not 'stopping.' (the funding of planned parenthood still passed... EVEN THO TED CRUZ VOTED AGAINST IT.) ...did he try to get everyone else on board to stop the bill ...and succeed?
y'know like a real capable leader would of done who had skill. nope.

Did he even do the smart thing... like attaching a complete/partial repeal of 0bamacare to the funding of planned parenthood? Which would of forced 0bama/dems to choose between one or the other and sign or veto? Ted Cruz, Rubio and the rest gave the dems everything they wanted in the end, without much resistence.

if he had done that, most people would of flocked to Ted Cruz and he would of been in first place pretty much this entire time his campaign for the presidency had started.
If he had done something about the illegals/building a wall/enforcing the border like he promised when he won senate
it wouldn't have even came up in this election.

such acts come with consequences...
so as many faults as Trump has, I can tell you Ted Cruz and Rubio have far more.

like it or not tho... the GOP inaction/enabling got them where they are today ...and that does include Ted Cruz/Rubio

to win... you gonna have to get Ted Cruz/Rubio to quickly repeal 0bamacare before the nomination/election ends or I'd say their toast.

....that is the only thing that will give such the much needed bounce to beat Trump.
if he fails... well... Ted Cruz/rubio must really not want to president then.

[Miss Jane Marple]

Gosh, I wish the results would come in for Nevada! I am so tired and I want to go to bed!

[narciso]

you know they say, I could tell you but then I've have to kill you, but they don't seem following through with that second part,

https://twitter.com/20committee/status/702301996099964928

[(A)Nuther Bub]

I've followed Matt Walsh for several years. He's an insightful patriotic conservative who is on the same side as JOMers in most things. His most recent columns, IIRC, prior to this one, were about Antonin Scalia's greatness and how critical it is that Obama be constrained from making the replacement. Label him Pajama Boy if you like, but that is mistaken.

[narciso]

well no pedestals must remain standing,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3460017/Black-communist-widow-exposed-revolutionary-hero-Soviet-spy-cost-kitchen-Evil-wife-Poland-s-prime-minister-boasts-betrayed-Lech-Walesa-12-000-home-needs-renovating.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

How are the Reps supposed to repeal Barrycare?
IIRC they sent him a bill doing just that and he vetoed it. They don't have a veto proof margin.

[narciso]

yes, but they had already funded robertscare through the cr,

[Threadkiller]

Cuckservatives: Matt Walsh Jumps The Shark

Glenn Beck’s puppet poses as a bold truth teller ...

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2015/08/10/cuckservatives-matt-walsh-jumps-the-shark/

A Glenn Beck connection?

[Miss Jane Marple]

I think I am going to bed I will check in from there with my iPad.

Too tired to sit here at the computer.

[Beasts of England]

I was just goofing on him regarding the posted photo, (A)Nuther Bub.

I have no regrets calling him out on the disgraceful, and almost certainly unhelpful, screed in the original post.

[narciso]

the vapors, in that earlier tweet, tell you everything you need to know,

I was witness to a local recall election, fanned by the local radio station, which was so cutthroat they almost called in jimmy carter,

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--I ask -- in all seriousness -- just what are the arguments FOR Trump?--

This question is close to being irrelevant. Barring a breakout by Cruz or Rubio, soon, Trump will be the nominee.
In that case the argument for Trump is precisely the-lesser-of-two-evils one perennially made for whatever inadequate doofus the Reps nominated. The only difference this time is that we KNOW a Hillary or Sanders election dooms the country to a left wing SCOTUS, the absence of which has been the only thing standing between us and the wholesale loss of virtually all our most important freedoms.

At that point anyone who sits on their hands or votes for either of those Marxists because Trump is rude and vulgar and might not be a real conservative and has funny hair is behaving less rationally and less responsibly than all the supposed clowns rooting for Trump.
And as it becomes more likely that Trump is the nominee that we might have to vote for to block those two scags who will end America as we know it, those who insist on denigrating Trump and his supporters to the point some decide they can't vote for him those people are, it seems to me, assisting in that destruction.

[narciso]

does notre dame pick lots when selecting faculty,

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/21/you-re-doing-baptism-all-wrong.html

[narciso]

cuckservative, is not a phrase you use, if you want to be portrayed as not a loon,

[cheerleader]

There's very little truth but a lot of desperation in his words.

Bribery? HYPERBOLE!!!!!
Bribery is a crime. When has Trump been arrested and convicted of the crime of bribery.

The rest is just a pile of vomit.

[cheerleader]

"--I ask -- in all seriousness -- just what are the arguments FOR Trump?--"

words of an extremely Low Information Voter

[narciso]

tweedle rove, and tweedle trippi, the last recently has been running the kuwaiti gitmo scam,

[derwill]

I stand with Ig's 11:16! Vote for the Republican no matter who it turns out to be as if your liberty depended upon it--because it does.

[cheerleader]

"Clowns" don't build multi-billion dollar multinational companies and fly around in their own Boeing 757 or finance their own campaigns. They don't raise beautiful, well mannered, extremely intelligent children who love and respect their father.

[narciso]

it is interesting how doctrine arose,

https://www.baptistdistinctives.org/resources/articles/believers-baptism/

what candida trades in, is low sophistry, that Dan Brown would look down on,

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

I don't know what a cuckservative is but linking to a guy who doesn't think racism is immoral is not a very good way to argue for your side of things.

[Beasts of England]

Ramon Castro is dead.

[narciso]

big woop, fidel's nina burleigh, ann marie bardach, made a big deal of 'discovering him' back in the early 00s, that was back when the white whale was luis posada carriles,

[narciso]

one of the links regarded an ad by one of the mittens braintrust, kelly packer gage, which makes a host of buckshot allegations which could at one time, have hit any of the candidates,

[Rango]

Ignatz, at some point in my life, I want to vote FOR someone again. Why can't we put someone I truly want in the White House again? If I have to vote for Trump to avoid the final collapse of our republic, so be it, but it just seems sad. And predicting the resulting effect Trump has on the trajectory of our country will be like predicting the eventual judicial position of a Bush 41 Supreme Court nominee.