Tag Archives: snowflakes

Word Rage

Donald Trump’s presidency began with a bang.

Scary!

Leftists hated his words. And they will hate his actions even more.

word-rage

Trump actually puts America First! – and the Left has gone bonkers. Leftists recoiled in reactionary horror.

Trump has tapped into a patriotic fervor which terrifies the Left and exposes its anti-American values and anti-democratic impulses.

Trump’s (First) Inaugural Address

Trump’s inaugural address was short, a mere 1,459 (powerful) words. The longest address, at 8,460 words, was given by William Henry Harrison, who died 31 days later from complications due to pneumonia. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s fourth address was the shortest at a meager 559 words.

In his address, Trump drew a line in the sand – a demarcation line between patriotism and globalism, between national sovereignty and cosmopolitanism, between American exceptionalism and obeisance to a New World Order.

Trump posits American primacy and polity above international diplomacy and appeasement. And Americans love it!

Charlie Kirk observed, “Donald Trump’s speech used the word ‘we’ 45 times and the word ‘I’ three times,” suggesting Trump’s ego may succumb to his new role as Commander-in-Chief.

(Will Trump’s new position as President transform Trump into a better man as he seeks to Make America Great Again? Will he grow into a selfless leader for a higher purpose? We can hope and pray.)

I tweeted: “Impressive #inaugural address: God country liberty fraternity TRUE hope & change #GodBlessAmerica.”

The Hartford Sentinel highlighted these inaugural words: “Will (40), America (17), American (12), people (9), nation (9), country (9), again (9).”

Patriotism. Nationalism.

Trump’s Dark, Dark, Dark Inaugural Address

Responses to Trump’s inaugural address varied: hysterical fear from the Left, jubilant enthusiasm from the #AmericaFirst crowd, and cautious optimism from formerly #NeverTrump.

Open borders enthusiasts like Forbes bemoaned “the most bellicose inaugural address ever given” with its “incendiary rhetoric,” “dark vision of America,” and “extraordinarily dark rhetoric.”

Hearkening back to the alleged “angry white males” of the Bill Clinton era, Forbes claimed: “Trump’s angry, determined, and take-no-prisoners speech was astonishingly dark in tone, matching his campaign speeches – and by far the darkest inaugural of the past half-century.”

(How would Leftists have responded if Forbes had used that very same dark language to describe any of Obama’s speeches?)

The Washington Post also lamented Trump’s dark choice of words, which included:

 “sprawl, ignored, windswept, overseas, tombstones, rusted-out, trapped, neighborhoods, landscape, flush, carnage, unrealized, robbed, stolen, likes, listening, hardships, transferring, politicians, reaped, stops, subsidized, disagreements, bedrock, Islamic, reinforce, solidarity, unstoppable, brown, mysteries, arrives, politicians, hire, infrastructure, trillions, depletion, allowing, disrepair, redistributed, tunnels, stealing, ravages, issuing, bleed.”

Zero Hedge similarly grumbled about Trump’s word choice, providing its own list of words never before used in a presidential inaugural address:

trump-speech-cloud_0

Many deplored Trump’s use of “carnage,” a word wholly appropriate and accurate in describing the violence in America’s Democrat-run metropolitan areas.

Trump testified to the blunt reality many Americans face from inner-city violence, race riots, terrorist attacks, and the consequences of the massive influx of illegal aliens.

Snowflakes want the whole world to be a safe space. Normal people in the real world want freedom.

(Quartz Media provides a database of every presidential inaugural, listing the most frequent words used in each one. Homework assignment: compare the inaugurals from Reagan to Trump.)

America First!

The most jarring moment for me was in Trump’s salutation: addressing and thanking, among others, the “people of the world.” That phrase, reminiscent of Obama’s “citizen of the world” rhetoric, ran counter to Trump’s America First! theme.

Trump’s appeal to the hearts of Americans – America First! –is neither unhealthy nor immoral.

Nevertheless, Leftists responded in typical fashion. Blue Virginia offered up an inaugural word cloud showing the predominance of America, American, country, and people in Trump’s speech.

trumpinauguralwordcloud

Blue Virginia also condemned the substance of Trump’s message, writing: “Donald Trump’s inaugural address: will go down in history as the infamous, hyper-nationalist, chest-thumping ‘America First’ speech, I bet.”

Even Bill O’Reilly called Trump’s speech “militant.” But it’s only divisive or militant if you disagree with the content.

Trump’s America First! Agenda

What does “America First!” mean?

Is it a nefarious plot to create a racist authoritarian state? Does it inspire national hubris? Or is it a response to the anti-American ethos of so many of America’s political, cultural, and economic elites?

In reality, American First! is both populist and conservative.

It is populist in that it is popular with the average America-loving American who believes in American exceptionalism, American values, and American ideals.

And it is conservative in seeking to restore and preserve the best of what America was and can be.

How will Trump translate his words into actions?

Trump proclaimed patriotism, protectionism, and nationalism. Patriotism and healthy nationalism are good things. Protectionism is not.

Unfortunately, in being America First!, Trump misapplies some American principles. His protectionist instincts are counterproductive and contradict the very principle of liberty upon which America is based. Free markets deserve to be free. Liberty necessitates the free exchange of ideas and of products.

Moreover, America is not an island and must not become isolationist.

Evil was allowed to fill the vacuum left by Obama’s retreat from world affairs. Obama’s “leading from behind” failed abysmally. Absent an American presence of strength in the world, evil will continue to grow and thrive, inevitably becoming an ever clearer and more present danger to this nation.

Trump also must not ignore the reality that America needs her allies and other relationships which are mutually beneficial. To neglect or discourage them would be disastrous. Fortunately, Trump pledged, “We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism.”

Trump appears to recognize that the United States is much more than an “I” – it’s also a “We.”

We, the People – with deep roots and relationships with our allies (e.g., Britain, Israel) and certain alliances (e.g., NATO). (In contrast, Trump is correct in diminishing – or abandoning – the United Nations, which is not an ally and is more often than not anti-American.)

Nevertheless, our new president’s prioritization of American interests at the head of the queue is both laudable and a necessary course correction from the previous administration and decades of progressive dominance in politics.

A Re-United States?

Michael Barone argues that Trump’s nationalism can ultimately reunite the American people, noting, “a healthy nationalism can bring people together.” Barone quotes Trump, who said, “When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice. Whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots.”

For a strong America, we need to restore and strengthen the American identity, American values, American ideals, and American independence.

Trump concluded his address:

“Your voice, your hopes and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way. Together, we will make America strong again. We will make America wealthy again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And yes, together, we will make America great again. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America. Thank you. God bless America.”

As Captain Jean-Luc Picard was known to say: “Make it so.”

[A new book, #NeverTrump: Coulter’s Alt-Right Utopia, sheds some light on the #OnlyTrump movement and its Alt-Right constituency. It is now available on Amazon at http://amzn.to/2fzA9Mr.]

Left Behind

Donald Trump’s inauguration is hours away and the Left remains stupefied.

The Left remains stunned by Hillary Clinton’s defeat. (Snowflakes are melting.) Her defeat, and Obama’s legacy, augur ill for the progressive agenda.

left-behind

From Obama and Hillary to identity politics and bumper stickers, the Left is in need of not just a new messenger, but a new message.

Hillary Lost – Get Over It

Hillary, the worst candidate Democrats could have nominated, lost to the worst GOP candidate ever.

Analysis by Dan McLaughlin strongly suggests that Trump won despite himself and that a far more traditionally conservative GOP nominee “would have fared far better.” According to McLaughlin, “A candidate with nothing but the historical wind at his back would have fared far better than Trump. Only his singular underperformance of the historic trend kept this race even close.”

But Hillary still lost!

Hillary had “an astoundingly poor performance,” according to McLaughlin, winning “a majority of the popular vote in only thirteen states, the fewest of any major-party nominee since Bob Dole in 1996.” Indeed, though she faced the “deeply flawed” GOP candidate “that Democrats were visibly salivating over running against,” Hillary “carried a popular majority in half as many states as Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, barely more than half as many as Mitt Romney.”

Indeed, “Hillary managed the worst Democratic performance as a share of eligible voters over the past five elections in 17 states, almost all of them states with above-average white populations: West Virginia, North and South Dakota, Wyoming, Tennessee, Missouri, Oklahoma, Iowa, Arkansas, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Michigan, Rhode Island, Alabama, Louisiana, Kansas, and New York.”

To whom did Hillary lose? Donald Trump.

McLaughlin observes, “All told, across the 765 counties in 28 states where Trump got fewer votes than the Republican candidate for Senate, he received 2.176 million fewer votes.” Moreover, in “counties Trump lost by 10,000 or more votes, we get a much longer list of 52 counties, in which more than 21 million votes were cast and Trump got 1,377,179 fewer votes than Republican Senate candidates.”

Trump was extremely unpopular; Hillary even more so.

Obama has Left Liberalism in Crisis

What was Hillary message? She as going to out-Obama Obama. America has rejected that agenda.

President Obama’s legacy is one which has actually left liberalism in crisis. Michael Barone points out: “Republicans have now won House majorities in 10 of the past 12 elections, leaving 2006 and 2008 as temporary aberrations.”

Barone continues:

“Republican success has been even greater in gubernatorial and state-legislature elections, to the point that Democrats hold both the governorship and legislative control only in California, Hawaii, Delaware, and Rhode Island. After eight years of the Obama presidency, Democrats hold fewer elective offices than at any time since the 1920s.”

Ramesh Ponnuru addresses the leftward momentum of the Left: “On criminal justice, on entitlements, on immigration, on abortion, on religious liberty, Democrats staked out positions and adopted rhetoric that were much less moderate than they had previously been. The new Democratic consensus included Hillary Clinton, who ran in 2016 as the heir to Obama rather than to her own husband.”

As Rich Lowry notes, Obama’s “favorite rhetorical crutch was to portray his positions as the centrist path between two extremes, although this was convincing only to people who already agreed with him. His inability or unwillingness to seriously compromise proved devastating to his party, which got wiped out in 2010, 2014, and most importantly 2016. This puts much of what he accomplished legislatively and unilaterally in jeopardy.”

Straightjacketed by Identity Politics

The Left has become straightjacketed by the identity politics for which both Obama and Hillary are poster children. The Year of the Woman failed in 2008 and 2016. Appealing to voters on the basis of race, gender, and class is becoming increasingly counterproductive.

Hillary and the Left lost in large measure due to the politically cancerous identity politics it is obsessed with and which taints everything the Left does.

The Million Woman March slated for the day after Trump’s inauguration epitomizes the nonsense that permeates the Left. Organizers for these protests in the name of all women actually exclude those who are neither liberal nor pro-choice. They also reject white women, claiming their oppression is significantly less than that of minority women.

Heather Wilhelm notes, “There are many different types of oppression, intersectional feminism teaches – based on race, class, sexual identity, and more  that layer upon each other. In the world of intersectionality, victimhood is sorted by category, tallied, and ultimately ranked.” Sounds a lot like those good old days of apartheid in South Africa.

“Apparently, at this point,” writes Wilhelm, “the way forward involves a cavalcade of left-wing causes – abortion, as usual, is taking top billing – buckets of vague platitudes, lots of hectoring, and endless, obsessive, identity-based infighting.” As usual in situations like this, the loudest bully wins, kind of like in Lord of the Flies.

Leftist Political Dynasties

Progressives are always seeking progress – moving forward. Hence their disdain for tradition, especially in traditional values, religious beliefs, and patriotic fervor. For them, we must get beyond the foibles of nationalism and embrace a globalist citizen-of-the-world ethos.

But progressives also like to anchor their progress and their victories in hero worship. Hence their love for political dynasties.

Leftist admiration for political dynasties is particularly undemocratic and peculiarly foreign to the precepts upon which America was founded. (Remember the Declaration of Independence?) Once leftists have power, they are loathe to give it up.

In the 1960s, the Left dreamed of a Kennedy dynasty (John, Bobby, Ted). Now they fervently desire an interwoven dynastic reign by Obamas and Clintons.

Lowry observes, Obama “will be remembered – and revered – by his admirers as his generation’s JFK. Lasting substantive achievements are beside the point when ascending to this iconic status.” As I pointed out, “At least JFK loved America, fought against communism, valued free market, tough on crime.”

One bumper sticker encapsulates this self-destructive pathology on the Left. It read: Hillary 2016, Michelle 2024, Chelsea 2032, Malia 2040, Sasha 2048.

What qualifies any of the (exclusively female) names on this list to be President of the United States?

Hillary’s singular accomplishment was to be more hated and less trusted than Donald Trump. HillaryCare bombed during her husband’s first administration. She was a lackluster senator and an abysmal Secretary of State who presided over the collapse of stability in the Middle East and the mushrooming of Islamism. Her singular achievement (apart from Benghazi and her secret email server) was setting a Guinness world record for frequent flyer miles.

Michelle Obama is indeed accomplished – at decimating public school lunch programs across America.

What are Chelsea Clinton’s accomplishments, credentials, and qualifications to be Commander-in-Chief? She received “an eye-popping $600,000 annual salary for an irregular stint as an NBC special correspondent.” Yes, she’s a “political heiress” engaged in crony capitalism.

Finally, in case it escaped anyone’s notice, Malia and Sasha Obama are children!

What do all these wonderful people have in common? They are all women and they all share the name of Clinton or Obama.

Obama’s Unraveling Legacy

Obama’s legacy is unravelling even as Trump prepares for his inauguration. Hillary’s political ambitions are effectively dead. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has again become her party’s standard-bearer in the House. Leftists continue to pursue their leftward momentum even as most Americans reject their policies.

President Obama’s “central case for government’s existence,” writes David Harsanyi, “rests on the notion of the state being society’s moral center, engine of prosperity, and arbiter of fairness. Obama speaks of government as a theocrat might speak of the Church, and his fans return the favor by treating him like a pope. This was true in 2008. And it’s true now. Just check out liberal Twitterdom.”

Some delusions die hard.