Tag: cuckservative

Perfidious fake conservative (((Jennifer Rubin))) urges the future shunning of the White House Press Secretary:

Conservative Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin tore into White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Sunday, saying she should be shunned from her next job for her false and misleading claims.

“Sarah Huckabee Sanders is so concerned that people aren’t nice to her,” Rubin told MSNBC’s Joy Reid on “AM Joy.” “And people like me think that — not that she should be harassed — but that she should be shunned. The reason is that she lies. She attacks our free press and no respectable employer should hire her after this term,” Rubin continued. “Also, no university and no news outlet. She has lied and she has endangered the lives of reporters and that’s why she should be shunned. Not harassed — shunned.”

Earlier this week, the columnist declared in a scathing editorial that the GOP “isn’t fit to govern.”

If lying is justification for being shunned, then why is anyone on the planet talking to Rubin? Before moving into fake conservative opinion writing to derail Republicans, Rubin was “a labor and employment lawyer in Los Angeles, working for Hollywood studios, for 20 years.”

Rubin is as legitimately of the political Right as Richard Dawkins is an evangelical Christian. And she’s as about as American as Li Keqiang.

From the transcript of the Darkstream:

I didn’t really think about Shapiro at all until 2005, when I dubbed him the Littlest Chickenhawk, and the reason I did so – remember this is back in 2005 okay – and what Shapiro did, despite the fact that he was of an age to join the military, he wrote and claimed that invading Iraq and invading Iran and basically invading the entire Middle East and establishing an American empire that would be democratic was the most most vital issue of our time. It was the absolute priority for the United States of America, and yet he didn’t join the military! It was more important for him to go to college and go to law school. I mean, this is the literal definition of a chickenhawk, somebody who demands the country go to war but refuses to do so himself.

So back in 2005 I dubbed him the Littlest Chickenhawk after he tried to justify himself and defend himself and it was absolutely, totally inept. Totally unconvincing, you know, and it really astonished me that anyone took him seriously after that. I mean, Shapiro has no intellectual integrity at all! He prides himself, his supporters talk about how he’s supposed to be this fearsome debater, he’s written a little pamphlet on how to destroy liberals in an argument, but here’s the thing. He ran away from the opportunity to debate Milo Yiannopoulos. Twice he talked about a general debate challenge, I  contacted him and said, “Ben, I’ll be happy to debate you.” Once it was on economics, I don’t recall what the other one was.

Both times he practically left tracks fleeing in the opposite direction, and so you know the guy is a complete and utter fraud.

Did Iraq pose an immediate threat to our nation? Perhaps not. But toppling Saddam Hussein and democratizing Iraq prevent his future ascendance and end his material support for future threats globally. The same principle holds true for Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan and others: Pre-emption is the chief weapon of a global empire. No one said empire was easy, but it is right and good, both for Americans and for the world.
– Benjamin Shapiro, WorldNetDaily, Aug. 11, 2005

The cucks are really, really desperate to keep the Littlest Chickenhawk viable:

I spend a few weeks every year teaching high-school and college students, and in my interactions with young people in and around universities I have noticed a trend. After class, at meals, and in walks around campus, the politically engaged students invariably ask me the same question: What do I think of Ben Shapiro?

Nor am I alone. Recently Eliza Gray had a similar experience while reporting on young conservatives in the age of President Trump. “Oddly enough,” she wrote in the Washington Post, “the person who appeared to be doing the most to shape the thinking of the new generation of Republican leaders was not the president of the United States—but Ben Shapiro, a 34-year-old anti-Trump conservative pundit who came up unprompted in more than a third of my conversations.” Again and again, students turn exchanges involving politics and ideology into discussions of Shapiro, his media presence, his ideas, and his mode of discourse.

As it turns out, I happen to think well of Shapiro, and admire not only his intelligence but also the way he is modeling political debate for an audience of millions. (We’ve corresponded once or twice but have never met.) More important, though, is what Shapiro’s celebrity tells us about the changing nature of media, the emerging sensibility of conservative youth, and indeed the future of American conservatism itself.

Shapiro owes a lot to social media. His appearances on Fox News Channel are not the cause but the consequence of his fame. It is by searching YouTube that teenagers come across his debates with campus lefties, his speeches, his appearances on like-minded podcasts, and his extended interviews with friends and other members of the so-called intellectual dark web.

The idea that Ben Shapiro is shaping ANYONE’S thinking, let alone the coming Republican leadership, is downright hilarious. The trend is clearly moving well away from his outdated open borders, free trade, Israel-first nonsense. Ben Shapiro may well be “the future of conservatism” because conservatism is dead. The cuckservatives fantasize about Generation Shapiro, but what they will get is Generation Zyklon.

As with the dog that didn’t bark in the night, what is significant is the fact that they have literally no one else. All of the genuine intellectual energy is on the nationalist Right. Jordan Peterson is a propped-up fraud. Sam Harris is a recycled, propped-up midwit. Shapiro has been propped up and pushed on conservatives since he was in junior high despite this being the quality of his political analysis.

I told you it was inevitable. But for the time being, conservatives are still determined to try to hold on to their bowties and good opinion of themselves as fine upstanding individuals who are above getting their hands dirty by actually laying hands on the enemy:

Ask any conservative hate-listed by the SPLC (me, for example) what it’s like to work for decades to achieve a successful career and then be labeled a menace to society based on some left-wing ideologue’s interpretation. The Left has been smearing the Right this way for so long — they did it to Barry Goldwater, they did it Ronald Reagan, they do it to every conservative — that we scarcely even notice it anymore.

What has happened in recent years is that the Right has begun to fight fire with fire, and the Left calls this “harassment.” This was the basic story of #GamerGate: Videogame enthusiasts had grown tired of their hobby being targeted by “social justice warriors” (SJWs) and decided to fight back. Defending themselves against the organized lobby of politically correct censors and critical-theory busybodies (e.g., Anita Sarkeesian), the #GamerGate crew were accused of “misogyny” and “haraassment.” And this exposes the double-standard: When the Left attacks the videogame industry, this is “activism”; when gamers fight back, this is “harassment.” Likewise, when left-wing outfits use the past words of conservatives to brand them racist, this is “research”; when the tables are turned, liberals call it “trolling.”

As John Sexton at Hot Air notes, the Left is defending Sarah Jeong’s anti-white hatred as simply “the way the social justice left talks”:

“White people” is a shorthand in these communities, one that’s used to capture the way that many whites still act in clueless and/or racist ways. It’s typically used satirically and hyperbolically to emphasize how white people continue to benefit (even unknowingly) from their skin color, or to point out the ways in which a power structure that favors white people continues to exist.

Having engaged in a bit of satirical hyperbole myself, I call bulls–t here. It’s a blatant double-standard — one rule for liberals, another rule for everybody else — that permits “the social justice left” to engage in blatant hate-mongering, while conservatives are compelled to tiptoe carefully and watch every word lest they accidentally say something that might somehow be interpreted as “racism.” What conservatives need to do is to start calling the Left’s rhetoric what it is: hate propaganda.

That actually made me laugh out loud. I like Robert Stacey McCain, his intentions are undoubtedly pure, but like most conservatives, he simply has no clue that there isn’t a silent majority that is going to gravitate to whichever side can present itself as the least hateful. Calling the Left’s rhetoric “hate propaganda” is going to be even less effective than “Dems R the Real Racists” was.

What conservatives need to do, what they will eventually be forced to do whether they want to or not, is to embrace science, history, and reality, and finally accept that blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Muslims, Indians, and Jews are NEVER, EVER going to take their side or align with their idiotic, idealistic universalism. What conservatives need to do is accept that for better or for worse, they are the White American party now, and pursue their own interests accordingly. All anyone has to do to understand how any immigrant interest group is reliably going to vote is to look at how that interest group prefers to live in its own country. The dirt is not magic.

This really isn’t that hard a concept to grasp. Immigrants don’t move to the USA in order to live like White Americans any more than Californians move to Texas in order to live like Texans.

You guessed it, it’s the New York Times-endorsed controlled opposition figure, (((Ben Shapiro))).

Alexa Names Her Favorite Conservative Pundit: Ben Shapiro.

The responses by Instapundit readers demonstrate that conservatives are finally seeing through the little fraud. These are all just from the initial page of comments.

Basil Makedon
This endorsement is enough for me to banish Shapiro to the outer-darkness. I don’t actually see the fascination with him, honestly. He’s not nearly as clever as he (and his fans) believes. I went to Law School with at least a half-dozen short, Jewish guys who were twice as smart, more conservative and talked at least as fast. Most of his “debates” are with half-witted children who have had indoctrination rather than education. The whole “Intellectual Dark Web” thing is such a farce. All of those people — save Shapiro — are Leftists, shivved by Blessed Hussein’s children. Shapiro is the lone exception, which of course makes me suspicious.

jubadoobai
Alexa likes the chipmunk on helium? Fix her taste buds, Bezos. Sigh. I used to like him, too. Once upon a time.

Carey J
It’s only because Shapiro writes for NeverTrump Review.

 Kyle Smith
The highly politicized Alexa answers mean that someone works full time politicizing Alexa and is paid to to do that. They hate average Americans and cannot help themsevles. Every “power” they get they turn to politics and hate.

Botched_Lobotomy
You could make an argument that Shapiro is a classical liberal based on his defense of free speech as long as he likes the person who’s speech is being restricted. You’d be wrong but you could at least make a good faith argument. In no way is he a conservative.

WanderingWonderer
Ben Shapiro has publicly stated that “racists” should be hunted down and hounded from their places of employment. Naturally he’s all about Israel staying jewish by any means necessary but ‘doesn’t care’ about America’s demographics. Ben Shapiro has also defended James Gunn’s “jokes” about pedophilia. It just goes to show who he likes and whose side he is on.

BillyS
Ben is the controlled opposition. They have to have some opposition, but they reign him in very well. He was just defending a pedophile recently after all!

Richard Warren
No surprise that the Approved Opposision (TM) is the approved opposition, except perhaps to that Driscoll guy.

JimboFlex
A member of the “Intellectual Dark Web” is Jeff Bezos favorite conservative? How can this be? We couldn’t possibly have been sold a false bill of goods!

jckluge
Ben is a complete putz who would run conservatism as a completely ineffective opposition if he could. I think Alexa is just following orders here.

willbest
Why would Alexa need to go to reeducation camp for picking one of the NYT approved voices of the conservative movement?

Vizzini
No, Bezos smiles. The Littlest Chickenhawk is the controlled opposition. All is proceeding in accordance with Bezos’ plan.

dougf43
Well of course Benny is her favourite. Why would he not be. Seemingly a combative worthy adversary, but in reality, under the surface, nobody to worry about at all. Because what Ben really approves of is Ben Shapiro, and his exquisite better than you morality. All sound and absolutely no fury, signifying —nothing.

It is indeed a mystery:

Charlie Nash @MrNashington
Not all “conservatives” are affected by Twitter’s new search result censorship, with Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro, the National Review’s David French, the Resurgent’s Erick Erickson, and Glenn Beck remaining unaffected…

It’s almost as if the Left wants to keep the cucks around and viable. After all, if they don’t have any Fake Opposition around, they might look like… fascists?

One of the nice things about being an ex-libertarian is that one no longer finds oneself lumped in with the professional cucks at Reason.

The Walt Disney Company has fired filmmaker James Gunn, director of the Marvel franchise Guardians of the Galaxy films, due to revelations that he—gasp—said some very offensive things on Twitter many years ago.

It’s no accident these tweets were suddenly discovered; right-wing bloggers including Mike Cernovich and Jack Posobiec (with an assist from Breitbart and The Daily Caller) went digging after Gunn made negative remarks about conservative writer Ben Shapiro on Twitter. Ironically, Gunn was actually offering a very qualified defense of liberal actor and director Mark Duplass for saying Ben Shapiro was someone the left should engage.

Gunn’s tweets reference violence and sexual assault against children. They are gross. But he says they were intended as jokes, and there’s really no reason to suspect otherwise. While many have implied that the tweets include a link to child pornography, this is false—the link in question is harmless.

Gunn said he was a very different person when he wrote those tweets, and had previously apologized.

“I viewed myself as a provocateur, making movies and telling jokes that were outrageous and taboo,” he said in a statement. “In the past, I have apologized for humor of mine that hurt people. I truly felt sorry and meant every word of my apologies.”

This really ought to have been enough. But we live in an era where both the left and the right are eager to collect the scalps of people who offend them. Conservatives who participated in the lynch mob against Gunn are hypocrites, since they have often scolded the left for doing this exact same thing.

Cuckservatives are very unhappy when anyone does anything more effective than protest in a feeble and futile manner. To the Left, an apology is nothing more than an admission of guilt and justification for prosecution, and their apologies should be treated accordingly. Cerno and Jack are doing exactly what everyone on the Right should be doing to the Left, and that is holding them accountable to their own rules.

If you want to win the cultural war, you have to fight. Feckless posturing about how “we should be better than that” is not fighting, it is surrendering.

A celebration in Colorado Springs!

COLORADO SPRINGS, CO—In a joyful ceremony, Christian leaders gathered to grant Jordan Peterson the status of honorary Christian. Though the Canadian professor has never identified as a Christian and does not attend any church, a vote was taken and the decision was made unanimously that Peterson had earned his salvation and could be drafted into heaven by popular vote.

“Most people are saved by grace,” said one of the pastors who presented the award, “Jordan Peterson isn’t most people.”

Though Peterson holds a number of highly controversial views such as that most societal problems are really complicated, men shouldn’t be deadbeats, speech should be free, and that becoming dogmatically ideological stunts intellectual and moral growth, the Christian leaders decided to overlook these grievous sins and still honor him with the award.

I still find it amazing that conservatives lionize Peterson and lambast Soros even though the two men share the same ideological perspective, possess the same messianic self-perception, and have the same long-term objectives for society.

Pat Buchanan observes that the failure of the neocons has been comprehensive:

The failures that killed the Bush party, and that represented departures from Reaganite traditionalism and conservatism, are:

First, the hubristic drive, despite the warnings of statesmen like George Kennan, to exploit our Cold War victory and pursue a policy of permanent containment of a Russia that had lost a third of its territory and half its people.

We moved NATO into Eastern Europe and the Baltic, onto her doorstep. We abrogated the ABM treaty Nixon had negotiated and moved defensive missiles into Poland. John McCain pushed to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, and even to send U.S. forces to face off against Russian troops.

Thus we got a second Cold War that need never have begun and that our allies seem content to let us fight alone.

Europe today is not afraid of Vladimir Putin reaching the Rhine. Europe is afraid of Africa and the Middle East reaching the Danube.

Let the Americans, who relish playing empire, pay for NATO.

Second, in a reflexive response to 9/11, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, dumped over the regime in Libya, armed rebels to overthrow Bashar Assad in Syria, and backed Saudi intervention in a Yemeni civil war, creating a humanitarian crisis in that poorest of Arab countries that is exceeded in horrors only by the Syrian civil war.

Since Y2K, hundreds of thousands in the Middle East have perished, the ancient Christian community has all but ceased to exist, and the refugees now number in the millions. What are the gains for democracy from these wars, all backed enthusiastically by the Republican establishment?

Why are the people responsible for these wars still being listened to, rather than confessing their sins at second-thoughts conferences?

The GOP elite also played a crucial role in throwing open U.S. markets to China and ceding transnational corporations full freedom to move factories and jobs there and ship their Chinese-made goods back here, free of charge.

Result: In three decades, the U.S. has run up $12 trillion in merchandise trade deficits — $4 trillion with China — and Beijing’s revenue from the USA has more than covered China’s defense budget for most of those years.

The Trotskyites lost the Soviet Union, but gained the Republican Party. Now they’ve lost that, and all they’ve got is Max Boot, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and the pathetic ideogicial non-movement that should rightfully have been christened the Idiotic Dork Web.

Matthew Cochran explains that civility can be a category error for conservatives:

Because civility is not a moral absolute and its form is always adjusting along with culture, it’s requirements are determined primarily by social contract — the kind of behavior we all implicitly or explicitly agree to when interacting with one another. Historically, some of these contracts have been great blessings while others have been reprehensible, but all are, by nature, contracts.

The detail that conservatives tend to forget is that when one party violates a contract, the other party is no longer bound by all of its terms. If you sign a contract to buy a car, and the dealer refuses to turn it over you, you aren’t “sinking to their level” by refusing to hand over your money. If you contract an employee who never shows up for work, you aren’t “repaying evil for evil” by withholding his wages. The same is true when dealing with people who are deliberately uncivil to civil people — it fundamentally changes what the rest of society owes them.

To be sure, this doesn’t mean that we must recklessly abandon civility whenever we get angry at the latest atrocious behavior from liberals. Civility is extremely valuable and is never something that should be tossed aside lightly. You need only look at the social justice left to see the consequences of doing so. Their enemies are not limited to conservatives. They rail just as hard against common sense when they melt down over beliefs that were shared by virtually everyone who ever lived until last week. They even cannibalize the very leftists who carried them to term whenever they’re triggered. Accordingly, conservatives are quite right to try and conserve valuable social structures like courtesy — they prevent all manner of chaos and suffering.

That said, civility does not actually exist between two parties when even one of them is deliberately uncivil. The unfortunate reality is that we increasingly find ourselves in circumstances in which there is nothing left to conserve. We need to stop taking the lazy road of “be civil though the heavens fall” and begin being deliberate about when to be civil — and when not to be.

First things first. There are no style points being awarded when it comes to saving Western civilization. There is only success and failure.