Tag: cuckservative

Not even a cuckservative

This officially blows the lid off the Republican Party. Nimrata Randhawa Haley is an open Invader-American; the Spanish version of her State of the Union response is pro-amnesty.

Governor Nikki Haley is trying to get out ahead of the building expose’.  Haley just gave a DC press conference claiming she does not support “amnesty”; however, against her earlier admission of Speaker Ryan and Leader McConnell approving the script – the Spanish version must have held similar approvals.

Governor Haley gave the English version, Miami Representative and party-insider Mario Diaz-Barlat delivered it in Spanish.  Here’s a (paragraph by paragraph) comparison as translated by the Miami Herald:

♦ English (Via Haley): No one who is willing to work hard, abide by our laws, and love our traditions should ever feel unwelcome in this country.

Spanish (Via Diaz-Barlat): No one who is willing to work hard, abide by our laws, and love the United States should ever feel unwelcome in this country. It’s not who we are.

♦ English: At the same time, that does not mean we just flat out open our borders. We can’t do that. We cannot continue to allow immigrants to come here illegally. And in this age of terrorism, we must not let in refugees whose intentions cannot be determined.

Spanish: At the same time, it’s obvious that our immigration system needs to be reformed. The current system puts our national security at risk and is an obstacle for our economy.

♦ English: We must fix our broken immigration system. That means stopping illegal immigration. And it means welcoming properly vetted legal immigrants, regardless of their race or religion. Just like we have for centuries.

Spanish:  It’s essential that we find a legislative solution to protect our nation, defend our borders, offer a permanent and human solution to those who live in the shadows, respect the rule of law, modernize the visa system and push the economy forward.

♦ English: I have no doubt that if we act with proper focus, we can protect our borders, our sovereignty and our citizens, all while remaining true to America’s noblest legacies.

Spanish: I have no doubt that if we work together, we can achieve this and continue to be faithful to the noblest legacies of the United States.

If you still think any good Republican is pro-America, you’re being played. BOTH factions of the bi-factional ruling party are anti-America. Break out your battle flag and wave it high in the certain knowledge that Nimrata and the Republicans are on the other side.

Of course, at this point, it should no longer surprise anyone that an Invader-American would side with the invaders who raised her and not the Americans among whom she was raised. The dirt is not magic. Someone should write a book about it. Oh, wait, someone already did.

The art of punditry

Ross Douthat doubles down. He may have been wrong about Trump before, but he’s still entirely confident that Trump can’t win the nomination:

I certainly overestimated poor Jeb Bush, whom I wrongly predicted would profit from Trump’s rise. But for the rest — no, I had a pretty low opinion of the right-wing entertainment complex to begin with, and I’m not remotely surprised that the white working class would rally to a candidate running on populist and nationalist themes.

I am very surprised, though, that Trump himself would have the political savvy, the (relative) discipline and yes, the stamina required to exploit that opening and become that populist. And for that failure of imagination, I humbly repent.

Of course I’m not completely humbled. Indeed, I’m still proud enough to continue predicting, in defiance of national polling, that there’s still no way that Trump will actually be the 2016 Republican nominee.

Trust me: I’m a pundit.

That’s the true art of punditry. Never changing your mind, even while you are admitting that you’re wrong.

No wonder I couldn’t hack it. Meanwhile, Reihan Salam explains what Douthat missed, and is missing, at NRO:

“[Trump’s] emergence as the voice of the anti-immigration Right is a reflection of the failure of the Republican establishment to grapple with lawlessness at the border and half a century of mass immigration. Consider the events of the past two years. Child migrants have surged into the United States from Central America, and working-class cities and towns across the country are struggling to absorb them. Before the federal courts stepped in, President Obama signed an executive order shielding roughly half of all unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. from the threat of deportation, a move he had previously suggested was out of bounds. And now the U.S. is experiencing yet another wave of Central American arrivals. Border Patrol officials report that many unauthorized immigrants believe that the U.S. is going to welcome them with open arms, and who can blame them given the president’s rhetoric?

Interesting to see that even the heart of cuckservatism is beginning to sense that all is not right with open borders.

Mailvox: interviews and the granting thereof

HS objects to my permitting Greg Johnson to ask me questions about my latest book, Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Betrayed America.

I am a born again Christian. I believe you profess the same. Therefore, why would you grant interviews with someone so warped as Johnson on every level. He not only is a sodomite but an atheist, paganism-pusher, and sodomite-hostile to Christianity and Christians. Perhaps you are not a regenerate man nor do you possess much in the way of principles. This would then, of course, explain the matter. Johnson even says you “honored” him in your recent book. This is a disgrace, disgusting. Perhaps you will deign to reply to me and explain. But probably not. I think you have something of a duty as a professing Christian to explain yourself. Since I as a fellow believer have asked and being as that the question is biblically legitimate I think you are so obligated.

First, HS should get off his ridiculous high horse. It is neither polite nor Christian to demand an answer and offer a justification for doing so before one has even given the person one is asking the chance to respond.

Second, HS is wrong. I am happy to answer his question.

Third, since I first became a public figure in 2001, I have made a regular practice of answering anyone who wishes to ask me questions. Including HS, even though he is an impolite boor, and Mr. Johnson, even though he does not share my views on a wide variety of subjects.

Would HIS similarly criticize Jesus Christ for not only speaking with, but actually dining with, prostitutes and tax collectors?

HS responded in what can only be described as textbook Gamma style:

First, let me say I appreciate your prompt reply. Though I was surprised at its jejune and unsophisticated nature. My email was direct, even demanding and legitimately so. That is, if my charges were accurate. You deny nothing of what I have charged save an unimportant suggestion that you may not care to respond, which I initially addressed. Thus you tacitly acknowledge said accuracy. You are indeed accountable for unbiblical public behavior. And it is reasonable for me or any Christian to expect such from you or any other public figure also professing a Christian faith –  in some venue or other.  Your appearance of being in league with a patent enemy of the Gospel is scandalous. For you to argue this is plain contumacy. Further, your cliché reflex in bringing up the Lord in his ministry shows only hack disingenuousness. It is precarious ground to draw conclusions from Jesus’ ministry for general behavior on our part in any instance but you are clearly badly mistaken in this particular offering. Our Lord NEVER socialized with people who were decidedly hostile to Himself and hateful to his disciples. And this is precisely what you do vis a vis Johnson. In mere personal terms, as a Christian, how can you not be repelled by this individual on a number of levels? Forgive the digression. I notice that you didn’t trouble yourself to even identify as a Christian in your email. But then you may feel my impolite tone preempts this. Which brings me to a conclusion. That you are concerned with impoliteness and boorishness (complete nonsense – remember? You run a rough-and-tumble blog – “boor?” – lol) rather than the obviously important substance of my email further discredits you. Why do I not expect a reply that will be other than pure defensive/self-centeredness?

I have to admit, I really, really struggle to not hate Gammas. Literally everything they do is almost breathtakingly annoying; no wonder they get bullied and abused so often when they are young. I expect this is the kind of guy who tweets his breakfasts and genuinely believes his bowel movements are “obviously important” to everyone. Now, here is the interview with the pagan to which HS importantly objected so vociferously.

GJ: Seriously, the thing that gets me about what you call Churchianity, which is a good term, the Churchians today is they seem to want to deny that it’s moral and right to have any preference for your own children over strangers, for your own country over neighbors, for your own race over other races, and yet you zero in on that in the New Testament indicating that no, those sorts of preferences were regarded as natural.

Looking at Aquinas, for instance. Aquinas in his Questions on Charity basically he says, “Yes, God’s love flows through all of creation, but creation consists of hierarchies and concentric circles of relationships, and so you have a natural preference for your own over strangers, and that structure of preferences doesn’t impede the grace of God, and it’s not something that needs to be fought against or disdained.” And yet what you’ve got with Christians today is this pure xenophilia, this perverse attitude that your neighbor is not your neighbor. No, the neighbor is someone who is far more foreign than your neighbor, and in fact your preference for these foreigners often turns your neighbor’s life in to a living hell.

VD: Right, but again, these are people who call themselves Christians, but when they’re preaching immigration from the Gospel, they’re doing exactly what the Apostle Paul warned about, which is the whole wolf in sheep’s clothing. These are not Christians.

I’m not playing no true Scotsman here. I’m saying these are not people for the most part… And I’m talking about the leaders, I’m not talking about the average church members.

GJ: Right.

VD: These are people who worship at the Temple of Babel.

GJ: Right.

VD: I would not be surprised at all if many of them actually served some other god. I actually got the concept of SJW entryism from being told about a church that had been basically invaded by people who had managed to take it over and the crazy thing is, I mention this in the book, the same thing happened 20 years later at one of the churches that my parents attended. I actually know one of the pastors involved and my uncle was on the board of the church. They ended up getting invaded by these SJWs, who promptly announced that they had a vision for combining Christianity with Islam and wanted to call it Chrislam.

Now, you cannot possibly hold Christianity responsible for that, because that is anti-Christianity of a sort that Richard Dawkins never dreamed of.

GJ: Oh God, yes! The core issue is really the idea of charity and loving your neighbor and being kind to strangers and so forth, and that notion carries a great deal of moral weight even in the minds of non-Christians. It’s been perverted into an attitude where you measure your virtue by the degree to which you betray the people close to you and side with people far away. It overturns families, it overturns communities, and it overturns societies. It’s just a kind of moralistic absurdity that is an agent of chaos and destruction.

VD: And you’ve seen The Lord of the Rings. What do we usually call a good that is perverted into something else other than its purpose?

GJ: Well, you tell me.

VD: We usually call that evil.

GJ: Evil. Yeah.

VD: I think this Churchianity is absolutely evil. I think it is absolutely of the devil. I don’t think you even need to be Christian to pick up the scent of brimstone from it. I realize for your secular viewers that may sound nuts, and that’s fine, but my point is that the good news for the secular and the pagan Right is that true Christianity, the Christianity that exploded across the world, and the Christianity that caused the lands of Europe to become Christendom, is ultimately on your side in that regard.

There’s no question about that. Even someone like Anders Breivik recognized it. Breivik is not a Christian. He does not worship Jesus Christ, but he described himself as a cultural Christian because he understood that connection.

GJ: Right.

VD: In Europe, that’s going to be the big factor of change. It’s not an accident that Putin often speaks in religious terms. It’s not an accident that the forces that are rising in Poland and Hungary . . . Even Hungary, like you said, is fairly secular, but when you listen to the nationalists speak they often speak about the Christian heroes, the Christian kings.

GJ: Oh yeah.

VD: But the most important thing to keep in mind, and I think it’s something that can inspire seculars and pagans as well, and it’s something that I always enjoy telling atheists, because they say there are fewer Christians now in America than there were before and I always say, “Hey, we only need 11.”

How terrible, that a Christian should speak of Aquinas, and Christian theology, and of the words of Jesus Christ himself, with an unbeliever!

A Republican self-throat-cutting ritual

Even the cuckservatives at National Review are aghast at the Republicans in office:

It would be bad enough had Republicans merely acquiesced to foolish policies, but in this bill they actively advanced them. The bill’s most egregious proposal will temporarily expand the H-2B visa program, quadrupling the issuance of visas to foreign workers for nonagricultural or temporary service jobs in 2016 — and it was a Republican initiative from start to finish.

What is the rationale? There is strong evidence that large-scale hiring of foreign workers depresses wages for Americans, and it’s not as if Ferris wheels and ski lifts will go unmanned if we stop importing Peruvian labor.

Clearly, Republican leaders bent to the demands of a tiny segment of employers. Meanwhile, they capitulated on a host of other proposals. Despite serious concerns about the integrity of our refugee-vetting procedures in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, the bill fully funds the government’s refugee-resettlement program, facilitating the president’s promise to settle 10,000 Syrians in the U.S. over the coming year. Despite revelations about outrageous criminal activity in America’s 340 “sanctuary cities,” the bill permits federal grants to those cities without adding any qualifying conditions.

And despite a bipartisan effort to reform the cronyism-riddled EB-5 visa program, under which foreigners can obtain a green card if they invest a certain amount in a business that creates or preserves ten jobs for U.S. citizens, Republican leadership dismissed the reform effort and extended the EB-5 program as is through September.

You know it’s bad when they can’t even bother trying to claim that this is just a tactical defeat that is cleverly setting up a long-term conservative strategic victory. You know, one of those long-term strategic victories that are apparently measured in centuries, because I’ve yet to see one come to pass.

If this still surprises you

Then you really, really, need to read Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Betrayed America:

Conservatives give Ryan a pass on budget deal they despise

‘The end product here is just cleaning the barn, it’s a disaster,’ one Freedom Caucus member complains.

The House Freedom Caucus hates the massive government-funding bill: Spending levels are billions of dollars higher than what conservatives wanted, and at least two top policy priorities — language addressing Syrian refugees and so-called sanctity of life — were cut.

But unlike past fiscal battles, when lawmakers took shots at GOP leaders and tried to tank bills, this time conservatives are largely holding their fire. Even as they vow to oppose the package, many are still praising Speaker Paul Ryan’s handling of the $1.1 trillion spending bill and $680 billion in tax breaks.

“In terms of the process, I can tell you I’ve had more meaningful conversations with the speaker and leadership in the last couple of weeks than I think I have in the last couple of years,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), who instigated the revolt against Speaker John Boehner that led to Boehner’s resignation this fall. “I would give it an A-plus in terms of trying to reach out to the rank and file.”

See, it may be a really dreadful bill, but the important thing is that those who oppose it had “meaningful conversations” and got “to feel included”. It is because they lack any sort of coherent ideology or substantive political principles that conservatives inevitably “grow” in office.

It may not prove much comfort, but the undeniable fact of the matter is that for the vast majority of human history, governments have ruled without much interference from the governed. What we are witnessing is simply a return to historical normalcy. It’s not the end of the world, it’s just the end of a dream that the Founding Fathers knew very well was likely to be transient.

Are we a moral people? No, obviously not. So, it should not be surprising that we are no longer fit for the form of government they created.

The benefits of foreign labor are a lie

In Cuckservative, John Red Eagle and I conclusively demonstrated, using official government statistics, that immigrant labor is a net negative to Americans and American workers. Others who are looking into the subject are reliably finding that the importation of foreign labor is harmful:

Last year, thousands of American companies won permission to bring a total of more than 150,000 people into the country as legal guest workers for unskilled jobs, under a federal program that grants them temporary work permits known as H-2 visas. Officially, the guest workers were invited here to fill positions no Americans want: The program is not supposed to deprive any American of a job, and before a company wins approval for a single H-2 visa, it must attest that it has already made every effort to hire domestically. Many companies abide by the law and make good-faith efforts to employ Americans.

Yet a BuzzFeed News investigation, based on Labor Department records, court filings, more than 100 interviews, inspector general reports, and analyses of state and federal data, has found that many businesses go to extraordinary lengths to skirt the law, deliberately denying jobs to American workers so they can hire foreign workers on H-2 visas instead….

At the same time, companies across the country in a variety of industries have made it all but impossible for U.S. workers to learn about job openings that they are supposed to be given first crack at. When workers do find out, they are discouraged from applying. And if, against all odds, Americans actually get hired, they often are treated worse and paid less than foreign workers doing the same job, in order to drive the Americans to quit.

What’s more, companies often do this with the complicity of government officials, records show. State and federal authorities have allowed companies to violate the spirit — and often the letter — of the law with bogus recruitment efforts that are clearly designed to keep Americans off the payroll. And when regulators are alerted to potential problems, the response is often ineffectual.

I know it’s painful for the devotees of free trade, who love nothing better than to compare 21st century analyses to 18th century dogma, to admit, but the increasingly undeniable empirical reality is that free trade, and the free movement of labor, are about as Marxist, globalist, socially destructive, and economically harmful as Communism.

I’ve read every single defense of free trade that I can find. None of them, not a single one of them, holds up. And as for those who babble childishly about a protectionist government picking winners, as if that suffices to make a rational case, what on Earth do they think is happening in the USA and in the EU now?

All that free trade accomplishes is that it allows governments to pick winners from around the world rather than from inside their own borders. And the winners are those who are willing to pay the most for the privilege, which is why the dominant figures in the U.S. media are a) an Australian and b) a Lebanese based in Mexico.

It burns! It BURNS!

Peggy Noonan, a “conservative” who voted for Obama in 2008 because reasons, can barely bring herself… to say…that terrible, terrible word.

Remember, the more they protest the term, the more they shriek “Nazi” and “fascist” and “racist” in an attempt to escape the burning flames, the more rhetorically effective you know it is. Calling a self-styled conservative a “cuckservative” is akin to brandishing a cross-shaped stake that was soaked in garlic and holy water in a vampire’s face.

Then driving that bad boy home.

That being said, if for tactical purposes you wish to have a calm and etymologically untainted dialectical term of use that they cannot reasonably protest in your arsenal, I suggest you utilize “demi-conservative”, as the cuckservative is an individual who only subscribes to three of Russell Kirk’s six conservative canons.

The three canons to which the demi-conservative observably fails to adhere are:

  • A conviction that society requires orders and classes that emphasize “natural” distinctions
  • A faith in custom, convention, and prescription
  • A recognition that innovation must be tied to existing traditions and customs, which entails a respect for the political value of prudence.

Their failure to do so may not be entirely clear by these summaries of Kirk’s canons, but I will write a more detailed post later which will make it eminently clear that this is unquestionably the case. As you can see, many of today’s “conservatives” are actually demi-conservatives who have rejected literally half of what the father of American conservatism declared to be the conservative mind.

In a word, they are cuckservatives.

Speaking of which, Greg Johnson interviewed me about the book. I’ll post the link to the transcript when it’s available.

An invitation

A few folks have said that they felt the economic chapter was the weakest part of the book, which I find absolutely fascinating as I have yet to hear anyone even begin to present the first glimmerings of a case against the key concepts in it beyond the usual “free movement of labor is not free trade”, which is observably false.

So, this is an invitation to anyone that wants to take me on; critique the chapter and I’ll post it here and respond to it. Declare your intentions in the comments, and if several of you are interested, you can even join forces and work on it together.

Bring it on. As a former free trader, I would very much like to be proved wrong.

Fun with cucks

It’s always amusing to run into the King of the Cucks, Nick Searcy, who waves his adopted black son as if he was a bloody flag rather than the get-out-of-racism free totem that is, apparently, the poor kid’s great purpose in life as far as Mr. Searcy is concerned.

“I actually do things in the real world.” – Nick Searcy, actor. 
Now that is funny!
Apparently cuckservatives, like SJWs, are prone to projection. Meanwhile, after accusing me of being “hateful, mean-spirited, and foul-mouthed”, Searcy directed this at another critic.
Yes, Nick $earcy! ‏@yesnicksearcy
Your chickenshit unwillingness to tweet your racism under your real name is also a factor, fuckhead.
The man has the emotional continence of a teenage girl who just found out her favorite boy band broke up. What I found even more amusing, though, was that our make-believe tough guy is actually tweeting at me from behind a block!
You are blocked from following @yesnicksearcy and viewing @yesnicksearcy’s Tweets. 

He even tried to justify it.

Yes, Nick $earcy! ‏@yesnicksearcy
I’m tweeting ABOUT you so that I don’t have to look at your repetitive racist bullshit, Coxday. Call Twitter, pussy. @voxday

Yes, I’m sure I’ll get right on it. Then I’ll cry harassment and start a Patreon account. But tonight’s pièce de résistance was this:

Yes, Nick $earcy! ‏@yesnicksearcy
I’ve made a fortune as an entertainer, 296 follower nonentity loser. You’ll NEVER be that clever. @Nosajio @voxday

Yeah, so, about that….
It would have been funnier, of course, if Einstein, rather than Machiavelli, had been third instead of fifth. And I was wrong. The pièce de résistance was when he went running to tell Larry on me.

Yes, Nick $earcy! ‏@yesnicksearcy
Wonder if @monsterhunter45 knows what a piece of shit @voxday is. 

The call of the cuck

A review of Cuckservative anticipates, correctly, I suspect, that it is Christians who will find it most difficult to give up their extra-Biblical Good Samaritanism:

The chapter on Christianity and cuckservatism is perhaps the most devastating in the book, and will be the most difficult pill to swallow for those at whom it is aimed. Your ordinary political cuckservative is, at some level, aware of his own pusillanimity and bad faith. Christian cuckservatives are, generally speaking, much more naive, good-hearted and truly well intentioned. For them, looking in the mirror that Vox Day and Red Eagle hold up will be extremely difficult. I would not be surprised if the loudest condemnations of this book come from Christian cuckservatives. Ordinary political conservatives reading this book may reproach themselves for their former credulousness and lack of good judgment, but they may more easily and readily be won over to the worldview that Vox and Red Eagle advocate since they can place the blame on the leaders of the movement. The Christian will have to go through a complete paradigm shift over his basic understanding of his own religion before he will be capable of making that same leap.

I’ve seen this repeatedly in Churchians. Their religion consists of equating “love” with “being nice”. It puts a premium on whatever makes them feel good emotionally; they are essentially emotional hedonists rather than physical ones.

Churchians can no more accept the concept of a God who is intolerant, or a Savior who does not save everyone (except, perhaps, for the intolerant), any more than an inveterate deviant can accept the concept of a God who considers sexual deviance to be abomination. It is not an accident that they are so easily subverted by the wolves in sheep’s clothing, who use the intolerance intrinsic in the concept of a fallen state of Man requiring salvation to deny the Cross, deny the Resurrection, deny Hell, and finally, deny Jesus Christ of Nazareth.