The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Debate: Who Hates America More?

Posted on | February 12, 2016 | 55 Comments

“Our elites are fixated on how disappointed they are with the tawdry public precisely because that allows them to avoid examining their own colossal failures.”
Ace of Spades, 2011

Ed Driscoll quoted Ace in the context of reminding us how much liberals hate America, or at least that part of America where white heterosexual men work for a living. It was a strange thing to watch Thursday’s debate between the insurgent socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and the increasingly frantic former frontrunner Hillary Clinton, where the key issue seemed to be which one of them was more capable of destroying whatever fragments of American civilization might still be intact after Barack Obama concludes his eight-year effort to wreck the country.

Bernie’s plan has the virtue of simplicity:

  1. Loot the banks;
  2. Plunder the rich;
    and
  3. Free stuff for everybody!

That kind of agenda is perennially popular with the disgruntled moochers and radical fanatics who vote in Democrat primaries and, alas, Hillary has to play the unpopular role of the grown-up telling the kids they can’t have ice cream for breakfast. Trying to be the “mainstream” candidate in a Democrat primary is always a tricky exercise, as Hillary found out in 2008 when her decades of loyal service to her party’s anti-American policies were spurned in favor of the half-Kenyan upstart from Chicago. Despite all his bold promises, Obama hasn’t done all his supporters had hoped. There is still money in banks (“Loot them!”) and the rich still have most of it (“Plunder them!”) and there still isn’t as much free stuff as Democrat voters want the government to give them, namely everything.

The Democrat Party is the world’s most successful hate group. It attracts poor people who hate rich people, black people who hate white people, gay people who hate straight people, feminists who hate men, environmentalists who hate the internal combustion engine, and a lot of bratty college kids who hate their parents. However, the real secret of the party’s success is that it attracts the support of journalists who hate Republicans, and who therefore work tirelessly to convince the rest of us that we should vote for Democrats.

This is why I’ve decided to remain neutral — or at least, not to get too excited — about this year’s GOP primary campaign. During the 2012 campaign, I was flying and driving all over the place to cover the epic struggle for the nomination, only to end up with Mr. Inevitable, Mitt Romney, as the candidate. What’s the point, really? No matter who the Republicans nominate for president, the Organized Forces of Liberal Journalism will paint him as a greedy, cold-hearted, woman-hating racist. If the GOP nominated a Buddhist monk or a Latina lesbian, still the New York Times and NBC News would find a way to convince themselves that the Republican candidate represented everything liberals hate about America — the military, the police, Christianity, capitalism, the internal combustion engine and heterosexual white men who work for a living.

American journalism is a temple devoted to promoting a religious faith in which the only true virtue is voting for Democrats. Every four years, the media assume the role of latter-day prophets, whose mission is to warn us of the apocalyptic disaster that will befall the nation if a Republican is elected president. Switch your TV over to MSNBC for a few hours and you can see what this partisan zeal looks like when it is not filtered through the dishonest pretense of “objectivity.” It is important to realize that everyone employed in any position of influence by the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Associated Press is as fervently “progressive” as Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews. The editors of newspapers and the producers of network news distort or suppress any story that does not exactly conform to the pro-Democrat narrative.

When Islamic terrorists commit mass murder in San Bernardino, the media portray this not as a story about the dangers of radical Islam, but rather a story about the urgent need to infringe the right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms. No gun should ever find its way into the hands of a heterosexual white man who works for a living, according to liberal journalists who consider Republicans to be a greater danger than ISIS or machete-wielding Somali Muslim immigrants.

So the debate in Wisconsin between Sanders and Clinton was an exercise with the goal of determining which candidate could go farthest in blaming every problem in the world on banks (“Loot them!”), the rich (“Plunder them!”), white heterosexual men with jobs, and other Evil Forces of Social Injustice that the Republican Party is presumed to represent. The two Democrats disparaged each others’ records and character, but agreed entirely as to their basic goals. Whatever foreign policy issue or domestic problem they were asked to address, Hillary and Bernie always blamed the Evil Forces of Social Injustice, and promised to do everything in their power to punish the Republican wrongdoers responsible.

To say that Hillary Clinton was shameless in her pandering to Democrat voters is to understate the transparent desperation in her efforts to appease the kind of left-wing fringe kooks who take Rachel Maddow seriously. At one point, Hillary began ranting about the Koch brothers — who have replaced the Religious Right as the sinister bogeyman in liberal imaginations — and at another point she also twice used the clunky acronym LGBT in less than a minute:

“I am not a single-issue candidate, and I do not believe we live in a single-issue country. I think that a lot of what we have to overcome to break down the barriers that are holding people back, whether it’s poison in the water of the children of Flint, or whether it’s the poor miners who are being left out and left behind in coal country, or whether it is any other American today who feels somehow put down and oppressed by racism, by sexism, by discrimination against the LGBT community, against the kind of efforts that need to be made to root out all of these barriers, that’s what I want to take on. . . . Yes, does Wall Street and big financial interests, along with drug companies, insurance companies, big oil, all of it, have too much influence? You’re right. But if we were to stop that tomorrow, we would still have the indifference, the negligence that we saw in Flint. We would still have racism holding people back. We would still have sexism preventing women from getting equal pay. We would still have LGBT people who get married on Saturday and get fired on Monday.”

Leave aside any question of policy that may be involved here, because no one could imagine that Bernie Sanders is any less adamant than Hillary in opposing discrimination. Rather, let us ask, first, how significant is such discrimination in the grand scheme of things? And second, we may ask, why did she use this acronym? If Hillary had said “the gay community” and “gay people,” would anyone watching the debate have imagined that lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals were not also included in the generic category? The use of the acronym “LGBT” would seem to be an effort by Hillary to speak the jargon of hardcore activists and the sort of bratty college students who major in Gender Studies.

“Oh, she gets it!” was the reaction Hillary hoped her use of this acronym would elicit from young activists. “She’s inclusive!

Being flattered and pandered to, being promised the sun, the moon and the stars by politicians oozing sympathy for you — Democrats have been running this three-card monte hustle for as long as anyone can remember. Once upon a time, William Jennings Bryan stirred the ignorant masses with his talk of mankind being crucified on a cross of gold, and all that Democrat noise about the Free Coinage of Silver didn’t really have anything to do with anything that made any difference at all to the lives of ordinary Americans. It was just so much half-mad demagoguery to stir up discontent among the rubes, and here were are in 2016, watching Democrats do the same thing they have always done. The only difference, really, is that we now have polls and consultants to tell Democrats which rubes to target with their shameless pandering. Exactly how much discrimination affects the daily lives of “LGBT people” is as irrelevant now as was the question of whether making silver coins legal tender would have any meaningful impact on the plight of farmers and factory workers to whom William Jennings Bryan was pandering.

Of course, back then, the voters to whom Democrats pandered were heterosexual white men who worked for a living, but the principle — dishonestly promising that the federal government will eradicate all the world’s woes — was the same, and the fools who believe Democrat rhetoric today are every bit as deluded as the struggling farmer who thought “Free Silver” was the solution to his problems in 1896.




 

Comments

55 Responses to “Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Debate: Who Hates America More?”

  1. Evi L. Bloggerlady
    February 12th, 2016 @ 2:19 pm

    Barack Obama does.

  2. Ilion
    February 12th, 2016 @ 2:48 pm

    Rachel Maddow

    I always forget, is Rachel Maddow the one with the glasses, or is the one with the glasses the female Rachael Maddow?

  3. kilo6
    February 12th, 2016 @ 2:50 pm

    I call it political messianism. Looking for a secular savior when one has no faith. As the Psalmist wrote:

    Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
    His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
    Psalm 146:2-3 (KJV)

    or if one prefers a reference outside of Scripture to show the political class is not your friend

    “It is not in human nature to be indifferent to political power; and if the price men have to pay for it is the sacrifice of friendship, they think their treason will be thrown into the shade by the magnitude of the reward. This is why true friendship is very difficult to find among those who engage in politics and the contest for office.”
    -Cicero On Friendship, (Part II Para 17)

    Ambassador Chris Stevens, U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, as well as CIA contractors Tyrone S. Woods and Glen Doherty would likely agree with Cicero but are currently unavailable for comment.

    Critical thinking skills and the wisdom of several millennia has been replaced with “vote Democrat”

  4. Joe Joe
    February 12th, 2016 @ 2:59 pm

    “Hillary has to play the unpopular role of the grown-up telling the kids they can’t have ice cream for breakfast.”

    Yes, and that’s why she’s losing. You can’t compete with Crazy Bernie’s Norma Rae ideology combined with his late-night mattress commercial tactics. (“It’s FREE! Your college is FREE!!”)

    As I said before, Hillary’s only hope is throwing free weed into the audience at the next debate.

  5. Fail Burton
    February 12th, 2016 @ 3:10 pm

    The Dem Party operates like a syndicate which runs around breaking the windows of successful businesses for failed glass companies. That con game will only get you so far. Eventually you have only the failed glass companies and no more windows to break. Stop telling me Latinos, Muslims and Africans are innately successful and stop importing them. Were they so successful they wouldn’t be streaming here, I’d be going there.

    The truth is the Dem Party needs failure to survive as a political entity. Their entire activist base does nothing but rabble-rouse as if Jim Crow and women’s suffrage never went away. They create ever more trivial gripe and hokum to keep the “dream” alive, as it were. Every night they go to sleep they wake up yesterday.

  6. Art Deco
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:02 pm

    and all that Democrat noise about the Free Coinage of Silver
    didn’t really have anything to do with anything that made any
    difference at all to the lives of ordinary Americans. It was just so
    much half-mad

    Um, yes it did. After the Civil War, the country suffered several decades of deflation, which added a premium to the effective service charge on debt. “Sound money” was the slogan for the gold standard, which has a deflationary bias. That’s injurious to the interests of debtors, which small farmers commonly are.

    There were a mess of real problems in the monetary system and in industrial relations which came to a head during the period running from 1929 to 1935. The trouble was that some of the policy adjustments were salutary and some were not. The problem that emerged after 1958 was the tendency of the Democratic Party to adopt policies which were injurious from the get-go (public housing) or which had crippling side effects (Medicare, student loans). Very often the problem was in not realizing that the source of the observable social defect lay in the intractable problems of the client population (something that was not the case during the 1930s, when the well-functioning working class was suffering).

  7. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:07 pm

    “America is a wonderful country, a shining beacon of hope for humanity! Help me destroy its racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic basis so the world will like us!”

    – today’s boilerplate DNC mantra

  8. Steve_in_SoCal
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:19 pm

    Hillary’s answer to the question regarding race relations since Obama’s election in 2008 and his 2004 DNC convention speech were all I could handle. Stating she didn’t accept the premise. Hell, 70%+ think race relations have gotten worse under Obama. Black and white alike. And she’s up there saying we need to build upon Obama’s race relations. Well of course. There’s nothing to do but build it at this point. It’s in the rubble.

    Forget the free stuff. The democratic party has always been about that. I stopped watching when it came to: “Who could out-black each other. Who could out-LGBT each other. Who could out-we need more refugees each other. Who could out-I’m taking all the rich people’s money each other. Who could out-wall street each other.

  9. Art Deco
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:22 pm

    Exactly how much discrimination affects the daily lives of “LGBT people”
    is as irrelevant now as was the question of whether making silver coins
    legal tender would have any meaningful impact on the plight of farmers
    and factory workers to whom William Jennings Bryan was pandering.

    No, neither question is ‘irrelevant’.

    1. There were observable economic interests at stake in 1900 and Bryan was speaking for some of them.

    2. What’s at stake now is a stew of things we do not discuss in brass tacks. One would be the autonomy of ordinary people to engage in business transactions without the supervision of lawyers. At the heart of this question would be the value scales and degrees of respect accorded different subsectors of society. A society which respects private property, business enterprise, and the sort of social competence expressed in markets and made manifest in an orderly domestic life is loath to second guess the decisions respectable people make in their everyday life and the sensibilities they have. What we have now is a society which invests Alvin Gouldner’s “new class” the franchise to interfere in everyone else’s life, to seize control of common institutions and insist they proceed along the lines of abstract notions of desert which do not comport with common sense. Controversies over the status of the homosexual population are an instrument of lawyers and shmucks with MEd degrees making everyone else their bitch.

    As for the homosexual population, the passion at the heart of their agitation is not for liberty (though some individual homosexuals may want that), but for the recognition of their Special qualities, which requires a subversion of existing value scales. Now, someone like Kevin AuCoin or Quentin Crisp to someone with the sentibilites of 1966 may be considered an excrescence, a sad wreck, a clown, or what have you. Now we have the demand, backed by court orders, that they be given recognition few ordinary people care to give them and be given the attention they crave, which includes a franchise to have tantrums public and private. Crisp did not seem to suffer any narcissism and did not want anyone’s high regard as long as he was left in peace; he found gay liberation baffling (“what do you want to be liberated from?”). Well, the pushy queers who’ve so damaged institutional life are not like that. An intelligent society tells pushy, narcissistic, and childish men to buzz off. Ours is not an intelligent society.

  10. AMartel
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:35 pm

    “The Bernie Sanders campaign is
    the Occupy Wall Street movement,
    but without girls getting raped in tents.”

    Suggested codicil: “as far as we know as of this date.”

  11. Adobe_Walls
    February 12th, 2016 @ 5:23 pm

    I’m just hoping the Dems follow their instincts and just say nyet to the Witch.

  12. Adobe_Walls
    February 12th, 2016 @ 5:28 pm

    ”Every night they go to sleep they wake up yesterday.”
    That’s a keeper.

  13. Neo
    February 12th, 2016 @ 5:46 pm

    For Hillary, it all goes back to the Golden Rule:
    He who has the gold, makes the rules.

  14. Neo
    February 12th, 2016 @ 5:48 pm

    I always thought it was the political version of the “Man in the white van offering candy.”

  15. Fail Burton
    February 12th, 2016 @ 5:55 pm

    If I had only gay feminists to go by, I’d think they were a third of the population. That’s a pretty good definition of narcissism.

  16. Zhytamyr
    February 12th, 2016 @ 6:08 pm

    They’re both commietastic, it doesn’t matter which one of them hates America more, what matters is if there are enough idiots that hate America enough to put them in the White House.

  17. GayPatriot » Consider and Discuss
    February 12th, 2016 @ 6:40 pm

    […] What underlies the spectacle of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders running for president on the basi…. […]

  18. kilo6
    February 12th, 2016 @ 6:46 pm

    Man in the white van?

    That’s kinda-sorta sexist isn’t it?

    How about Lena Dunham in the white van doing things she admitted in her autobiography?

  19. trangbang68
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:13 pm

    one is her half brother from another mother, Ricky Madcow

  20. trangbang68
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:15 pm

    Or Hillary telling Bubba he can’t have interns for breakfast

  21. Gospace
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:32 pm

    The only reason 70%+ think race relations have gotten worse under Obama is because 30% of the people aren’t paying attention.

  22. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:58 pm

    She’s the skinny one with glasses and short hair.

    Oh wait, that also describes Chris Hayes. And I see you have that same trouble.

    Well then, Maddow is the more butch of the two.

  23. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:00 pm

    Jonah Goldberg’s latest makes the connection between the gnostic heresies and Sandersism and Trumpism.

  24. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:02 pm

    Okay, hon…

    And then Bill’s internal dialog goes like this:

    (Note that she didn’t say I couldn’t have interns with breakfast)

  25. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:03 pm

    Yep. It’s always Selma in DNCLand.

    And they hope like hell that nobody finds out who it was with the fire hoses and dogs at Selma…

  26. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:04 pm

    No, the 30% is lined up for their free stuff.

  27. Steve Skubinna
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:05 pm

    They were promised participation trophies and by damn they will have them!

    Because they’re special!

  28. kilo6
    February 12th, 2016 @ 9:26 pm

    Thanks, that was a good one.

    The political parties tell me every day in fundraising e-mails that hidden forces and secret radical agendas can be held at bay if I donate $5. Bernie Sanders is a veritable spokesman for anti-billionaire paranoia. He’s the redeemer who will fight the stygian forces of the Kochtopus at Megiddo.

  29. Jones
    February 12th, 2016 @ 9:53 pm

    Yes, hate of your country means you’re in favor of subsidized healthcare, and public university tuition! Those damn poors are never gonna have to work again, and they’ll be living off the productive forever! What’s next after healthcare? Undoubtedly gulags, and a secret police force! Here that Canada? Even though the American right supports the police state in the form of NSA mass surveillance, an unconstitutional drug war, militarized police force, and no due process for anyone even suspected of having terror ties.

  30. Wombat_socho
    February 12th, 2016 @ 10:29 pm

    You’re an illiterate idiot. Go away.

  31. Matt_SE
    February 12th, 2016 @ 10:36 pm

    I haven’t noticed Obama rolling back the police state or NSA powers. Maybe he likes it that way.

    PS: come to think of it, he actually expanded most of GWB’s policies. It’s like the Democrats have 150% of Dem GWB on their side!

  32. Matt_SE
    February 12th, 2016 @ 10:43 pm

    Their entire party is about virtue signalling. Never once will there be a review of policy effectiveness, because it would expose the problem.

    Democrats never question their premises because they can’t afford to.

  33. Matt_SE
    February 12th, 2016 @ 10:49 pm

    There’s a sizable cohort of corrupt insiders. They know Bernie will inconvenience them, so they support Hillary.
    The only thing worse for Democrats than Bernie losing would be Bernie winning.

  34. Matt_SE
    February 12th, 2016 @ 10:58 pm

    I’m almost tempted to let Bernie be elected just so his supporters will receive a royal a**-f***ing when he collapses the economy. The problem is, they are also incapable of learning lessons.

  35. Fail Burton
    February 13th, 2016 @ 1:45 am

    The road to hell and all that.

  36. Daniel Freeman
    February 13th, 2016 @ 3:33 am

    the American right supports the police state in the form of NSA mass surveillance, an unconstitutional drug war, militarized police force, and no due process for anyone even suspected of having terror ties.

    Either Barack Obama is a rightist, or you’re an idiot. There are at least three political axes:

    1. Authoritarian vs. libertarian: both party establishments are the former.

    2. Traditional vs. iconoclastic: both party establishments are the latter, with the Republicans trailing a few decades behind.

    3. Gobalist vs. nationalist: both party establishments are the former.

    And there’s your Beltway Kabuki Theater.

  37. Daniel Freeman
    February 13th, 2016 @ 3:38 am

    And also, they would not be the only ones f***ed.

  38. jimb82
    February 13th, 2016 @ 9:46 am

    Bernie did say that women fantasize about being raped by 3 men simultaneously.

  39. jimb82
    February 13th, 2016 @ 9:48 am

    Bull Connor was on the Democratic National Committee.

  40. jimb82
    February 13th, 2016 @ 9:51 am

    Did you ever wonder, who were the actual targets of Jim Crow laws? Think about it, if white people were inherently racist, then they would behave they way they behave and no laws would be necessary for them to discriminate against blacks. The purpose of Jim Crow laws was for a white Democrat power structure to force OTHER WHITE PEOPLE who would not have discriminated on their own to join in discrimination as a matter of law.

  41. Matt_SE
    February 13th, 2016 @ 9:57 am

    Yeah, but we were going to get f***ed anyway and besides, we can take it because we’re tougher than the creampies on the other side.

  42. Quartermaster
    February 13th, 2016 @ 11:08 am

    I saw one meme poster that said, “The people who think Bernie will fix the country are the same idiots that thought Obama would.”

  43. Quartermaster
    February 13th, 2016 @ 11:09 am

    Nah. It was raciss, but you went and made it it sexiss.

  44. Steve Skubinna
    February 13th, 2016 @ 11:47 am

    I’m sure lunch counter owners didn’t mind what skin color paid them, so long as the money was green.

  45. Quartermaster
    February 13th, 2016 @ 4:25 pm

    Found it again

  46. NeoWayland
    February 13th, 2016 @ 4:53 pm

    That’s part of what made the sit-ins possible.

  47. Gringao
    February 13th, 2016 @ 5:02 pm

    Am I imagining things, or are we living in “Atlas Shrugged” right now?

  48. FMJRA 2.0: RIP Justice Scalia : The Other McCain
    February 13th, 2016 @ 9:29 pm

    […] Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton Debate: Who Hates America More? GayPatriot A View from the Beach […]

  49. jimb82
    February 14th, 2016 @ 10:15 am

    Although there might have been exceptions, you got it. The Jim Crow laws were necessary so that business owners didn’t undermine the official Democrat mantra of segregation.

  50. Sunday Links and Thoughts – If You're Left
    February 14th, 2016 @ 2:08 pm

    […] foolish the media is for ignoring Jihad in America The Other McCain asks who hates America more Hillary, or The Bern? The Lonely Conservative points to the feds “helping parents raise their […]