The Other McCain

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

‘Hate Speech,’ CNN and George Soros

Posted on | October 31, 2018 | Comments Off on ‘Hate Speech,’ CNN and George Soros

Republican campaign ad in Minnesota.

Yesterday, I switched my office TV to CNN, a psychological hazard I try to undertake at least once a week. Yes, it’s a mental-health risk to immerse myself into that bizarre alternative universe — a land where Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon are considered objective journalists — but if I don’t occasionally watch CNN, how can I know what’s going on in the deranged minds of Democrats? As much as we would like to ignore CNN, ignoring them is in some sense as dangerous as ignoring anti-Semitic kooks like Robert Bowers. The third-rated cable-news network is like a fringe extremist cult compound on the outskirts of town, and you never know when the cult leader might decide to start Armageddon.

Hey, has anyone mentioned that CNN has not one but two primetime anchors who are homosexual? Isn’t that odd? Like, you’ve got three hours of programming between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET, and two of those hours are anchored by Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon? Whatever the percentage of the homosexual population, it’s certainly less than 67%, so why this unusual over-representation of gay men on CNN primetime?

We’re not supposed to mention such things — it’s homophobia, I guess — but the fact that we’re not allowed to talk about it doesn’t mean people don’t notice. CNN is gayer than the Castro Street Pride Fair, which may explain why the network’s ratings are lower than Nickelodeon and the Hallmark Channel. Given a choice between Don Lemon and reruns of Spongebob Squarepants, which would you watch? But I digress . . .

Trump’s Embrace of Racial Bigotry Has
Shifted What Is Acceptable in America

That’s the headline on a Slate column by Jamelle Bouie, and what does it mean? Trump’s rhetorical style is abrasive, yes, but he isn’t anti-black. In fact, both polling data and anecdotal information indicate that black people like Trump’s blunt tell-it-like-it-mode of communication more than they like the controlled, scripted GOP talking-points style of most Republican politicians. Trump is a wealthy businessman and guess what? A lot of black people admire wealth and success. Why shouldn’t they?

Trump is a white guy who doesn’t feel guilty about being white, and that’s most of what the “racial bigotry” narrative is about. Liberals believe it’s wrong to be white, that white people should be embarrassed by their whiteness, and Trump refuses to play along with that game.

The other thing is, of course, immigration.


Let’s not mince words here: Democrats want to import Third World immigrants because they believe this will enable Democrats to take over the federal government, the same way they have done in California. Remember that 25 years ago, California was a GOP-controlled state, but as the Hispanic population rapidly grew, Democrats took over. California is now 39% non-Hispanic white, 39% Hispanic, 15% Asian and 7% black, and the white minority is shrinking rapidly. Every year, about 140,000 more people leave California than move there from elsewhere in the U.S., and if you think the exodus of white people from California is good for the people (of whatever ethnic background) left behind there, you’re a fool. The only people really benefiting from California’s demographic transition are the Democrats gaining more and more political power.

California is in effect a one-party state, where Democrats control every statewide office, both houses of the legislature, and the vast majority of elected county and municipal offices. This has consequences.

Have you noticed that Democrats keep reminding us Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016? Why do you think that is? California. What happens if you subtract California’s numbers from the total?

U.S. Popular Vote, 2016

Hillary Clinton ……. 65,853,514
Donald Trump ……. 62,984,828

California Vote, 2016

Hillary Clinton …….. 8,753,788
Donald Trump …….. 4,483,810

U.S. Minus California, 2016

Donald Trump …….. 58,501,018
Hillary Clinton …….. 57,099,726

In other words, the Democrat takeover of California — which is entirely due to the demographic shifts produced by immigration — accounts for all of Clinton’s popular-vote advantage in 2016.

So when you see liberals denouncing Trump for “racial bigotry” because of his outspoken opposition to the Democrats’ open-borders agenda, you understand that this is because cracking down on illegal immigration is a threat to the Democrats’ political power. Democrats want to do to America what they’re doing to California — turn it into a Third World hellhole — and Trump is trying to stop them. That is “racial bigotry.”


Maybe the average Trump voter hasn’t crunched the numbers and done the kind of analysis I’ve shown here, but they have an instinctive sense that the Democrats’ immigration agenda is harmful to their interests. Liberals will call this “racial bigotry,” too, I suppose — “How dare those working-class people in Iowa vote to defend their self-interest?”

For many years, the partisan lines in the debate over immigration policy were obscured by prominent open-borders Republicans like John McCain, and by such so-called “conservative” intellectuals as the pro-amnesty editors of the Wall Street Journal and the Weekly Standard. One reason Trump was able to win over working-class voters in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan was because he didn’t follow that script. Like every other Republican who’s won a presidential election since 1968, Trump is demonized by liberals as Hitler, and anyone who voted for Hitler is obviously a Nazi, so the hate that liberals direct against Trump is actually aimed at you, the Republican voter. And anyone who points this out is, of course, engaging in “hate speech”:

Americans are no longer a free people, if debate on major public-policy issues is effectively criminalized, which is what the Democrats and their allies are attempting to do with regard to our immigration policy. We are now being told in effect that it is “hate speech” to express opposition to the open-borders agenda of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and such of their billionaire donors as George Soros. Democrats and their media allies have recently taken to declaring that it is a “dog whistle” of racism and anti-Semitism for any Republican even to mention the name of Soros in connection with the immigration issue. If you don’t think the United States should throw open its borders to welcome the caravan of Honduran migrants now headed north through Mexico, and if you call attention to how Democrats are cheering on this horde of would-be foreign invaders, well, you must be some kind of Nazi who wants to kill Jews. Or at least that’s the general drift of liberal rhetoric in the final week of the midterm election campaign.
CNN has spent the past few days insinuating that the gunman who murdered 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue was incited to this act by President Trump. Republicans are not allowed to object to CNN’s one-sided coverage, however, because Florida madman Cesar Sayoc also hated CNN, and therefore anyone who criticizes the network is deemed a potential threat to public safety. Between the Pittsburgh shooter and the Florida bomber, basically anything said in favor of Republicans (or against Democrats) is now considered “hate speech” in the eyes of liberals. This is especially the case when it comes to immigration. Ever since the migrant caravan set off from Honduras, announcing their intention to march all the way to the United States, Democrats have been accusing the GOP of “exploiting” the issue. What are Republicans supposed to do? Pretend they don’t notice the lawless intentions of these so-called “refugees”? . . .

Read the rest of my latest column for The American Spectator.




Comments are closed.