Back in the late 1990’s, James Byrd was murdered by three white guys in Texas. It was a terrible crime and the three men involved were quickly arrested and put on trial. It was a quick trial with two getting the death penalty and one getting life in prison. One has been put down while the other lingers in the system. Whatever your views on capital punishment, the fact that it takes decades to administer it says a lot about our society.
Now, our betters should have been congratulating themselves for what they had done. A generation earlier and this crime may never have been prosecuted. Instead, the three white guys were treated like any black criminal in the same circumstances. The real test of equality before the law is not at the admissions department at Harvard. It’s in the courtroom.
That’s not what happened. The Left used this case to tar normal Americans as bigots and later tried to blame Republicans presidential candidate George Bush for the crime. They ran very ugly ads trying to convince people that Bush was responsible for what happened because he was a raging bigot and racist. Naturally, the Republicans howled in protest, calling it a Nixonian smear and dirty trick.
A couple of days ago Jonah Goldberg doubled down on the absurd claim that Donald Trump is a member of the KKK. He’s been doing this carefully choreographed routine where he pretends to merely be curious about the story but is really trying to spread the smear that Trump is a secret Klansman. As I pointed out in the comments, it’s the sort of odious smear David Brock used to pull on Bush ten years ago.
Somewhere else, responding to another commenter, I pointed out that Goldberg lives in a whites-only neighborhood in a wealthy suburb of DC. It’s the sort of neighborhood Steve Sailer says, “home prices discriminate so the residents don’t have to.” Goldberg, I’ll note, makes armpit noises on TV and his wife was a Bush appointee. If you want to see an example of managerial class sponger, it’s Jonah Goldberg.
Writing that comment, it occurred to me that I used make this point with regards to liberal commentators back in the Bush years. Chris Mathews used to rant and rave about racism, despite living in one of the whitest towns in America. In other words, the one thing to change in the last ten years is the Buckley Conservatives now sound just like the Progressive from a decade ago. Put another way, I did not leave conservatism, conservatism left me.
What was plainly obvious in 2000 when Bush ran for President was that the Left was not upset about his politics. They were horrified that he was a class traitor or more accurately, an apostate. He was from a clan that is the epitome of Yankeedom, yet he declared himself a Texan, abandoned Public Protestantism for Evangelical Christianity and was throwing in with the bad whites.
No man is hated more than the apostate, even more so when the apostate was a former member in high standing. In every mass movement, the apostate is the villain, who must always be found and destroyed. The Scientologists don’t try so hard to ruin the lives of former members because they have free time. Stalin did not have Trotsky murdered because he thought he welshed on bet or left the seat up too many times.
Apostates are hated not because they reject the cause or the group. They are hated because their very existence calls into question the rightness of the cause. After all, if the traitor is able to prosper outside the cause, maybe he is right and the people in charge have been lying. That’s why he must be destroyed and never allowed to prosper. Otherwise, the logic of the cause no longer makes any sense.
The interesting thing we are seeing with this smear campaign against Trump is that it is a copy of the one launched against Bush. Trump is supposed to be allied with Yankeedom. If he had backed Rubio or Bush, the people at National Review would be holding parties in his honor. They would laud him as a great “conservative” behind the campaign of Jeb Bush! Instead, they are driving around in the broken down progressive clown car from the previous decade.
That tells us something about our managerial elite. The Left side freaked out over Bush the apostate. Now the Right side is doing the same over Trump. Their loyalties are to their class. The Right side is now finding solace in the arms of the Left side as they huddle together in the castle. All the jibber-jabber about party loyalty, conservative principles and fair play from the Right side have been cast aside in order to defend their class interests.
The big difference this time is that Trump is not Bush and Buckley Conservatives are not Progressives. Trump is a very smart guy who is fully aware of what he is doing, while Bush was an amiable nitwit, who just wanted to make the family proud. Similarly, Buckley Conservatives lack the skill of their brothers on the Left. It’s not called the Stupid Party by accident.
At this point, it looks like the Right side may have permanently damaged itself with the people it counts on for support. The Left side was at least able to provide it’s partisans with a chance for a catharsis. They voted for Black Jesus, had a big party and jeered at their friends and neighbors, who had been Bush supporters. Smashing things up is great fun, which is why looters are always willing to mug for the cameras.
It’s tempting to think this is a one-off phenomenon, but the managerial class evolved as a two-headed monster. It is a game of bad cop/worse cop on the voters. If one side is permanently damaged, the other side can no longer function in its natural role. The near total lack of political and intellectual talent on the Left side may simply be what awaits the Right side. How it all holds together is the big question, which is why it is so important to snuff out the apostate.
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results — 03/11/15 | therightplanet.com
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations — Trumpmania Edition | therightplanet.com
Pingback: Watcher’s Council winners for March 11, 2016
Pingback: Watchers of Weasels Council Results: The Peasants Are Revolting |
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results | http://www.independentsentinel.com
Pingback: The Council has Spoken – If You're Left
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results | Grumpy Opinions
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Results for 03-11-16 | Stately McDaniel Manor
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results | Viewpoints of a Sagitarrian
Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 03/11/16
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 03/11/16 | NoisyRoom.net
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results | Nice Deb
Pingback: The Razor » Blog Archive » The Council Has Spoken: March 11, 2016
Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results | Virginia Right!
Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results
Pingback: The Razor » Blog Archive » Council Submissions: March 9, 2016
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Ronnie and Nancy Edition | NoisyRoom.net
Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Ronnie And Nancy Edition
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Trumpmania Edition | Virginia Right!
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations For 03-09-16 | Stately McDaniel Manor
Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Trumpmania Edition | Nice Deb
Pingback: Watcher of Weasels » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Trumpmania Edition
Don Surber wrote on Trump. If I heard about it here, forgive me. Read a lot; don’t always retain sources. Surber is obviously old enough that he recalls that Reagan was not perfect. And realistic enough to know that there is no Perfect Candidate – and that Trump, with his flaws, is better than any of the alternatives. His comments on free trade and other issues make this worth a read for those both pro- and anti-Trump.
http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2016/03/i-too-wish-it-were-not-trump.html
I’ve read him from time to time and always think I should put him on my daily list of sites.
That Trump has shown up the neocon traitor cucks as little better than social justice warriors when threatened is more than enough for me. They are a bunch of selfish, greedy cowards who have no business leading the Republican Party let alone the United States. These snakes should be glad that white America is still prepared to send this group packing via the ballot box rather than by the lamp post. But who knows, that day may still yet be coming…. we could recruit James Byrd’s still living killers to show us how it’s done.
Speaking as a Yankee – I never saw Trump as a member of this tribe. Too flashy, too loud and pushy, too much bluster.
To my New England raised, WASP ears, he was always that brand of low-class New Yorker who was never to be trusted. He’s a jumped up used car salesman.
I see him as someone from a good family, well-raised and disciplined, who has a very powerful and original mind. He is accused of not giving details. That is like accusing a Patton of not giving the details on his next battle.
As for his “style”, his daughter Ivanka put it best: “He is blunt.”
Blunt scares the daylights out of the crustless white bread cucumber sandwich set.
The Neocons are fighting for their life, a Trump Presidency could re-align the entire American conservative movement.
NR, Weekly Standard, maybe even FOX news could be made irrelevant to the new conservative coalition.
And the think tanks, and the lobbying firms, etc, etc. It truly is an existenial moment for those folks. May they rot in hell.
Vague thought from over the ocean: if I were American, would I vote for Trump?
If I were in the States I may well be better informed than I am right now, and I may see things that the left-leaning British media — led as always by the socialist-loving BBC — choose not to tell us. But on balance, as it stands right now, would I vote for someone who is an alternative to a continuation of what has gone before, however dodgy their outlook?
Essentially, would I go for someone who appears thus far to have thrown a brick through the comfortable bubble glass of US politics, just for the hell of it?
It isn’t a question I actually have to overtly consider, unless our EU masters suddenly decide to sell us off to Washington as the 51st state and be done with us, so I can indulge myself on the fantasy when the mood takes me. Still, I will watch the November fun-fest with interest.
@ UKer – Fully agree with you. I would not want the responsibility of having to chose between these two US candidates. It’s between slam the door on your hand, or slam the door on your foot. Either way, it will be painful. God help us all if Europe ends up under full political control of the Americans. I prefer to maintain what little control I may have over my own destiny.
I think you don’t have to worry about America controlling Europe. America turning it’s back on Europe while Putin does bad things to “her” is another matter altogether. You boys are going to reap what you have sewn…again.
Please explain to me why Americans think Russia is bad and China is good? They’re both capitalistic communist dictatorships. Yet you push for trade with the Chinese to the point of deindustrializing your own country and indebting yourselves with Chinese loans. On the other hand, and for no apparent reason, you continue to demonize the Russia. You fought directly against Chinese soldiers in Korea. Other than the skirmishes in Archangelsk and Vladivostok during WW1, when exactly has your military ever exchanged fire with Russian soldiers?
Russia is the least of European problems. Putin is old-school mother Russia which is why everything he is doing is related directly to re-establishing the Russian territories and Russian order. Putin isn’t going to cross into Poland or Czech (or Europe) any sooner than launch missiles over the north pole into America. He knows and respects the old European borders which is exactly why he’s doing what he’s doing in the direction he’s heading. The fact is Turkey has a lot more to fear from Russia than Germany or France.
Both Obama and Kerry had a chance to normalize relations with Russia, but as usual, your “fear the dreaded commie” attitude got in the way. That and the fact Putin has zero respect for anyone of color, especially one who is about as masculine as a Nancy Drew story.
Russia got into Afghanistan and that was bad. Now you’re there and it’s all good. The US failed to act in Syria and that was good, now the Russians are doing exactly what you failed to do and it’s bad. Really? What am I missing here?
I bet you have a Russian grandfather (and don’t know it) 😛
And who said the PRC is “good”? Are you purposefully being obtuse? This election is being driven because the political elite sold out to China (among others). We are going to take the country back and leave you and your brethren to your own devices.
Let me be perfectly clear: I don’t care two shits what happens to Europe, or Russia, or china, or Africa, etc, etc. I only care about my country. Full stop. Canada I give one shit for, just because the girls are hot.
@ Turk – I hope you are right – and that you can take it back. You have much to lose. We Europeans will carry on as we have for 2,000 years or so, one way or another. It’s unfortunate you didn’t visit Europe in the 80’s, I suspect you’d feel the same way towards Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands as you do Canada. 🙂
@ theZman – Should make for an interesting read.
Karl, that’s an excellent question. I think it will make a good post. Maybe next week.
Thank goodness someone else has noticed the reflexive anti- Russian hysteria.
Our President FDR went to war to protect Stalin’s eastern and western flanks, for gosh sakes, allowing the genocide of a great people, the Germans.
“Please explain to me why Americans think Russia is bad and China is good?”
Karl, define “Americans”. If you are talking about the American elite class, then this is an easy question to answer. America is run by an internationalist Technocratic elite that is strongly influenced and informed by Cultural Marxism. China is run by a very similar class of people, Technocrats who also came to embrace Cultural Marxism, although via a subtractive process– they started with full-blown Communism and then rejected the economic parts. Obviously, then, the American Elites love China, as they are exactly on the same side, and working towards the same goals, although having to use different methods to work on those goals– methods shaped by the reality of their differing origin points.
Russia, on the other hand, is strongly nationalistic. They rejected Communism and Technocracy and reverted to a kind of neo-Tsarist government– a strong national leader, who unashamedly promotes Russian cultural, ethnic, and national unity, and enforces it with an iron hand. Remember that Russia is a federation of many cultures and ethnic groups– groups that have been made forcibly subordinate to the dominant group. Ask the Chechens about that. The iron hand is indispensable.
For all this, Putin is absolutely despised by the International Technocratic Elite. While the International Elite relies on multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity to degrade the integrity of national states, Putin builds national integrity by establishing a dominant culture and ethnicity and making all other cultures subordinate to it. Putin stands squarely in the way of exactly what they are trying to accomplish; thus, he must be reviled.
Zman, are you currently a regular poster on the field-negro blog or is it someone pretending to be you?
Never heard of it until now, so not me. I post here, Disquss and Twitter. Once in a while I post on Sailer’s site.
OK thanks, as I suspected, someone is just copying and pasting your stuff and passing it of as his. I’ll have a word.
We are seeing a new party form. Not sure if it will be disgruntled Republicans or Trump supporters, but I remember how soon after 1980 we saw a new animal, the “Reagan Republican” running for office from City Hall all the way up to Congress. If he makes the White House, look for “Trump Republican” on campaign posters.
Killing Trump won’t put this genie back in the bottle. The reveal is now complete and no one is going to be giving any party or any candidate the benefit of the doubt, or voting to help the party. This is a process that is only just starting and already is causing tectonic plate level movement.
“This is a process that is only just starting and already is causing tectonic plate level movement.”
Are you old enough to remember Ross Perot? Perot launched a surprisingly successful independent candidacy in 1992 promoting many of the same ideas that Donald Trump is promoting now– ending illegal immigration and opposing the offshoring of American industry and jobs. Just when Perot was building huge momentum in his Presidential run in the summer of 1992, he dropped out of the race quite suddenly, citing threats to his family. A few months later, he got back into the race, but at that point it was too late to make up for lost time. Perot lost the election, and everybody forgot about him, and more importantly– completely forgot his message. Of course, everything he predicted would happen, actually happened. He was right about everything. Nobody remembers.
After the election, Perot quickly disappeared from public life, literally moving himself and his family to an island, and that was the end of that.
Targeting the leader of a movement is very, very effective. Don’t have any illusions.
I decided this afternoon to make Trump the only one I vote for in the fall on the entire ballot, even if I have to write his name in.
Trump is running through Hell with an open can of gasoline. The Dirt People are cheering him on. And Hell is terrified.
Pingback: Obama’s ‘Reign of Terror’ Has Divided The American PeopleHigh Quality News Blog | High Quality News Blog
Many Germans view Donald Trump as being on the same level as Italy’s prime minister Berlusconi and no German thinks being rich qualifies one for a higher position in politics. Generally speaking, Germans see the social/economic disconnect as a serious issue with regards to being able to effectively and fairly lead our country which is predominantly middle class. Even if our political elites have risen up to their positions, that fact remains that our last five chancellors have all come from the working/middle class.
Willy Brandt (SPD): Raised by a single mother who was a cashier at a department store
Helmut Schmidt (SPD): Parents were teachers.
Helmut Kohl (CDU): Father was a civil servant.
Gerhard Schroder (SPD): Raised by a single mother who worked as an agricultural laborer.
Angela Merkel (CDU): Daughter of a protestant pastor in the old DDR
Trump’s career includes running beauty pageants, golf courses, sports teams, TV shows, plus his personal life includes wealthy parents, three wives and the tabloid accounts of his affairs. This is not the resume or character of a serious political candidate, especially one who may one day “have his finger on the button”. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that we trust or respect Ms. Clinton either.
It is difficult to determine which is worse for America’s future; that Ms. Clinton and Mr. Trump are the best that America can come up for the highest position of leadership in your country, or that the American people would actually support and/or vote for them in the first place.
Karl, Americans have always liked leaders who are a little weird. Reagan had a very messy personal life. His kids were nuts. He made movies with a monkey for goodness sake. But, he did some important things well so the rest made for a good harmless show. It’s hard to explain, but America operates a lot like an island nation. We prize risk taking and daring. If that means strange personal habits, so be it. We tend to be suspicious of people who don’t make many mistakes. Angela Merkel would have no political career in America. She’s far too dull for us.
We also have a very high margin for error. No one is invading us other than Mexican gardeners.
The trouble with two party systems, in any country, is often that the choice is awful. Choosing between Clinton or Trump begets the question, is that the best you can do from such a huge nation?
On a smaller scale recently we had the choice as Cameron or Miliband, and neither filled any of us with joy (I know, we in the UK like to think we have a three party system but no sane person cares about the LimpDumbs.)
The fantasy of democracy is the best person available emerges from the morass. Not sure it works as advertised.
America is a big country with some vast cultural differences. The two party system forces compromise. The trade-off is a long periods where the choices are less than inspiring.
As UKer pointed out, we Europeans follow the Parliamentary system of electing one of several parties, rather than an individual. I think this works well in a relatively homogenous population where the culture, language and norms of the people are generally consistent regardless of social or economic background. There will always be the haves and have-nots and the extreme fringe. But while the Bavarians and the rest of Germany do at times seem worlds part, we still share much of what being German is all about at a core level.
I doubt very seriously if our Parliamentary system will work as we become more diverse. At least as we have see in the US, where diversity between the races (who seem to have very little in common with each other) seems to be problematic. I think that’s a reality for all European countries in the future if immigration (and not just the current situation) continues.
There’s only one race that is problematic.
“Trump’s career includes running beauty pageants, golf courses, sports teams, TV shows, plus his personal life includes wealthy parents, three wives and the tabloid accounts of his affairs. This is not the resume or character of a serious political candidate….”
Au contraire, my dear Karl, for in America these things work to the Donald’s advantage. Although it doesn’t withstand any serious scrutiny, Americans feel a casual, intimate connection with their celebrities, and hence the first name basis – the Donald, Hillary, LeBron, etc. – by which we refer to them. Added to this, the Donald has been a celebrity for a very, very long time, and Americans are well acquainted with his various activities, which supplies a certain familiarity. That he has been hugely successful at many of these endeavors goes to his credit, and the fact that he has had spectacular and very public failures doesn’t hurt him either, because who hasn’t had failures? But the most important determinant in the qualities you mention is the widespread anger and suspicion of those who have the resume of a “serious political candidate.” These “serious candidates” are understood to have failed America and its people in any number of ways, and whose interests lie other than with middle-class Americans. Thus, the fact that Trump is an outsider to the sphere of “serious candidates” and causes consternation to the political class makes his appeal all the greater.
Serious candidates are guys in not-too-shiny suits with white shirts and conservative ties who don’t rock the Establishment Boat. They use euphemisms like “reach across the aisle” to reassure everyone that they will not ever be troublesome. Go along to get along, put in their time, gather their perqs, and retire with a nifty pension so that they can make real money as lobbyists or speechifiers.
Karl, how many of those five left office still in the middle klass 🙂 At least one was a Russian agent, and another sold your country out to the Muslims. All five participated in the total disarmament of your country, making it superbly vulnerable to all sorts of mischief.
I was expecting such a reply – thank you for doing your homework! 🙂 Yes, that is true. Of the five I mentioned, Merkel (at least so far) has remained true to the party and her country and retained the dignity and honor of her position. I grant you the latest immigration issue is a major detractor, but her career has up until now been sober and “dull” which is fine with us. My point being the difference in how Germans view their politicians up bringing and background in comparison to the American who have somehow made it into politics following an acting career. We accept the potential of corruption and scandal as a risk of political office and neither condone or excuse it. But at least they started from humble beginnings like most of us, not parading around with a beauty queen in the back of their father’s limo. Now if they end up with a beauty queen once in office…well, that’s a risk they take at the peril of our press.
So Merkel was doing fine until that part where she indicated that you should bend over and accept your inevitable fate in a civilized way. Sort of like the Jews back in the day. That is well beyond what I would call a major defect.
I would not compare the recent refugee problem (it’s not an immigration problem, let’s be clear on that point) with the Jews. Despite what some may have done on the past, I think Germans would welcome 1,000,000 Jews over the same number of Muslims given the positive aspect of Jewish contributions to society in general, despite their liberal attitude. No Jews that I am aware of have attacked people because they didn’t like what others had to say about their religion. They are typically not the type of people who show up and expect free hand outs.
It must be a language problem I’m experiencing here.
You are a liar. They are refugees in the first country where they go to escape war or persecution.
Every country they enter after that, they are economic immigrants.
Just to help clarify any language issues:
An immigrant is someone who chooses to resettle to another country. A refugee is someone who has been forced to flee his or her home country. The difference is one has freely chosen to leave their home land with the intention of becoming a citizen of another country while the other is forced leaver in order to seek temporary refuge until the situation (war, famine, flood) reverts back at which point they intend to return.
“Asylum seeker” means a person who has applied for asylum under the 1951 Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees on the grounds that if he is returned to his country of origin he has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political belief or membership of a particular social group. He remains an asylum seeker for so long as his application or an appeal against refusal of his application is pending.
“Refugee” in this context means an asylum seeker whose application has been successful. In its broader context it means a person fleeing e.g. civil war or natural disaster but not necessarily fearing persecution as defined by the 1951 Refugee Convention.
“Economic migrant” means a person who has left his own country and seeks by lawful or unlawful means to find employment in another country. This would cover Mexicans coming to America.
Three different categories, and none have a legal right to remain in a host country indefinitely since they are not citizens, until such time the courts give them legal status to do so.
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html
Oh for fukk’s sake give it a rest with the Jews!
Regarding Merkel, that’s like saying “Until he hit the iceberg, Captain Smith was doing a fine job”. IMO, it is the ones who come up from the middle that are hungriest and neediest, and therefore more prone to being corrupt once in office. But at the end of the day, they are all hawgs with their snouts in the public trough. Best to execute a few every year, just to keep the rest on their toes 🙂
Interesting that Ms. Clinton commented she wants to be like Ms.Merkel. Not the other way around. I haven’t heard of anyone thinking Ms. Clinton is a role model for political leadership.
I hadn’t seen that Goldberg article you linked to, but it’s good for a chuckle – Jonah righteously fretting that not only is Trump probably a klansman, but that the reason he won’t denounce the klan is that the Donald knows his supporters at heart are klansman too. Yes, those dirt people – we know all about their secret nastiness. This kind of pious virtue signaling used to be the preserve of the Salon readership.
The smug cuckservative posturing must be costing NR a ton of lost readership – just take a look at the comments – but astonishingly Goldberg and his ilk don’t care. I know you’ve written about the changes in magazines and other media that have created a growing disconnect between the commentariat and their audience, and here would seem to be a prime example of what you described. But at some point, NR will alienate so many of its former readers that the magazine will have no audience at all and simply cease to exist – and Goldberg is either blithely unaware of that, or fine with it. I suspect the latter, meaning that by some measure of competing desires Jonah would rather be among the pious than among the employed – although I doubt he thinks of it in such stark terms.
“NR will alienate so many of its former readers that the magazine will have no audience at all and simply cease to exist”
No.
There are Anti-American Oligarchs willing the finance the propaganda of filth like Goldberg.
We live in an increasingly autistic age. “Holding it all together” used to be a pretty good working definition of politics. Take Bill Clinton. He could talk like Noam Chomsky while governing like Nixon because he understood how the game is played — and, crucially, so could the members of his coalition. These days, pretty much everyone is baffled by the strange notion that a person can look one way but actually be another way. They’re so hyper-focused on the virtue signals that when they’re forced to see the signals cancel each other, it fries their circuits.
Trump has the woters and soon will have the power (and a massive mandate). And he owes the GOP bupkis. I have a hunch he will form a 3rd party once in office and work to primary out all the GOP congress creeps. Good chance that the saner Dems will join with him; the large middle dumping the crazies from both ends. See ya Mitch, enjoy the wilderness — hopefully with your pension stripped.
I really have no idea what Trump can and will do in office. My inclination is that the managerial class will block everything he tries, but there may be a lot of elected officials sick and tired of this class of barnacles hanging off the system. They may let Trump be the spear catcher while they push through some tough reforms. There’s some history to support this scenario.
Or, someone shoots him.
Think Robert Kennedy or George Wallace.
George Wallace has been on my mind lately.
Huey Long also, maybe?
Im pretty sure he would continue using his plane and his security. Who the fuck would rely on the Secret Service or any other Fed employees for anything if they could afford an alternative.
Think McKinley.
I’m not asking for a visit from the friendly NSA man assigned to this corner of the web, but I’d be surprised if Trump made it past the primary season without someone taking a shot at him. Which is sad on a lot of levels, but mainly because he’ll be nearly impotent in office — President Butt Naked can rule by decree, but that’s because the bureaucracy heads are all fellow travelers. The few of Trump’s executive orders that aren’t immediately declared unconstitutional by lefty judges will simply not be implemented.
At the end of the last Progressive Awakening, we saw a rash of street violence, a break down of order and more than a few shots at famous people. This is much milder denouement. Black Lives Matter is nothing compared to the Panthers. Maybe the Squeaky Fromme just tosses pies.
Capturing or killing the commander of a numerically strong, highly motivated enemy army is a basic war tactic, meant to unnerve the rank and file and lead them to act rashly or begin fighting among themselves.