David French on Native-Born Ingrates

 

David French has a new article on immigrants.

Immigrant citizens don’t owe a special debt of gratitude of to this nation — a debt over and above the gratitude that native-born citizens should feel for their home country. To be crystal clear, I believe Ilhan Omar and every citizen immigrant should be grateful for their place in this country. What I reject is the notion that native-born citizens like myself can demand a level of gratitude from immigrants beyond what we demand from native-born citizens.

In fact, to the extent that we should parse gratitude at all, I assert a simple proposition — the people who did exactly nothing to become citizens of the greatest nation in the history of the earth should be among the most grateful people on this planet. We should be grateful to God that we weren’t born elsewhere. We should be grateful to those who gave their “last full measure of devotion” to defend our nation and our Constitution. We should be grateful for those who endure great hardship to defend our liberty, safety, and prosperity.

Against the backdrop of this immense American gift, native-born Americans by the countless millions don’t trouble themselves to be educated enough about their own country to pass the basic citizenship test that we give to prospective citizen immigrants. All too many native-born citizens forsake the moral obligations of citizenship and instead focus only on reaping its considerable legal and constitutional benefits.

I think French is wrong.  I think my native birth is worth more, because my parents sacrificed a lot to make this country better.  My father and his brothers and fought in WWII.  My brothers-in-law fought in Vietnam.  I have been signed up for selective service for 35 years.  Together we have paid about a hundred years of taxes to build the $100 trillion of infrastructure the USA has.  Isn’t that worth something?  David French seems to say “no”.

My story is actually very common.  People fight and work and die to make the country better.  It seems to me that those sacrifices build up an inheritable equity and when we choose to share that equity with outsiders, the newcomers should be extra thankful to get a share.  I don’t care about civics tests, because I think that being American takes more know-how than can be summarized on a 3×5 card.  A lifetime of living American counts for a lot, even if somebody cannot summarize the first three articles of the Constitution.

I am not saying that immigrants can’t be great Americans.  I know many that are.  I am saying that great Americans are always thankful for the opportunity to be American and appreciate the efforts of those that built and sustained the greatest country ever.

Published in Immigration
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 129 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):
    For all four women their “home” is of course America. Implying anything else makes him sound racist, though I believe in his heart he is not a racist.

    Is this some new definition of racist?  Read your statement and pretend all four women are white.

    • #61
  2. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):
    I tend to think that Trump was going for the unpatriotic attack line but mixed in the racists stuff because he saw it was useful hyperbole or maybe as an intensifier. So I don’t think Trump was being racist on purpose just dumb in the way he communicates making sure that his blow against the squad was glancing instead of solid.

    Please give me the exact quote from the president that you say is “racist.” I keeping hearing that what he said was racist, but I’m having a hard time finding the racial content.

    What home do citizens of the United States have except the United States? Why would Trump believe that the “Squad” were not natural American citizens as they all but for Omar were? What marks them out as having a different “home” from the country of their birth.

    If he had chosen, as I wrote, to attack their patriotism or lack of gratitude toward the US I think he has a very strong line of attack going for him. For all four women their “home” is of course America. Implying anything else makes him sound racist, though I believe in his heart he is not a racist.

    If the racism in what Trump tweeted demands we must infer the racism then it’s a subjective judgement … and therefore not very racist at all …. certainly not the hyperbolic (D)/MSM proof positive of Trump’s White Nationalist membership.

    I believe if anything, Trump’s tweet is far more xenophobic than racist.   Tlaib is not “a person of color” any more than the average  Israeli, and most hispanics like AOC are not any more “a person of color” than your average Italian, Greek, or black Irish for that matter.

    The fact is being “a person of color” is a sought after designation for the purpose of being a member of an aggrieved group which grants you special elevated status in todays Lefty (D) land of strangedom.

    Moreover, the racist charge is being used by the Left as a political cudgel for the purposes of discrediting your political opponent instead of an actual desire to rid the culture of racism.

    • #62
  3. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Franco (View Comment):
    I said, “Great. It doesn’t matter one bit because Democrats like you were never impressed with the likes of Mitt Romney anyway, and now Republicans aren’t shackled to have to uphold some absurd moral high-ground that keeps them from winning.

    This is great comment that gets right at the heart of our disagreement.   Moral high ground has nothing to do with political effectiveness political skills are not married to Moral high groundr.  Moral high ground helps if you have the political skills to get credit for it.  If you don’t have the political skills to make use of the moral high ground you don’t get credit for that high ground.

    Imagine that Trump had the political skills to see how vulnerable Hillary was on Bills infidelity but had the moral high ground. 

    Hillary says, “…that is why we owe to the American people to do better by them.  Mr. Trump’s tax cuts again benefit only the rich and while leaving the poor behind.  We must do better and when I am President we will do better!”

    Trump’s reply, “Hillary’s rhetoric is powerful there.  It always is.  I am sure Paula Jones, sitting here in the front row tonight, took comfort from Hillary’s rhetoric about protecting women and uplifting women and ending sexual harassment too.  Hillary’s rhetoric was good there too, but when it came to practice?  Hillary, destroyed the lives of many women, women who were the victims of her husband because it served her interests.  Liberals like Hillary always talk about helping people but the moment one gets in her way she crushes them.  I have been married 40 years and let me tell you I know how to keep a promise.  My tax cuts will help everyone, I promise you and when the going gets hard I will not turn on you.  We all know like Paula Jones here that Hillary will.”

    That is way more powerful then what the Access Hollywood wounded Trump had to do because he did not have the high ground.

    Romney did not lose because he was a moral man.  He lost because he chose a bad political strategy.  He thought that if he presented himself as a competent Administrator disapproval over Obama performance would drag him down.  While Republican hatred for Obama would drive turn out.   

    There was some truth in that miscalculation.  Obama’s vote total dropped by 5 million? and Republicans did turn out, but it was not enough.  Romney needed to do more and push people to stay home and drive enthusiasm up with Republican leaning voters.  He failed to do that.  His personal record of good works and marriage fidelity had nothing to do with the failure of his political strategy.

    He could have made better use of his good moral character too but he did not because of his failure as a politician not as a man.

    • #63
  4. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Franco (View Comment):
    The Frenchmen of the GOP are operating under the illusion that Democrats care about solutions ( they actually don’t ) and that being “good” or “moral” or Romneyesque earns points in politics. To a small extent being a goody-goody does,

    I have no such illusions and I don’t think David French does either.  No one made Romney let Crowley get in that dig on him about Obama’s use of Terrorism not let Obama get away with down playing Russia.  A better politician would have made great use of those opportunities and turned them on his enemies.  Romney was not a great politician.

    Franco (View Comment):
    that’s offset by how much a politician like that must self-censor, allow others to drive the narrative and must speak in grand platitudes that make him/her boring. Then if there’s but one flaw that can be discovered, this pol looks like a complete hypocrite.

    No one advocates for this nor things that anyone will win by using grand platitudes to be boring.  I would say that everyone, in all walks of life, can benefit from some self censorship.  It has to be the right kind of censorship though. 

    Franco (View Comment):
    For some of these people, they are more concerned with role-modeling and associating themselves with the GOP as “the good guys” than much else. Somehow I think they’ve conflated politics with morality. Not a good formula.

    You seem to making the mistake that political skills are tied to morality.   Being morally reprehensible makes one a great politician and being morally upright makes you a terrible politician.  Neither thing is true.  If they were true Hillary Clinton would be an amazing politician and she is a terrible one and Reagan would be a footnote in history and never been President.  

    • #64
  5. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I suspect that if the President interjected Paula Jones as you suggest, the GOP pundit class would go after him for being too mean.

    • #65
  6. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    I believe if anything, Trump’s tweet is far more xenophobic than racist.

    These two concepts are closely related. 

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    The fact is being “a person of color” is a sought after designation for the purpose of being a member of an aggrieved group which grants you special elevated status in todays Lefty (D) land of strangedom.

    This would be a great thing for Trump to highlight.  With a “Bad ideas know no color” campaign.  Having a darker skin tone should not allow to advocate for policies that harm your fellow citizens.  He did not highlight that though.  I would have kind of loved it if he had.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    Moreover, the racist charge is being used by the Left as a political cudgel for the purposes of discrediting your political opponent

    Perhaps it would be a good idea of politician to make it as hard as possible for his enemies to use their favorite cudgel instead of making it easy to swing that cudgel?

    • #66
  7. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):
    For all four women their “home” is of course America. Implying anything else makes him sound racist, though I believe in his heart he is not a racist.

    Is this some new definition of racist? Read your statement and pretend all four women are white.

    That is kind of the point would Donald Trump or anyone think his statement made a lick of sense if all four women were white?  I don’t think it would have even occurred to him to tweet the way he did if the entire “squad” was white.

    • #67
  8. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    I suspect that if the President interjected Paula Jones as you suggest, the GOP pundit class would go after him for being too mean.

    Maybe but I for one would have defended him for it.  Context really matters so in my scenario I am assuming that Hillary either had a strong theme of morality v. Republican greed or had made some comments about how Trump’s traditional morality was bad for women.  

    Any kind of attack or political stunt has to have the right context to really connect and do damage.  My example assumed the right context.

    As to how the Republican establishment would have reacted in that context I can’t say.  I hope they would not have criticized Trump for such tactics.  I know I would have not done it.

    • #68
  9. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):
    Moral high ground helps if you have the political skills to get credit for it. If you don’t have the political skills to make use of the moral high ground you don’t get credit for that high ground.

    I don’t know that this is true. 

    George Bush (the younger one) was a good and religious person. So they invented claims of draft dodge that became Ratergate.

    Mitt Romney who is a good man, no matter your view on his political positions or skill, became a gay bashing bully who abused his dog, while keeping women in binders. 

    Republicans will never get credit for the Moral High ground. To the left and large parts of the media it is impossible to be both Republican and moral. 

    • #69
  10. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Jager (View Comment):

    George Bush (the younger one) was a good and religious person. So they invented claims of draft dodge that became Ratergate.

    Mitt Romney who is a good man, no matter your view on his political positions or skill, became a gay bashing bully who abused his dog, while keeping women in binders. 

    Rathergate backfired badly and still hurts the left to this day, like a old wound before a storm.

    Mitt Romney did not have the skills to turn the attack back on the left.  He sure could have, but he did not.  That was his failure.

    We have no control over the attacks of our enemies what we do have control over is how vulnerable we are to those attacks and the price we make the bad guys pay for the attack.  Everyone Republican will be attacked but not every Republican has to be vulnerable to every attack and no Republican has to sit and take it sometimes you can welcome severe over the top attacks because it makes the enemy vulnerable to counter attacks.

    Democrats will be Democrat no matter what we do.

    • #70
  11. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I think coming to America and then working to undermine it should not be legal.

     

    I agree with the sentiment but as with all things like this who gets to decide what “undermining” American is? Different political parties would think different things qualify as undermining.

    Also I think Omar had no intentions about undermining anything when she left Somalia at six. She learned to undermine America while she was hear most likely from other Americans.

    Getting elected and then trying to turn America into Somalia counts. 

    • #71
  12. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):
    I tend to think that Trump was going for the unpatriotic attack line but mixed in the racists stuff because he saw it was useful hyperbole or maybe as an intensifier. So I don’t think Trump was being racist on purpose just dumb in the way he communicates making sure that his blow against the squad was glancing instead of solid.

    Please give me the exact quote from the president that you say is “racist.” I keeping hearing that what he said was racist, but I’m having a hard time finding the racial content.

    What home do citizens of the United States have except the United States? Why would Trump believe that the “Squad” were not natural American citizens as they all but for Omar were? What marks them out as having a different “home” from the country of their birth.

    If he had chosen, as I wrote, to attack their patriotism or lack of gratitude toward the US I think he has a very strong line of attack going for him. For all four women their “home” is of course America. Implying anything else makes him sound racist, though I believe in his heart he is not a racist.

    Words mean things. He made no comment about race. There’s nothing specifically “racist” there.

    That is fine but I don’t think that most that read it would agree with you. If all four ladies had been white do you think he would have told them to “go home”? Maybe he would have but I don’t think so. Again I don’t think Trump is actually a racists and he was being motivated by politics and not color but his comments read racist. He is not very careful when he is on an insult tear on twitter.

    If you want to jump on the calling people racist bandwagon, so bit it. It just shows how much you are willing to let the left tell you how to speak and think. 

    • #72
  13. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    I believe if anything, Trump’s tweet is far more xenophobic than racist.

    These two concepts are closely related.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    The fact is being “a person of color” is a sought after designation for the purpose of being a member of an aggrieved group which grants you special elevated status in todays Lefty (D) land of strangedom.

    This would be a great thing for Trump to highlight. With a “Bad ideas know no color” campaign. Having a darker skin tone should not allow to advocate for policies that harm your fellow citizens. He did not highlight that though. I would have kind of loved it if he had.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    Moreover, the racist charge is being used by the Left as a political cudgel for the purposes of discrediting your political opponent

    Perhaps it would be a good idea of politician to make it as hard as possible for his enemies to use their favorite cudgel instead of making it easy to swing that cudgel?

    I believe the (D) Left has made it a cottage industry to make literally everthing closely related to racism.

    Thus making everything an (R) politician says subject to walking on “racism” egg shells.

    Which is to say, the MSM/(D) complex wants desperately for Trump to be a racist and work tirelessly to find evidence of it no matter how contrived.   I will not comply with the (D) /MSM  lack of sincerity when they disingenuously use the racism charge for political ends, rather than honestly try to find comity in an attempt to rid(decrease?) the culture of racism.

    • #73
  14. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    I don’t want cred for high ground, I want to win.

    I want the left destroyed. I want them driven from the land. They are out to destroy America, and trying to make peace with them is impossible. 

    This is war. David French, and you Brian, don’t believe it is war. That will save neither of you when the squads come to round you up. 

    These four women would put all of us in camps if they had the power, in a heartbeat. 

    That is what we are up against. 

    Time to stop letting them tell us how to speak and think. 

    • #74
  15. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    The Frenchmen of the GOP are…

    I have no such illusions and I don’t think David French does either. No one made Romney let Crowley get in that dig on him about Obama’s use of Terrorism not let Obama get away with down playing Russia. A better politician would have made great use of those opportunities and turned them on his enemies. Romney was not a great politician.

    Franco (View Comment):
    that’s offset….

    No one advocates for this nor things that anyone will win by using grand platitudes to be boring. I would say that everyone, in all walks of life, can benefit from some self censorship. It has to be the right kind of censorship though.

    Franco (View Comment):
    ….

    You seem to making the mistake that political skills are tied to morality. Being morally reprehensible makes one a great politician and being morally upright makes you a terrible politician. Neither thing is true. If they were true Hillary Clinton would be an amazing politician and she is a terrible one and Reagan would be a footnote in history and never been President.

    I don’t disagree with you on any of these points generally. I think you misunderstand.

    These traits are not exclusionary, it would be fine to have a good man who also has good political instincts and plenty of ‘fight’. Newt is one – although the media (Fox) sought to eliminate him on moralistic grounds and succeeded.

    The morally challenged candidates get excluded early or never make it in the GOP, and this is not the case with Democrats. It also helps to have killer instincts which upstanding guys ( who are often entitled like Romney) aren’t ever inclined to use ( or even see).

    I’m also talking about what certain pundits and voters want and where they focus priorities. If it’s too focused on the morality of the candidate, thinking the idea is to show the country how great Republicans are and how they are better, then it will result in a certain kind of candidate who believes all he has to do as a candidate or President is to be a good guy.

    Bush seemed much like that. What conservative policies resulted from his 8 years? Not much IMO. But at least he won. It looks to me that McCain wanted to promote himself ( as usual) as a “good guy”, hero even, and wasn’t concerned with policy. In retrospect it’s clear he never was, and didn’t really care to win. Romney was similar. It looks to me these guys are grandstanding and virtue-signaling as their primary reason for being.

    Moreover, all the left has to do is attack the character of the Republican to thwart him. We can attack the character of Democrats all we want with zero effect. Notice how the hypocrisy charge is absent regarding Trump. They hate that their tactics of attacking character is failing to affect Republicans. 

    • #75
  16. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Everyone Republican will be attacked but not every Republican has to be vulnerable to every attack and no Republican has to sit and take it sometimes you can welcome severe over the top attacks because it makes the enemy vulnerable to counter attacks.

    Democrats will be Democrat no matter what we do.

    I just don’t think that is how things work anymore.

    Take these examples. 

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-deeply-immoral-values-of-todays-republican-leaders_b_5a2eb9f7e4b04cb297c2aee5

    https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2017/9/22/16345194/republican-party-pathological

    No matter the candidate something will be made up to tarnish them as with Bush and Romney. Even if that does not work the Left now views all Republican as immoral and pathological just based on our policy goals. 

     

    • #76
  17. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    I believe if anything, Trump’s tweet is far more xenophobic than racist.

    These two concepts are closely related.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    The fact is being “a person of color” is a sought after designation for the purpose of being a member of an aggrieved group which grants you special elevated status in todays Lefty (D) land of strangedom.

    This would be a great thing for Trump to highlight. With a “Bad ideas know no color” campaign. Having a darker skin tone should not allow to advocate for policies that harm your fellow citizens. He did not highlight that though. I would have kind of loved it if he had.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    Moreover, the racist charge is being used by the Left as a political cudgel for the purposes of discrediting your political opponent

    Perhaps it would be a good idea of politician to make it as hard as possible for his enemies to use their favorite cudgel instead of making it easy to swing that cudgel?

    This sounds entirely reasonable, but in these cases I think it’s not applicable.

    For one thing, if a Republican makes a reasonable case or comment it will not be reported, and it will definitely  not become a story.

    Also, the idea is to make them apoplectic. Saying something inaccurate helps compel the newspropagandists to report. 

    This is not a debate about Trump or racism.

    What, haven’t they already concluded he’s despicable? This is like more evidence surfacing after a conviction. So what? No more damage is done ( except maybe some of Trumps more tepid allies on the right)

    This brings out these 4 women to the forefront, confounds Pelosi, distracts the MSM, and reminds millions of voters what kind of congresspeople the Democrats elect. 

    The debate is no longer in the realm of reason ( if it ever was) it’s in the realm of perception and who sees what. The Democrats see what they want to see about Trump no matter what. They will not be changing. But America sees these four radicals who want to impeach, say disparaging things about America, Jews, Israel and say the MF word in public. 

     

    • #77
  18. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I don’t want cred for high ground, I want to win.

    I want the left destroyed. I want them driven from the land. They are out to destroy America, and trying to make peace with them is impossible.

    This is war. David French, and you Brian, don’t believe it is war. That will save neither of you when the squads come to round you up.

    These four women would put all of us in camps if they had the power, in a heartbeat.

    That is what we are up against.

    Time to stop letting them tell us how to speak and think.

    I too look at these women and see evil tyrants. When they smile, I see a sinister desire to control. The souls of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot swirl within them. In other words, as Brian Wolf would say, they are not very nice people. The point being, everyone has their own sensibilities. Many ideas can be expressed in many different ways. The bottom line…ya gotta be yourself. That is what Donald Trump is, it’s what he does, it’s real. Trying to correct his moments of misspeaking is futile. What is certain–he will misspeak. But what he has also proven as certain–he will work anyone of any age to a frazzle in his effort to do what he said he would do. People intrinsically understand that in him. Because they understand, some are scared to death of him, while many of us love the man to death. It is what it is, and so is Donald Trump.  

    • #78
  19. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    It’s all here.

     

    • #79
  20. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I think coming to America and then working to undermine it should not be legal.

     

    I agree with the sentiment but as with all things like this who gets to decide what “undermining” American is? Different political parties would think different things qualify as undermining.

    Also I think Omar had no intentions about undermining anything when she left Somalia at six. She learned to undermine America while she was hear most likely from other Americans.

    Getting elected and then trying to turn America into Somalia counts.

    Perhaps some of the people that elected her need to get out too?  I can’t imagine why people would have voted for her.

    • #80
  21. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    If you want to jump on the calling people racist bandwagon, so bit it. It just shows how much you are willing to let the left tell you how to speak and think. 

    I did not.  I said twice that I think Trump is not a racist, just clumsy and foolish.

    • #81
  22. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Brian, your reaction to this Twitter thread, please:

    • #82
  23. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    I believe the (D) Left has made it a cottage industry to make literally everthing closely related to racism.

    Sure.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    Thus making everything an (R) politician says subject to walking on “racism” egg shells.

    It could mean that but it can turned on them too.

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):
    Which is to say, the MSM/(D) complex wants desperately for Trump to be a racist and work tirelessly to find evidence of it no matter how contrived. I will not comply with the (D) /MSM lack of sincerity when they disingenuously use the racism charge for political ends, rather than honestly try to find comity in an attempt to rid(decrease?) the culture of racism.

    Sure but it does no one any harm to ask Trump to make it harder for them, rather than easier.

    • #83
  24. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Sure but it does no one any harm to ask Trump to make it harder for them, rather than easier.

    The President is making it harder for them. Harder for them to hide their anti-Americanism.

    He’s forcing them to expose their own core values — which are not American at all.

    • #84
  25. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    I don’t want cred for high ground, I want to win.

    Sure. Losing honorably still sucks.

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    This is war. David French, and you Brian, don’t believe it is war. That will save neither of you when the squads come to round you up. 

    Presumably our fire arms will and the fact that people that volunteer for our military are generally from conservative regions and will be reluctant to slaughter their own relatives and neighbors.  Of course when the squads come it will be war.

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    These four women would put all of us in camps if they had the power, in a heartbeat. 

    There could some truth to this which is why it would be good to beat them politically.

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    Time to stop letting them tell us how to speak and think. 

    Never let them do it in the first place.  So  I don’t have to stop them now.

    • #85
  26. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Franco (View Comment):
    Moreover, all the left has to do is attack the character of the Republican to thwart him. We can attack the character of Democrats all we want with zero effect. Notice how the hypocrisy charge is absent regarding Trump. They hate that their tactics of attacking character is failing to affect Republicans. 

    I would say the mid term elections give lie to that.  Republicans did not turn out for the House like they would have if this had not effect.  In addition it might the case that Trump has growing, instead of shrinking support and more people are getting on board with him but we don’t have evidence of that.  If it happening we don’t know it.

    If it is not happening then Trump is unlikely to win in 2020 and that will because of his failure as a politician.  There is a winning coalition out there for Republicans we will have to wait and see if Trump can build it, as W. Bush did before him.

    • #86
  27. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    Jager (View Comment):

    No matter the candidate something will be made up to tarnish them as with Bush and Romney. Even if that does not work the Left now views all Republican as immoral and pathological just based on our policy goals. 

     

    When was that not true though.  Nixon was pretty much a liberal Democrat policy wise and they despised him.  Reagan was deeply immoral, from the Democrat perspective, Ford also evil.  They have always been this way.  Or I should say they have been this way in our life times or at least since 1924.

    • #87
  28. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    It’s all here.

     

    Just using his example the French didn’t gain any advantage in longer civil war for the English they went bankrupt lost legitimacy and were consumed in a revolution.  England came out stronger than  France did and France entered the war long before it was obvious that we would in that war.  The Battle of Saratoga just convinced them we were serious no one knew we would win.

    Sometimes intervening in the Civil War does not help you, it hurts.  As the King of France found out.

    • #88
  29. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Brian Wolf (View Comment):

    Jager (View Comment):

    George Bush (the younger one) was a good and religious person. So they invented claims of draft dodge that became Ratergate.

    Mitt Romney who is a good man, no matter your view on his political positions or skill, became a gay bashing bully who abused his dog, while keeping women in binders.

    Rathergate backfired badly and still hurts the left to this day, like a old wound before a storm.

    Mitt Romney did not have the skills to turn the attack back on the left. He sure could have, but he did not. That was his failure.

    We have no control over the attacks of our enemies what we do have control over is how vulnerable we are to those attacks and the price we make the bad guys pay for the attack. Everyone Republican will be attacked but not every Republican has to be vulnerable to every attack and no Republican has to sit and take it sometimes you can welcome severe over the top attacks because it makes the enemy vulnerable to counter attacks.

    Democrats will be Democrat no matter what we do.

    There is very little emphasis on offense – the Republican attacking- and a lot of emphasis on defense.

    If you’re on defense that much, you are going to lose.

    Trump is the first major Republican to go on offense. That’s what offense looks like. And yes, they take offense and offense can be offensive. But it’s legitimate and should be used liberally, like they do.

    Clearly, we all have some Stockholm Syndrome after decades of being attacked and falsely charged. We can’t even see how deeply it’s affected us. Now with Trump, I have a new perspective. It doesn’t have to be us defending the latest false charge with calm reason, trying to convince the world we are good people. We can say mean things about them too. We can ignore their charges. We can laugh at these charges and mock them. 

    They hate us. They will not be swayed by anything we say or do. So we should at least use the same weapons and have a ‘fair’ fight.

     

    • #89
  30. Roderic Fabian Coolidge
    Roderic Fabian
    @rhfabian

    It’s not that we expect more gratitude for this country from the Fab Four, it’s that we don’t like their constant unfair and false criticism of it.

    French may have a good point in saying that more gratitude should not be expected of Omar, but he only makes it because the President does expect more gratitude.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.