Monday, July 6, 2015

A Tale of Two Candidates: Trump and Perry

One suspects that this is not going to end well for Republicans, but their whirlwind romance with Donald Trump is moving forward.

It makes some sense that one of the kings of reality TV would surge ahead in a primary campaign that is increasingly looking like The Bachelorette.

One suspects that it’s not so much Trump’s truth-telling, such as it is, but his willingness to stand up to the bullies who persecute, prosecute and shun anyone caught uttering the least offensive remark about any designated oppressed group.

Instead of bowing down to the thought police by offering serial apologies, Trump doubled down on his remarks.

There is very little that a bakery in Oregon can do when it is put out of business for refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. Apparently, their religious convictions count for nothing in the matter.

Perhaps they were in the wrong, but I will reserve judgment until a gay couple walks into a Muslim bakery and asks them to bake a wedding cake.

Anyway, the former bakery owners, the Kleins are now being fined for their action. One expects that the case will end up in the Supreme Court, but in the meantime a family that lived off the income from their bakery is in serious trouble.

They have been placed so beyond the pale that GoFundMe has shut down the site they were using to raise money.

Trump’s willingness to stand up to the bullies impresses Republican voters. Many others would do it, but simply cannot afford to.

The problem is, since Trump almost surely is not going to be the Republican nominee, will his supporters turn out to vote for the eventual nominee? At the least, his ascendance looks like a death knell for the candidacy of Jeb Bush.

As for Trump’s more substantive point, Rich Lowry offers a temperate analysis, explaining that Mexican immigrants consistently have lower educational levels than immigrants from other countries:

Immigrants here from Mexico — which has sent more immigrants than any other country for decades — have the lowest levels of education. Nearly 60 percent of them haven’t graduated from high school. Only about 10 percent have some college and nearly 6 percent have a bachelor’s degree or higher.

By way of comparison, the situation of immigrants from Korea, for instance, is almost exactly reversed. More than 50 percent of them have a bachelor’s degree or higher, and less than 4 percent failed to earn a high school diploma.

This puts Mexican immigrants at an inherent disadvantage, and it shows. Nearly 35 percent of immigrants from Mexico and their U.S.-born children are in poverty; nearly 68 percent are in or near poverty. This is the highest level for immigrants from any country (the Philippines is the lowest, with 5.5 percent in poverty).

Fifty-four percent of immigrants from Mexico lack health insurance. A higher proportion of Mexican immigrants uses means-tested government programs than immigrants from any other country—more than 57 percent. As Camarota notes, this is “even higher than for refugee-sending countries like Russia and Cuba.” By contrast, the lowest percentage is for immigrants from the United Kingdom at just over 6 percent.

Of course, Trump’s remarks about criminality have gotten the most attention, but apparently there is some truth to his assertion that Mexico is not sending us their best and their brightest.

And then there’s Rick Perry. The former governor of Texas, a man who brings far more experience to the race than the vainglorious Mr. Trump, made a thoughtful and well received speech about race the other day.

No one noticed.

Or, I should say, almost no one noticed. The Wall Street Journal editorialized this morning that Perry has given “the speech of the campaign so far:”

The media continue to dismiss Republican Rick Perry’s presidential prospects even as they pretend that Democrat Bernie Sanders poses a serious threat to Hillary Clinton. Mr. Perry has a far better chance at becoming President than Mr. Sanders does, and last week the Texan gave the speech of the campaign so far.

At the National Press Club on Thursday, Mr. Perry delivered thoughtful, often moving, remarks about race and the Republican Party. (We reprint excerpts nearby.) The former Texas Governor doesn’t spare the GOP, Texans or Americans for historical offenses against African-Americans. He also scores his party for giving up on even trying to win support among African-Americans, a failure that he says has cost the GOP “our moral legitimacy as the party of Lincoln, as the party of equal opportunity for all.”

The Journal continued:

“There is a lot of talk in Washington about inequality. Income inequality. But there is a lot less talk about the inequality that arises from the high cost of everyday life,” Mr. Perry says. “In blue state coastal cities, you have these strict zoning laws, environmental regulations that have prevented builders from expanding the housing supply. And that may be great for the venture capitalist who wants to keep a nice view of San Francisco Bay, but it’s not so great for the single mother working two jobs in order to pay rent and still put food on the table for her kids.”

And also:

Mr. Perry does the same on education, pointing out that “in too many parts of this country black students are trapped in failing schools.” He notes that in 2002 Texas ranked 27th in high-school graduation rates; by 2013 it was second, and its most recent graduation rate for blacks was first….

Mr. Perry also stressed Texas’ impressive record on prison and sentencing reform, especially for nonviolent drug offenses. 

The Journal concluded:

The sad truth is that most Democrats and the American left today want to polarize politics along racial lines. They need to divide by race because their coalition is built on identity politics and grievance. Mr. Perry is showing how to respond in a way that points the country to a better, unifying future.

Now, Gov. Perry needs to take the message into America’s inner cities. He can start by accepting the invitation from Rev. Corey Brooks to speak at his New Beginnings Church of Chicago.


Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

"They need to divide by race because their coalition is built on identity politics and grievance."

This is the essence of today's Democratic Party.

While it may be a source of consternation for many of us, it clearly is the source of their power. They nakedly wield identity politics without the slightest bit of concern they will be called out on it by mainstream media figures. Their narrative goes unquestioned. Regardless of whatever race you are, you will get a pass in media interviews if you pity the right groups, and advocate blank check funding for "programs" on their behalf. It doesn't matter if they work. It's the thought that counts.

We can complain and moan as much as we want, but the issue clearly serves as a quantifiable means to power in this era of big data politics. It polls well. The Democrats will ceaselessly blather on about the "structural disadvantages" this, that and the other group face, unless they are challenged. They use Republican miscues to solidify their base, creating Republicans as opponents and haters. Repeat.

As the government gravy train keeps chugging on with Chinese money, it doesn't matter who's really to blame for a minority group's poor economic prospects so long as there are the usual suspects to blame. Identity is powerful, and if you can link a person's voting behavior at an early enough age (13-21 years old), you own them for life. It's like a cigarette brand. Social media is great for this. In the prior post Stuart mentions Jewish voters and Israel. The vast majority of non-observant Jews will vote Democrat.

Being smart is the most important value in America by far, and it is associated with being liberal. The more monolithic the voting bloc (academia and entertainment, for example) the more Leftist tendencies you will find. This trend is growing among wealthy Americans, regardless of race. The smarter you are (or want others to think you are), the more Left your opinions, advocacy and voting behavior. Wealth increasingly follows the tribe of intelligent people... the "brights." Younger wealthy people are increasingly left-of-center, as seen in the nation's wealthiest zip codes.

As their elders die off, and the brights take up positions in the mainstream, the more you will see economic liberty, free enterprise and religious observance identified with ignorance. This is how demographic trends happen over time. Consider that Vermont and Maine were the only two states to have voted against FDR in all four of his presidential bids. Look at Vermont now with its openly socialist Senator and presidential hopeful. Maine's wealthiest and most educated zip codes (which include retirees from the Eastern corridor) are solidly liberal. How did this happen?

Tribes shift allegiances based in their highest values. The highest value in America today is intelligence, especially looking smart and believing the things smart people believe. Luntz's work shows 93% of Americans self-identify as having "above average intelligence." Clearly this is impossible. But it is more important than any other attribute listed, including physical/personal attractiveness and wealth. Intelligence is highly correlelated with wealth today.

Identity politics is extremely powerful. Ignore it at your peril. The Democrats are expert at it, and this is the main reason that today's Democratic Party doesn't look like your father's or grandfather's Democratic Party. The idea that the Dems are really out to take it to "the rich" is a ruse, wrapped in a lie, obscured by a smokescreen. Follow the money. Hollywood, Silicon Valley/128 Corridor, Wall Street. All Democrat. Wall Street has the money to give to candidates more pragmatically (to influence regulatory oversight), but you get my drift. In the case of Hollywood and high tech, it is identity politics at its core. Try to be an open Republican in those two industries. Ask the founder and former CEO of Mozilla.

priss rules said...

This country is sick, sick, sick.

The very Liberals who bitch about how Joseph McCarthy went after communists(who really did threaten the world back then) are now destroying anyone who won't bend over to the monstrosity called 'gay marriage'. They are 100x worse than McCarthy, and they never seem to be going away. And groups like ACLU that used to howl with fury about any breach of civil liberties now look the other way when universities come under PC rule. ACLU, as it turns out, was never about freedom. It as all just a trojan horse ruse. When radicals didn't have total power, they needed civil liberties to say their say. Now that radicals have the power in media and academia, they make damn sure that all 'heretical' views are silenced and those who spout them are destroyed.

I don't see this as a mere spiritual/religious issue but a moral one. I've never been religious, but I know something stinks when the moral institution of marriage is now equated with men who bugger one another or cut off their penises and testes. How does it serve a moral institution to make believe that two men who use anuses as sex organs is the moral equivalent of man and woman who use proper sex organs in the way nature meant them to be used? How does it serve marriage to associate it with freaks like Bruce Jenner now known as 'Caitlyn'.

Also, the fact that Gofundme has banned the couple means that the problem we face isn't communism(totally dead) but a new decadent capitalism that works with Political Correctness to destroy and attack anyone they don't like. Capitalism or so-called 'free enterprise' can attack freedom and conscience. After all, capitalism is only as good as the people who run it. If PC people run capitalism, they will use the power of money to destroy others. Also, capitalism is all about profits. So, if the prevailing ethos say 'YOU MUST BEND OVER TO HOMOS TO DO BUSINESS', even businessmen who don't agree with the 'gay agenda' will have to bend over for the sake of profit. No principles among capitalists. One saving grace about capitalism is it's not a totalitarian system, so non-economic institutions and organizations can and should counter the power of money. But as US has become so materialistic, shallow, and vain, money rules and dictates all. And as PC has taken over all institutions, they all spew the same crap that never deviates from the main Narrative.

And they are hypocrites because 'marriage equality' never pushed for incest marriage or polygamy. It only pushed for marriage privilege for homos, an insider-group in the upper echelons of power.

Kaiser Derden (aka TDL) said...

"there is some truth" ???? is that like a little pregnant ? there is truth not "some" truth ...

Kaiser Derden (aka TDL) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
sestamibi said...

"Perhaps they were in the wrong, but I will reserve judgment until a gay couple walks into a Muslim bakery and asks them to bake a wedding cake."

Well, maybe not an actual gay couple, but intrepid iconoclastic conservative film-maker Steve Crowder:

Anonymous said...

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

The Democratic Party is moving Left because they have nothing creative to offer. Probably the most important single definition of Leftism is destruction. They are destroyers.

They destroy everything in their path. Everything. Why? Their entire worldview is about destruction. They see the world as being full of things they and others do not have, and will never have. They champion tearing things down on behalf of others because they are crusaders acting in the projection of their own pain, wrapping it all up in the red flag of social justice. And that's bizarre, because it's antisocial, and has nothing whatsoever to do with justice.

They see things that are deeply meaningful to other people that they do not appreciate, and will never appreciate. They see the joy others experience, and are consumed by their anger, rage and envy. Someone else has something they want, and "the system" prevents them from having it.

They are victims, which destroys any sense of personal responsibility. They have no access to joy. They can't stand for themselves, so they can't really stand others. This realization manifests as a great void in their life, reminding them of the loneliness, isolation and deep hatred that rules their lives. If they cannot have the connection to all that is human -- those things that you have and they desperately covet -- it is more empowering for them to destroy what you have than to create it themselves.

All the vitriol amidst their crusade for "love," all the debauchery as a way to uphold "dignity," and all the decadence they display in their search for "rights" is just a smokescreen. They hate humanity. They hate themselves, you, and everyone else. They even hate their "friends," because people in such a state of desperation can't have meaningful relationships. Christoper Hitchens said "I don't have any friends." That means they view themselves and others as damaged goods, not wounded souls. Their wounds are the source of their self-loathing. The damage is the outward expression.

And if they cannot receive or provide love to someone or create something, they are suspicious and contemptuous of, well, almost everything.

The essence of Leftism is an assault on the fundamental concept of VALUE. If you cannot appreciate value, you definitionally cannot love anyone or create anything. Why do it? It's material. It's valueless. Is a bunch of atoms or cells. It's nothing. You're nothing, I'm nothing, life is nothing. It's all meaningless.

If they cannot have what they most desire -- a connection to humanity, theirs and ours -- you can't have it, either. That's Leftism in a nutshell: valueless, meaningless destruction. Creation takes effort and vision. Destruction only requires the weapon you have at your disposal. It is a release. It is rage. And it exists for its own sake, because nothing else matters anyway. They hate your religion because it matters to you. They hate your house because you care for it. They hate your community because they don't belong to it. They hate the country because they don't connect with it.

Their misery is all because of you. It's all about them, all the time. They couldn't create a workable, creative solution to anything of enduring value if you spotted them all the good people they needed and provided an unlimited budget to accomplish it. They cannot create, they can only destroy. And they know it, so the rage festers and builds, one cause they don't really care about after another. Just more activism, more protests, more drugs, more sex. Because if they had to stop and be with themselves for two minutes, they'd spontaneously combust.

That's today's Democratic Party: a bunch of raging malcontents looking for a leader who will destroy the enemy. The enemy out there. Always the enemy. Always destruction. Always death. All shrouded in hope, change, tolerance, openness...

Ares Olympus said...

re: Trump’s willingness to stand up to the bullies impresses Republican voters. Many others would do it, but simply cannot afford to.

Minnesota had our own celebrity big-mouth by the name of Jesse Ventura. Trump may be a birther, but Ventura is a 9/11-truther. Now which one is expressing truth-to-power, the theoretical manipulation of a baby's location of birth so he could become president 40+ years later, or the death of 3000+ Americans and a $4-6 trillion dollar war in Iran and Afghanistan?

But Trunk is bold and can pick on 12 million underground illegal aliens sneaking across the border so they pick our vegetables highs school education, that's really really brave. I'm not sure my ancestors who came here around 1850 all had high school educations, but they were coming for the same sense of opportunity that brings people from Mexico now.

I wonder of Mitt Romney also can't afford to tell truth-to-power about all the rapists from Mexico? I suppose he could stil run for president 2020 at age 73, after Trump helps decimate the Republican party's national brand. So he has to keep quiet, but we all know secretly he agrees.

On the other hand perhaps the Hispanics can yet be repressed for a few more decades, being 17% of the population while only 3% of the voting population. Why worry about the future when you can scapegoat a heritage for "brownie points" among white voters?

Standing up to bullies can be admired, but there's an unknown fine line between standing up to bullies and being a bully.

MLK stood up to bullies too, and probably acted like a bully as well at times, but he had a sound message:
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

What's Trump's message exactly? Looks like he asks himself "What do I feel like today? Who pissed me off today? What will make me feel better today?"

Webutante said...

I have always been a great fan of Governor Rick Perry and would vote for him in a minute. You and Roger Simon have both done his race speech a great justice. Thank you, Stuart.

Anonymous said...

Hey Ares Olympus, some illegal who was deported 5 times casually and randomly murdered a lady in San Fran, a sanctuary city. He's one of the 12 million. Is he a bully too? Sounds like he was hunting, not picking veggies. Maybe the SF police should've listened to the feds? What are you going to tell her family? I'm sure they'd want this illegal not judged by the color of his skin, but they sure might wonder why he was in this country illegally after committing 7 felonies, and the local authorities did nothing until he popped their daughter who was strolling on the pier with dad. I don't care what Trump thinks, but I know I'm pissed off. And you're talking about Jesse Ventura, Mitt Romney and all this other smoke and mirrors crap. Your repressed scapegoat may not be a rapist,but he sure is a murderer. But I suppose you don't need to worry about that kind of thing up in Minnesota.

priss rules said...

According to George Takei(too gay), a person has no dignity if he or she had his freedom, opportunity, and livelihood taken away. According to George, dignity only comes with fame, fortune, freedom, and social advantages.

But I would say the Christian bakers in Oregon who had their business ruined, their freedom taken away, and their lives destroyed by the Homo Lobby have far greater dignity, decency, and genuine pride than George who's been favored, promoted, and showered with special praise by the Liberal media complex.

The powers-that-be lavish favors on George simply because he uses his anus as a sex organ, but the man has no real dignity. He's just a has-been actor used by media bosses to promote homo agenda among the geeks.

The Christian bakers here have true courage, dignity, and pride even though their freedom and livelihood have been taken away.

Dennis said...

I believe we need to be much more enthusiastic about winning the Cultural Wars because what always happens is that those who think they are winning always over reach. Just the comments here taken as a whole denote that, discounting Ares, the backlash is growing and attracting people from every political persuasion. We just need to find more ways to push the radicals to over reach while undermining the intellectual foundation of their expectations of control.

I suspect that Kennedy's reasoning is going to come back and force the liberal wing of the Supreme Court to deal with the chaos and confusion they have created with the Bill of Rights. Alienate enough people and they will destroy you.

Rick Perry is smart enough to realize he needs to take the political actions at the national level that made him popular in Texas with a highly diverse electorate. If minorities in South Carolina can be convinced that Republicans are the party that best serve their interests than a smart person might think it possible to appeal to the same desires held by other minorities.

Ares Olympus said...

Anonymous@9:30PM, It does sound like a bizarre tragedy. I can see why people want to politicize it before justice is done. This isn't the sort of case I'd stake a reputation on for immigration reform, although there surely are good cases out there. To make a good villain, you need a narrative of malice, not stupidity.
Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez is charged with first-degree murder in last week’s shooting of Kathryn Steinle, 32, while she was walking with her father.

Sanchez was deported five times previously and has spent a combined 17 years in federal prison for illegal entry into the United States.

Hillary Clinton, a Democratic candidate for president, told CNN Tuesday that San Francisco was wrong to ignore ICE’s detainer request. ... Republicans also criticized Sanchez’s release.

In court Tuesday, Sanchez’s public defender, Matt Gonzalez, said the shooting appeared to be an accident. In jailhouse interviews with two television stations, Sanchez said he found a gun wrapped in a shirt on the pier Wednesday evening. He said the gun went off in his hands.

“This was an act of random violence, shooting an innocent victim in the back,” prosecutor Dianna Garcia told the judge, arguing against releasing Sanchez on bail.

A downcast Sanchez spent most of the hearing with his head bowed, appearing to fight back tears while the judge explained the charges to him. Sanchez was aided by a Spanish-language interpreter and pleaded not guilty in Spanish.

Outside court, his attorney said Sanchez has a second-grade education and a nonviolent criminal record of low-level drug arrests and immigration violations.

He faces life in prison if convicted.

Ares Olympus said...

p.s. to Anonymous@9:30PM: We have more bizareness to the SF killing:
The gun used in the killing of Kate Steinle belonged to a federal agent, a source with knowledge of the investigation said.

It wasn't immediately clear what federal agency the gun was tied to, how it ended up in the hands of the alleged shooter or whether the revelation about where the weapon came from would affect the case.

"It doesn't in terms of charging this defendant," CNN legal analyst Danny Cevallos said, "but it may mean that somebody else is going to be on the hook, and soon."
Matt Gonzalez, a public defender representing Lopez-Sanchez, said it's very likely the shooting was accidental and stressed that his client was not a violent person.

"There was no motive whatsoever for this defendant to cause any harm to the deceased," he said. "He did not know her. There's no allegation that this was any kind of crime, such as a robbery attempt or anything like that."

So basically if a 8 year old boy picked up that same gun an it accidentally went off and killed someone we'd be calling it a tragic accident that left someone dead, but because it was an undesirable person who picked it up and accidentally fired it, we have murder charges and national hysteria.

Good thing we don't lynch people for justice any more, right?

So even here the label scapegoat might be an accurate description, at least if you're 100% sure he's going to be convicted as a murderer. I admit I wasn't there, so I don't know what happened, but "accidental shooting" makes more sense than "random murder".

Anonymous said...

Ares, you're willing to believe anything to to confuse what this really is. You should be a spin doctor. I suppose you'll believe anything and try to get others to believe it too. Now you're hinting that a ILLEGAL ALIEN who murders in broad daylight isn't responsible for his actions because it was a federal agent's gun, or that this ILLEGAL ALIEN at least should be charged as an 8 yr old, even though he's now an adult. You're a magician of moral equivalence. And we're all supposed to crowd around the tissue box because this ILLEGAL ALIEN never got past 2nd grade. The ILLEGAL ALIEN confessed to the murder, and then shows up in court with his public defender entering a not guilty plea. Are we now supposed to believe Dirty Harry is back on the SFPD, and the sanctuary city's disgraceful reputation for strong arm tactics with ILLEGAL ALIEN prisoners in extracting the confession this ILLEGAL ALIEN gave just hours before? That the SFPD has a special rendition program for illegal aliens, modeled on the CIA's post-9/11 black ops? Are you suggesting a rogue agent got to Sanchez before the SFPD and gave this ILLEGAL ALIEN a federal gun? You sure it wasn't Fast and Furious? Perhaps the gun was planted on him! Accidental shooting or random murder, the girl's still dead. As if some federal agent losing his gun means they're an accomplice or on the hook. As if that explanation brings the girl back it makes it any better for her family. No motive? Who cares? The ILLEGAL ALIEN is already in our country and faced the police before, so maybe he wants to go out in a blaze of glory so he doesn't have to get another free ticket home. As for Hillary telling CNN what she thinks, wouldn't that mean she'd have to answer a reporter's question? She doesn't do that. Given this ILLEGAL ALIEN's rap sheet, count me in as someone who's not exactly skeptical of the man's capacity for a random murder. Maybe she looked at the ILLEGAL ALIEN the wrong way. Education? This ILLEGAL ALIEN could have a doctorate for all I care. There's being a skeptic and being an idiot, and I think you're playing politics while accusing others of playing politics. The girl's dead. The ILLEGAL ALIEN's public defender says his client is not a violent criminal. Well, it looks like he is now. We have murder charges because this ILLEGAL ALIEN killed someone. Do you think this ILLEGAL ALIEN picked the gun out of some fed's lunch bucket on the pier and was was walking around and pointed the gun at her as a joke and it somehow discharged? You believe all that? Yeah? You have some serious issues, man. You've taken something you first described as a bizarre tragedy and made it into a story of a scapegoat. Your words. Scapegoat? Trump was correct: this kind of stuff happens every day in places other than Minnesota. Now you've turned it into a cliffhanger of accidents, political intrigue, bad federal agents, lynch mobs, undesirables, bad schooling, and national hysteria. You're accusing others of politicizing things, while turning it into political sensationalism with covert agents with bad motives. Sickening. Maybe it was Jason Bourne.

Ares Olympus said...


That's a long paragraph to explain why the most obvious explanation "accident" is not what you'd like to believe.

If Congress wants to use this "accident" as a reason to look at Immigration reform, I'm all for it.

My own answer might be to consider NAFTA (North America Free Trade Agreement) also a "free labor agreement" as well, for automatic green cards for citizens of Canada and Mexico who want to work across the border.Then we'd have a better chance to know who every is, and people wouldn't have to hide underneath lawful society.

Of course this won't help people who pick up FBI guns hidden on the ground an accidentally shooting someone with it. Perhaps those FBI agents should be more careful with their guns, perhaps they should have fingerprint identification or something.

Of course we could just keep crying "The sky is falling" and refuse to face any real issues that can be addressed better than building a 20' tall fence along a 1933 mile long fence that will require illegals to learn how to swim a quarter mile.

Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ignatius Acton Chesterton OCD said...

Ares Olympus @July 8, 2015 at 10:28 PM:

C'mon, Ares... Do you honestly believe it was an "accident"?

The guy had 7 felonies and was deported 5 times. An "accident"? You think that's an "obvious explanation"?

According to NBC News sources, the Federal agent's gun was taken from his vehicle. In most of the country, that's called "stolen."

The girl was strolling on a pier. The guy is an illegal migrant who was in possession of a stolen gun in a sanctuary city. I don't think the gun went off by itself, or by accident.

The sky IS falling for that family of the deceased.

This is where your contrariness starts to irk people. This isn't a court of law where we have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. This is a forum of opinion. You sound like Sanchez's defense attorney, who has a duty to protect his client. You're just recreationally speculating, as always. In this case, it is unseemly. This Sanchez shouldn't have been in the country, and you're acting like it's a normal Thursday afternoon shooting in Chicago.