All errors should be reported to

Saturday, October 01, 2016

Trump supporters to media: Quit dehumanizing us

Now that National Review and Fox News have abandoned conservatism in favor of lucre (and I hope the Family Murdoch reaps what it has sown in donating to Team Clinton), conservatives must seek new outlets.

Thankfully, Breitbart survives and Roger L. Simon is keeping PJ Media from sinking into the toilet of liberalism. and Drudge remain to fight the good fight. holds true.

And new stars emerge. Mike Cernovich is a daily read now.

The most entertaining Trump friendly new site is

These people are almost as crazy as Trump, who is crazy like a fox. They post what they want when they want and continue the spirit from the Internet when it was dial-up and AOL cost $2.95 an hour.

The place is outside my ken, but fascinating.

Typical post is:
"Trump is not a candidate. Trump is a murder weapon. The victim will be the establishment class, i.e. the status quo."
The site is great for research. I get a post or two out of the site every day, and I now know the story of a Frog named Pepe. Talk about win-win.

In the wake of a pack of Hillary supporters chasing and beating a Trump supporter, the Reddit/r/TheDonald readers sent a missive to reporters:
OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND CALL TO ACTION: Following the dangerous and dehumanizing attacks from the Clinton campaign and the MSM, a young man was severely beaten last night for his peaceful political involvement. We demand an apology and immediate cessation of this irresponsible behavior.
The message was quite powerful. The media portrays Trump and his followers as fascists, yet they are in reality victims of fascism. (And there is no other word to describe the San Jose Police Department refusing to protect Trump supporters from violent gangs as they were filing out of a rally in June.)

The statement said:
Dehumanizing language leads to violence.
Painting a loved and harmless cartoon frog a 'hate symbol' is no different than Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines egging on the Rwandan genocide by referring to Tutsis as 'cockroaches'. They were later sentenced by an international tribunal to 30-35 years in prison for their crimes. The goal is the same here: dehumanize the enemy to make them pests that must be literally exterminated.
The post linked to a Washington Post reporter who then tried to get an interview. The exchange is hilarious and revealing. Basically the guy the reporter asked said, only if I get to interview you. Turns out there are as many Reddit/r/The_Donald subscribers as there are Washington Post subscribers.

I am glad someone is standing up to liberal fascism. I wish Jonah Goldberg really mean what he said in that book.

But to hell with the National Review, et cetera.

Conservatives were ditched at the altar.

Fine. Move on. When your favorite steakhouse goes vegan, you find a new joint.


My new book, "Trump the Press," is a fun read that details how the experts missed the rise of Trump. Read the reviews in the right column.

Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space.

The book also available in Kindle and as a paperback on Amazon.

Autographed copies area available. Email me for details.



  2. "When your favorite steakhouse goes vegan, you find a new joint."

    Hey, if vegetarians eat vegetables, what do humanitarians eat?

    1. dessert, of course. Make mine tiramisu.

  3. Try

    1. Gateway has been pretty good.

      A little rah-rah, but you do get a lot of good info.

  4. I've really pared down my blog list since the beginning of the year.

    Feral Irishman has a good blogroll, also.

    1. Oh my gosh. You're right. Haven't looked at our blogroll in a coon's age but it is very out-of-date now. Shoot...more work to do.

      This ugly war has left us without a political home. We be orphans, all.

    2. I second the motion from "unknown" above; AKA The Last Refuge, is my political home.

      Other than here at Don's place, that is. The Treehouse does fantastic investigative reporting, I discovered it during the Travon Martin affair; they had facts against the MSM "narrative." The narrative, of course, was totally fiction. The Treehouse had the real story.

  5. It's kinda like that migration from the dust bowl to Kalifornie. Same principle as the "Okie" moniker and the attendant hate. Alinsky had nothing on the The Californian Barons. It took on the commie narrative which is similar to the Nazi meme of today. Turns out a lot of those Okies and Red River Texans ended up in governmental farm management in the central CA valleys because they taught them soft skinned fellers a thing or two, especially about stealing water from Arizona. The present day Okies will most likely be similarly involved in skills training and re-education.

    Forget the media Jake, it's Chinatown.

  6. Some of the writers at American Thinker are still strong, including the Sunday article from Clarice Feldman and anything from Thomas Lifson.

    1. Limitedly. Before the "conservatives" demonized Trump, they used Diana West for target practice. The worst part was they put words in her mouth that never appeared in her book. It was a gob-smacking attack in which Ms. West was not allowed to respond. However, the comment section on her book on Amazon grew into a mighty roar:

      Almost 300 reviews, and at two thirds of them wouldn't have happened had The Boyz not decided to build their cordon sanitaire around her. Those reviews are worth reading, especially the ones marked "Verified Purchase".

      Don, you have to get them to start a hate war on you: that wonderful book of yours would sell like hotcakes. The thematic approach you took really organized the unrelenting onslaught.

      EVERYONE should read your book just to see how it's done - and done properly.

    2. Dymphna, the kind lady who toils daily with Baron Bodissy in keeping us apprised of the goings on abroad at the Gates of Vienna blog is a joy to read and like Mr. Surber, Gates of Vienna occupied a favored read space along with the King of Poca in my blog when I had one. But it seems to me that to throw conservative principles out for the incompetent and dislikeable Trump was never a well thought out position.

      I wonder how actual incidents that reflect badly on Trump never affect his supporters. Here is the incident regarding the Trump Princess boat in Gary, Indiana that affected my employer badly in the 1990s. Perhaps Don could use his new book to explain how we can overlook dishonesty and greed.

  7. Trump may be smart like a fox but he never learned from Reagan on how to handle criticism. He is so thin skinned that he too often goes after just about anyone and everyone who criticizes him. FNC is following Trump's stupid attacks, as are all the other news networks; attacks that have nothing to do with the campaign and sets him up for revealing and perceived and usually negative media reports. Since I am not such a blind fan of Trump, I don't see the FNC that others do, who are all in for Trump.
    I've been a manager on a large construction project and the client is sort of like the electorate. I knew enough to not act in front of the client as Trump does in front of the electorate Trump owns, so to speak, the loyalty of his base seemly regardless of what he does but by getting into this dirt that has nothing to do with Clinton and the election is, IMO, not going to sway enough other people to get elected.
    I will vote for him, but I hope that the seasoned political veterans around him will convince him to check his ego and become more like Reagan. I am hoping that if elected Trump would keep such people around him and listen to them. If Clinton can get to him this easily, think what Putin and the Chinese could do.
    One safeguard for his election is that if Trump goes off the rails, under the 25th Amendment, he could be removed from office, at least temporarily, by his cabinet as was considered with Reagan because of his dementia. The yes people that Clinton will surround herself with would never even consider such a move. I say that because if they would keep her as the candidate after her national security violations and the serial lying to the public, they would never take her on for constitutional violations; the Democrats didn't do it with Obama, so why with Clinton.

    1. amr, that's pretty much the same way I see it: Trump allows himself to be distracted by personal attacks, and he should rise above it. Totally agree!

      In Trump's defense, though- he's trying to thread a very narrow needle here. He's already got us, his base; he knows he won't get those committed to Clinton; so he's going for the undecided/lowinfo/?? voters, including Bernie supporters. Many of those folks would see a no-holds-barred attack on Hillary as being ungentlemanly, or unsportsmanlike. Hillary's already painted him as a racist, sexist monster whose main joy in life is eating children, so he can't afford to look scary at all.

      Hillary won't hesitate to say, "I am woman, hear me roar!" followed immediately by "Don't hit me, I'm a girl, you bully!" Sadly there are a lot of people who would swallow that BS whole. (Obama got elected, remember. Lots of people who should have known better voted for him.)

      I also agree about your scenario if one or the other should 'go off the rails'- though Trump will be constrained anyway, as Congress is composed of only one or two Americans. The rest are Uniparty members, who will be jealously guarding their iron rice bowls, and who will not hesitate to impeach Trump but who would never in a million years do that with Hillary.

      I do wish that Trump could use his characteristic phrase "You're Fired!" with ALL of Congress, so that we could start all over again with a fresh lot, as the ones we have now are corrupt, spoiled, and rotten.

      Ah well, I'm glad that Trump likes to work, he's got a lot of it ahead of him!