Rep. Steve King: ‘We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies’

I'm inclined to agree with him.

Before the usual idiots start shrieking "racism!" (the left's all-purpose term of abuse these days), notice that the sentence doesn't even mention race.

"Our civilization" isn't primarily a matter of race in any biological sense. It's a matter of shared culture, tradition, custom and history. I think that it's obvious and undeniable that a nation's culture, tradition, customs and history can't be defended, buttressed and "restored" by importing large numbers of people whose cultures, traditions histories and customs are dramatically different. So King would appear to be right.

One of the reasons why the post-World War II dream of 'one-world' globalism is crumbling as we speak is its demand that people cease identifying with their own cultures, histories and traditions. That isn't a realistic expectation and it isn't even clear that it's desirable. Our distinct cultures aren't just evil atavisms to be swept away on the road to some fanciful utopian future, they are something that's fundamentally human and probably inevitable given human psychology.

In a word: human beings simply aren't fungible commodities.

 

This is good to see

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/13/us/politics/steve-king-babies-civilization.html?_r=0


"Against the backdrop of an emboldened white nationalist movement in the United States, his Twitter post over the weekend — “We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies” — suggested that Mr. King was sliding from his typical messages to something far darker. It was praised by both the white supremacist David Duke and The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website."

They better rebuke it. 20018 is coming fast. I hope guys like King keep talking. The more that they do, the more energized the Dems become.

 

Time flies.

 

It seems to be going by faster now that I am getting older. I am trying to squeeze as many things that I can in a day! Geez! :smile:

 

What does Paul Ryan think of Steve King?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/14/paul-ryan-doesnt-know-what-to-do-with-the-steve-kings-of-the-gop/?utm_term=.b1028827f2eb

 

Really?

So you're okay with the Queen of SJW's, Elizabeth Warren, lying about being Native American in order to secure a teaching position at Harvard University, thereby screwing an actual person of color out of the position?

One of the many reasons why the Democrats are imploding is because their galling hypocrisy can now easily be exposed and publicized, thanks to technology.

 

Bwa-ha-ha-ha!!! It's fun to observe him squirm like this; couldn't have happened to a nicer or more deserving guy.

Here is the deal. Core "value" and main goal of the GOP is class warfare: cutting social spending to the poor in order to finance tax cuts for the 1%. It is Ryan's one and only unshakeable principle. I don't think that eg. Ryan is any more racist than an average privileged white guy of his age; if anything he can be less so on account of better education. But the way they SELL it to the voter is by discrediting "entitlements" by hinting that they go to the "other guy" - minority, Latino, immigrant, LGBT, "feminazis", "liberal coastal elite" - anyone, really. It's the "welfare queen" gambit, masterfully done by the great communicator Reagan (and he was quite the performer - and also probably not particularly racist himself). So they appeal to the baser instincts of their base, including racism, while also trying to distance themselves from it just enough to be deniable. But the effect is that they can't directly attack trolls like Steve King, or people who are willing to pander to the deplorables more directly - like Trump. GOP is trapped by their own dishonest tactic.

 

"Energized Dems" these days translates to protests that inconvenience massive amounts of people (blocking roads, intersections, and bridges), destroying property, injuring innocent people, and attempting to silence any speech that isn't isn't in lockstep with their radical ideology.

I hope the Dems stay "energized" all the way to the mid-term elections, because they'll get slaughtered again. Everyday Americans who work, pay taxes, and don't have time to be "energized" are getting sick of the bullshit.

 

In all likelihood, Warren did believe in the family tall tale about Cherokee descent; Harvard publicising this undocumented claim to make their quotas look better is on Harvard. There's no evidence this screwed any person of color of anything. And - yeah - even taken at face value, a hypocrite is 10x better than active hate peddlers like Wilders, Rep. King - or Steve Bannon for that matter. Better than an active Birther promoter too.

It is notable that you do not try to make your side look better, trying to knock down Dems instead. "Clinton said this thing once so he's as bad as Steve King" is desperate.

 

Oh, we are energized alright! I hope the Steve King's of the world keep talking. Keep talking man.

We will see how things turn out soon enough.

 

They why doesn't Warren just say that? When asked if she was Native American, this was her response. Or I should say, non-response;

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YVJ8H1VZDo[/video]

Harvard, as a private university, doesn't have to release their hiring records, and in fact have refused to do so in regards to Elizabeth Warren. If she wasn't hired to fill a quota, why doesn't Harvard release the records to remove all doubt?

Because she was, and an actual person of color was screwed out of the position. That's some of the most reprehensible racism I can imagine these days.

You're the only one mentioning race here, because along with every other leftist, it's your Pavlovian fall-back position. When all else fails, scream about race. And homophobia. And transphobia. And xenophobia. Any "ism" or "phobia" will do, provided it distracts attention away from the real issue.

You know that Hillary Clinton started the whole birther movement during the 2008 Democratic primary, right?

The Republicans control the White House, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and soon, the Supreme Court.

Does that look or sound like desperation?? :lmao:

 

I'm having a deja vu all over again now. Let me tell you a couple of anecdotes.

A few years ago, Vladimir Putin attended a charity show, and afterwards met with a bunch of performers for a chat, on camera. Performers were mostly big stars from Soviet times - mostly actors, but also some musicians. So a musician named Yuri Shevchuk got up and asked him a very sharp question about him trampling on the right of assembly - how the rally in support of the relevant article of Constitution gets banned all the time, how some protesters rot in jail on trumped up charges, this kind of thing. Putin's reaction was notable in few ways: first, he asked Mr. Shevchuk for his name, and he replied "Yura, the musician" - a meme was born. "Yura the musician", frontman of DDT band, is one of the pre-Perestroika cohort of semi-banned "Russian rock"; there was four or five biggest bands on that scene, and every single person in all of Soviet Union knows their names and main songs. So it was like a politician condescending to Bob Dylan. But the rest of Putin's reply was exactly in the vein of what you said; namely, how protesters inconvenience a lot of ordinary citizens trying to get home from their dachas after weekend there. It's interesting to hear this exact line of reasoning from an American.
Second thing of this nature was Viktor Yanukovych of Ukraine justifying the brutal suppression of initial, modest Euromaidan encampment, on November 30, 2013. He said that the protesters were disruptive and did not let workers install the big Christmas tree on the site (he used the Russian word, "yolka", in a Ukrainian speech. That particular piece of decoration was called "yolka" from then on - another meme is born). As we all now know, he was out of power and fled to Russia February 24th, 2014.
I am not saying Trump is literally Putin or Yanuk at this time. But the rhyming theme is striking.

 

That would be remarkable if true, since the thread is about Rep. Steve King's blatant racist twit.

And you know very well that, in fact, no she didn't. Wouldn't work as excuse even if she did though.

And yet, you guys are drawn to playing victim and searching for myriad excuses. Yeah, actually, this looks a lot like desperation. Which is funny, since you are supposed to be in such a good position to defend Congress in 2018.

 

Which has absolutely nothing to do with Trump, and nothing to do with Islam.

Nice couching of your statement, because you needed it;

Fact checking the media -- yes, the Clinton machine did start the birther movement - Washington Times

What planet are you living on?

Oh, I'm not worried about 2018. If you thought 2016 was bad, you better hold on to your socks.

 

I know, right? It makes it harder to understand why the Right is so agitated and shrill. Expression "sore winner" names it but does not explain.

P. S. I hope for an upset in 2018, but it is a very, very steep hill to climb.

 

Oh? Then make it. What is the actual point? What is the danger to "our civilization" from "other people's babies"? To me, this is practically the "14 words" slightly rearranged. Apparently, Paul Ryan recognizes it, and Steve King was a bit of a crackpot outcast - until recently. Something about the zeitgeist makes people fail to get what is so blatantly wrong with this discourse.

 

I don't know whether you noticed, but you've won. Now, Donald J. Trump is a Republican President and the leader of the GOP, and this party's failings are about him. Part of the package. And, no, it's not about Islam; it's about "other people's babies".

Oh good, an actual argument. Let's look closer, shall we?

So to summarize this line and the whole article, it argues that "while Hillary did not start the birther movement, she totally start the birther movement". And you know this because you presumably read it before posting the link, right?

Which raises the further question. The technique in question, "going after the opponent's "otherness"", is a (shady, yes) political trick of the trade as old as dinosaur droppings. Yet I don't remember suggestions that when Bush did that to Kerry, Romney did it to Obama, the whole Republican field and then Obama tried to pin this on Romney, Cruz tried this with Trump ("New York values"), or here up South Harper used it to smear Ignatieff ("he did not came back for you") - they started "birther movements". And yet, this article, and people reposting it. I can see two explanations: Clinton Derangement Syndrome or plain old baseline misogyny. Which one is it? Personally, I have my guess, as I can't imagine this sticking to Bill in his day. This is yet another case of Hillary slammed for fighting almost like - imagine it! - a political candidate in a campaign. Unacceptable!