September 22, 2016

The 85-year-old boxing promotor Don King is going to speak the way he speaks — even in front of that other Don who speaks in his own way — -ald Trump.

Don King — standing in front of Donald Trump and wearing a jacket weirder than a Hillary-Clinton jacket — said:
America needs Donald Trump. We need Donald Trump, especially black people. Because you have got to understand, my black brothers and sisters, they told me, you've got to try to emulate and imitate the white man and then you will be successful. We tried that ... I told Michael Jackson, I said, if you are poor, you are a poor Negro. I would use the n-word. But, if you are rich you're a rich Negro. If you are intelligent, intellectual, you're intellectual Negro. If you are a dancing and sliding and gliding n------, I mean Negro, you're a dancing and sliding and gliding Negro. So dare not alienate because you cannot assimilate. You know, you're going to be a Negro till you die.
I know the mainstream news focused on King's saying of the epithet that's censored in the above transcription — the epithet and the fixed grin on Trump's face in the background, but the old man was making his point, and it's a significant idea that he must have wanted people to think about. Reading it, I think it's perfectly lucid, and I even think he deliberately said the n-word and then corrected it, and he did it to criticize white people, who, he seems to think, are racist even when they show respect to an accomplished black person, such as Michael Jackson.

I saw the clip on television, and it was edited to exclude the name of King's interlocutor, so I was left wondering why he was saying "sliding and gliding." It made King sound wacky and maybe senile. But with the name Michael Jackson in there, the language all fits together, including the challenging of the audience with that word, the word he wanted white people to know is the word he uses — "I would use the n-word" he says before he actually says it — as he imagines how white people are thinking.

My link goes to a Washington Post column — sorry to throw you at the pay wall again — by the "race, gender, immigration and inequality" reporter Janell Ross. Ross seems to credit King with saying something that makes sense, though after aptly paraphrasing it, she appends: "Or, at least, that's what King may have been saying, as best we can tell." Ross proceeds to describe the predictable "outrage and umbrage expressed about King's language and his use of the n-word in a church, of all places." But she's critical of that kind of superficial coverage of racial problems:
That's race coverage around the edges — racial-epithet scandal to possible ethnic- or religious-group uproar. And, it's this coverage that overtakes or actually stands in where a more thoughtful, substantive examination of the undeniable role that race continues to play in housing, lending, employment, health care, education and every other major feature of American life should probably be....

80 comments:

PB said...

go incognito mode in Chrome and it bypasses the paywall.

ndspinelli said...

It is fascinating watching the MSM and the culture hyperventilating over Don King saying "nigger."

MayBee said...

My favorite moment was on CNN yesterday, when they had a black man (sorry, I don't remember his name) on to talk about the awfulness of Don King saying n*gger, and he said yes, it was awful, and that's why he always refers to him as Don Coon.

Clayton Hennesey said...

Once we create an absolute one to one linguistic mapping between "nigger" and "the N-word", we're only being disingenuous and coy when we use the latter. When we say the latter, we're saying the former, nothing more, nothing less, just like when we're "investigating" porn online.

Well, there may be a difference. Once we start saying "the N-word" (Because how can we stop ourselves?), we have duly registered our willingness to submit to having our language usage dictated by others.

So the bottom line ends up being very odd indeed: we're no longer saying "nigger"; instead we're saying the replacement word that means "nigger", in the process prostrating ourselves rhetorically for reasons now no longer clear.

MayBee said...

No, CNN did not spend the rest of the day discussing whether they should have aired a black man calling another black man a "coon".

David said...

Don King says something outrageous. Not exactly novel.

rhhardin said...

Good characnter would go a long way towards ending racism.

It's disparaged by the media though.

Mattman26 said...

I'm honestly trying to fathom what King's point is; that blacks should try to assimilate? Shouldn't?

Brando said...

"Once we create an absolute one to one linguistic mapping between "nigger" and "the N-word", we're only being disingenuous and coy when we use the latter. When we say the latter, we're saying the former, nothing more, nothing less, just like when we're "investigating" porn online.

Well, there may be a difference. Once we start saying "the N-word" (Because how can we stop ourselves?), we have duly registered our willingness to submit to having our language usage dictated by others.

So the bottom line ends up being very odd indeed: we're no longer saying "nigger"; instead we're saying the replacement word that means "nigger", in the process prostrating ourselves rhetorically for reasons now no longer clear."

Louis CK made this exact point--when we say "N word" all we're doing is putting the word "nigger" in someone else's head.

Look--it's not as though the word "nigger" is some special taboo, that if someone says the word in any context it's going to cause thousands of black babies to die. It's just a word--and the only reason to not use it is in context. But if the context is benign (sort of the way I'm using it here) then it's ridiculous to wince at it.

If bigots started deciding to replace "nigger" with "faucet" and in their insults hurled at blacks yelled "you damn faucet!" does that mean suddenly we're going to have a second "f word"?

Clayton Hennesey said...

(off topic) BTW, Professor Althouse, ask your colleague Glenn Reynolds how he feels about having Twitter suspend his account.

surfed said...

My inner city high school and middle school students "niggered" each other from the moment I got to work until the moment I left the classroom and turned out the lights. As in: "Hey nigga loan me a pencil" or LeCharles who wandered the halls at will would come into my class unannounced and declare to the stusents seated "You all be my nigga's" to acclaim and approval from the students. I would write referrals on usage of the "n" word until one day the House Admins office secretarty told that that the African-American woman who was the House Admin was just tearing them up and throwing them away. I gave up and just let them operate within their cultural identity zone and inured myself to a word I detested.

Brando said...

And at least the snippet of Don King quoted in Althouse's post is gibberish. If she sees something profound in it that is only because she's been master persuaded into adoring anything Trump or his fans say. If there's any meaning in what King said, it certainly isn't conveyed in those words.

rhhardin said...

At least black people aren't demanding their own pronouns yet.

GWash said...

Trump and Don King perfect together... throw in Chris Christie, David Duke and Ted Nugent and you have a full house... a measure of Trump's character (or desperation to be elected) is the company that he keeps...

traditionalguy said...

King is a bigger showman than Trump. A man like that is valuable.

rhhardin said...

I don't see any uses of "nigger" as a 50s redneck would have used it.

Today's uses all tap into the rogue sentiment, somebody putting it to The Man by going his own way, but allowing a mocking-or-not (ambiguously) connotation of stupid.

What's-his-name used it that way.

Negro is just a race, made into a landmine so that outrage can be possible.

MayBee said...

The second favorite part of my day was CNN interviewing various black pundits, most of them declaring Don King doesn't have any influence or audience in the "Black Community".

And once again I am left wondering exactly what the "Black Community" is. That would be a great debate question.

rhhardin said...

Shorpy has old photos occasionally titled by the government agency captioning them stuff like "Houses in the Negro section." The word isn't disparaging.

MayBee said...

Finally, Don Lemon on CNN going berserk that Donald Trump said the lives of black people is the worst it's been.

No! Don Lemon said. It's the *best* it's ever been. How stupid and racist Trump is to say otherwise!

Lemon then went on to say that no matter what polls say, Donald Trump is not getting even 7% of the black vote. Because he has his ear to the black community. Don Lemon talks to the black community, and nobody is voting for Trump (hello, Pauline Kael).

It was a great day on CNN.

Lucid said...

GWash - It's cute how to stuck David Duke in there. Guilt-by-Left-Wing-Fantasy-Association.

Fabi said...

David Duke - drink!

Ann Althouse said...

"I'm honestly trying to fathom what King's point is; that blacks should try to assimilate? Shouldn't?"

I don't understand why you would even ask that question. He explicitly said that it is impossible to assimilate. You can try or not try, but it doesn't matter. You're not going to get there because of something that's wrong with white people. He's talking to white people.

TreeJoe said...

Is it just me or does reading the news article show you how much these people literally tie themselves in knots trying to come up with something to complain about, something to editorialize against, even when it contradicts itself.

A black person can use the N word because he/she is black until the N word is used in the context of support of an event that is not supported by most black people, even if the specific usage of the N-word was said in an acceptable fashion intra-sentence.

I mean, seriously.

Brando said...

"Finally, Don Lemon on CNN going berserk that Donald Trump said the lives of black people is the worst it's been."

Don should tell that to the people rioting in the streets and going on as though systemic racism is crushing the entire black population of this country, from the poorest to the richest.

Which is it? Are blacks some decayed underclass, or are they a lot better off than in the recent past?

rhhardin said...

If blacks aren't going assimilate, it's because of bad character, not whites.

Bad character is praised today in blacks. So why would anything different happen than being unassimilated.

Idiots.

rhhardin said...

Back before affirmative action, the blacks I went to school with and worked with got their on their own merits. They assimilated fine.

There were no grievance studies back then.

Wilbur said...

"Trump and Don King perfect together... throw in Chris Christie, David Duke and Ted Nugent and you have a full house... a measure of Trump's character (or desperation to be elected) is the company that he keeps... "

Shall we conduct the litany of the despicable company on Hillary's side of the ledger?

Really, is that the best you can do? I'd be embarrassed.

320Busdriver said...

Thanks Obama!

Chuck said...

Isn't the basic reason, that Don Trump and Don King both speak in such vague/sloppy/indeterminate terms, is because they both aren't really thinking clearly? They are men who know what they want, but in their working lives as celebrity figureheads they don't really have to deal with hard questions. They sort of know what they want, but have never had to deal with opposing views. They so rarely have to deal with hard debates. It's showbiz for them, presenting some sort of personal unified worldview to select audiences who mostly adore them. So they know what they think, and therefore what they want to say, but it has pretty much never been measured against an opposition. Or even reality.

I feel certain that you, Professor Althouse, are still on the trail of the MSM misrepresenting Trump. Why don't you face the fact that Trump is habitually bad in supplying clear speech and clear meanings?

Bad Lieutenant said...

habitually bad in supplying clear speech and clear meanings

Like "what the definition of is is?"

If that's clarity I want vanilla.

You can't get around the fact that you are a lawyer, think like a lawyer, and for you there is nothing else. In AD&D you would be lawful neutral if not lawful evil.

The Cracker Emcee said...

" Why don't you face the fact that Trump is habitually bad in supplying clear speech and clear meanings?"

Versus habitually lying your ass off for 40 years? Oh, dear.

Brando said...

"Back before affirmative action, the blacks I went to school with and worked with got their on their own merits. They assimilated fine."

Plenty of blacks still do assimilate fine. This separatist/grievance nonsense sounds good for the screaming activists, but the average Joe is just trying to make a living like everyone else.

Mattman26 said...

Thanks for the slap down, Ann. Guess I must have needed that and just not realized it.

Chuck said...

When have I ever defended anyone named Clinton?

You guys are so upset with me, for not parsing Clinton; when in fact she doesn't even interest me because I am not supporting her and I will never support her. You falsely attack me as her supporter, no matter how many times and how effectively I deny it. You want me to be her supporter, to diminish me among independents who might be attracted to Trump, who is regularly the target of my criticism. It's all about Mr. Trump.

Althouse doesn't waste much more bandwidth than I do, parsing the Clinton lies about her server, etc. But you don't demand the same of her, because she (inexplicably) doesn't criticize Trump like I do.

Bob Boyd said...

Janell Ross is doing the same thing she's complaining about. You can't fully understand Don King's point from this snippet, you can only infer one. They should link to a full transcript so readers can get more context. I couldn't find one.

Here's some other stuff King said:

"What I'm trying to say to you is that the white women, and I put it in these kind of (words) so you understand what I'm saying, the white woman and the slave, the people of color," King said. "When the system was created, they did not get heard. The first will be last and the last will be first."

"The white woman did not have the rights, and she still don't have the rights," King said. "And people of color don't have their rights — those are the left outs.”

"So that's why when I see them try to ridicule him or to try to ostracize … I want you to understand, every white woman should cast their vote for Donald Trump," he said. "Not for Donald Trump the man, but to knock out the system … to get their rights."

"And I'm appealing to all the blacks because (their) vote is given away cavalierly, lackadaisically, with no redeeming factor, and they're playing the vote by party that you got to vote this way," he said.



dbp said...

Two things:

""Once we create an absolute one to one linguistic mapping between "nigger" and "the N-word", we're only being disingenuous and coy when we use the latter. When we say the latter, we're saying the former, nothing more, nothing less, just like when we're "investigating" porn online."

I disagree: It is one thing to say Don King used the N-word and an entirely different thing to say Don King is an N-word.

As for Don King's message--I think it is mostly aimed at black people. I think what he is saying is that whites will never see you as anything but black, but they will also see you as a rich black, a poor black, a famous black, an accomplished black, etc. Don't waste your time on assimilation, spend it where you can benefit: Be rich, accomplished, famous etc.

Hagar said...

Talking about "the n-word" is "virtue signaling."

Owen said...

I get what Don King means. I disagree with its absolute assertion but he was being rhetorical.

What makes what he says mostly true is the action of the Outrage Industry. It takes disparity of any kind, and if it can't find any it manufactures some to suit. Then it produces outrage. This benefits the producers who get publicity and power as they "explain the problem" and "work to overcome it." The outrage also produces an abundant supply of guilt, freely dispensed to neurotics and virtue-signalers.

Don King's use of "nigger" was just the spark needed to fire up the Outrage Machine. It will keep chugging for days on that.

Brando said...

"Talking about "the n-word" is "virtue signaling."

Nah--saying "African American" or "people of color" is virtue signaling. Saying "the n-word" is just stupid. Everyone knows what word you mean, and saying it three times doesn't summon Black Beetlejuice! Just say the word you're talking about!

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Ross proceeds to describe the predictable "outrage and umbrage expressed about King's language and his use of the n-word in a church, of all places.

Apparently the people she is criticizing have never been in a black church, or talked to a black person.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Or heard of Don King.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I'm honestly trying to fathom what King's point is; that blacks should try to assimilate? Shouldn't?

He's saying its impossible. What he is saying is not exactly a new concept.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Don King's use of "nigger" was just the spark needed to fire up the Outrage Machine. It will keep chugging for days on that.

Which is why he used it. Otherwise nobody would know that Don King had endorsed Trump. Now its all over the news and airwaves. The MSM, who are profoundly out of touch if they think anyone in flyover country is going to care about Don King, of all people, using the N-word, took his bait. Don King's shtick is to say and do outrageous things so he can get noticed by the press. Apparently these outraged people don't follow boxing either.

Birkel said...

... said Chuck, the Hillary Clinton supporter.

Chuck said...

Bad Liutenant: Interesting idea, your citation of Bill Clinton's evasive video deposition testimony in the Paula Jones case.

But that only leads us right back to the dozens of Trump depositions in his libel case, the Trump U cases, etc., etc. Of the ones that can be viewed on the 'net, they are almost all laughable disasters.

Chuck said...

Birkel said...
... said Chuck, the Hillary Clinton supporter.


That's just spam by now. I'd ban you, if it were my blog and if you persisted.

Birkel said...

...said Chuck, the Hillary and Bill Clinton supporter.

Birkel said...

Yes, Chuck. I suppose you, like many others on the Left, would ban me.

I guess it's a good thing I'm not on Twitter.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck, what do you pretend to be trying to accomplish?

You are objectively pro-Hillary like the America Firsters in 1940 were objectively pro-Fascist.

Sebastian said...

"He explicitly said that it is impossible to assimilate. You can try or not try, but it doesn't matter. You're not going to get there because of something that's wrong with white people." Which is itself, of course, an outrageous form of racism. Not that it matters, or that any black man spouting off about whites would ever be held accountable. But let's assume he's right. Next step for whites: you wanna play the tribal game? let's play the tribal game. Forget all the integration BS, everyone for himself. No more redistribution for you, no more affirmative action, no more Medicaid and housing subsidies and school lunches. Y'all are on your own. Of course, we aren't there, yet. I hope we don't get there. It would be ugly. But the race baiters make it harder to stay on the sensible path.

holdfast said...

King has always struck me as a bit of a buffoon and a scam-artist, but you have to give him credit as a trail-blazer. When he started out, he was pretty much one of a kind as a powerful black fight promoter.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Sorry, the "it's a church!" stuff went out the window when we were assured that Rev. "God Damn America!" Wright was firmly within the valid, respectable, and praiseworthy black liberation theology tradition.
You can stick your "ooh, but it's a church, how dare they, what about the dignity of a house of worship?!" right up your asses.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Clayton Hennesey said...
Once we create an absolute one to one linguistic mapping between "nigger" and "the N-word", we're only being disingenuous and coy when we use the latter. When we say the latter, we're saying the former, nothing more, nothing less, just like when we're "investigating" porn online.

Well, there may be a difference. Once we start saying "the N-word" (Because how can we stop ourselves?), we have duly registered our willingness to submit to having our language usage dictated by others.


Louis CK has a pretty good bit on this exact idea--that it's actually worse to say "the n-word" as the newstalkers do because it accomplished exactly what saying the word would do (namely putting the word & idea in someone else's mind) without actually saying the word and having to take responsibility for doing that.
Anyway he expresses that in a funny way; worth a Google search to find it.

Ann Althouse said...

"Thanks for the slap down, Ann. Guess I must have needed that and just not realized it."

Thanks for thanking me.

Chuck said...

Bad Lieutenant said...
Chuck, what do you pretend to be trying to accomplish?

You are objectively pro-Hillary like the America Firsters in 1940 were objectively pro-Fascist.


You say "America First" like it was a bad thing:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Kbqzn8VZd2I/hqdefault.jpg

n.n said...

Class diversity is a progressive process and condition.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Yeah yeah. Hitler loved dogs. I don't even have to follow your link.

You are objectively pro-Hillary. If you're not a registered Democrat, you should be. If you are a Republican, you are sailing under false colors. You are betraying your party and, much more importantly, your country.

Happily, everyone here knows it.

Birkel said...

Chuck said:
You are objectively pro-Hillary like the America Firsters in 1940 were objectively pro-Fascist.
You say "America First" like it was a bad thing..."


What he said, Chuck, was that the America Firsters of 1940 were pro-fascist. You Hillary supporters really are a slow breed, aren't you.

HINT: Donald Trump was born in 1946.

Given your support for Hillary Clinton, and more expansive government thereby, it is odd that you reject the fascist label.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Chuck said...I feel certain that you, Professor Althouse, are still on the trail of the MSM misrepresenting Trump. Why don't you face the fact that Trump is habitually bad in supplying clear speech and clear meanings?

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive, Chuck. Trump is an unclear speaker (perhaps by design, perhaps because it's the best he can do) AND the MSM misrepresents Trump in biased ways. You present these two things as though they're exclusive, but that's fallacious--both can be true, and both ARE true. Professor Althouse "facing" one fact says absolutely nothing about the other fact, Chuck.

Chuck said...

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive, Chuck. Trump is an unclear speaker (perhaps by design, perhaps because it's the best he can do) AND the MSM misrepresents Trump in biased ways.


This is true!

In an exchange about being clear, let me be clear:

Trump is an unclear speaker. I think it is sometimes by design (i.e., his tax returns) and sometimes it is because he just doesn't know enough to be specific (i.e., notable Supreme Court decisions) and sometimes it is because it is his style (look at years and years of his interviews) to be unclear. A lifetime of being questioned about stupid stuff you've said previously will do that to you.

And, it is also true that Trump is the subject of media bias the likes of which we may never have witnessed in modern history.

I am not the boss of Althouse. As she knows, I am one of her most ardent fans; generally and specifically on the subject of her Fisking the NYT and the New Yorker and the media in general. Still, I don't tell her what to do.

But it only requires intelligence and a critical mind (possessed in abundance by Althouse) to find important issues on which to criticized Trump.

Turning all of this around on you; it should not be mutually exclusive, for Althouse to entertain a fascination with Trump's messaging, or the anti-Trump media bias, and to also entertain the deserving Trump criticism.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck,

Why don't you "entertain the deserving Trump criticism" after the election?

Brando said...

"But it only requires intelligence and a critical mind (possessed in abundance by Althouse) to find important issues on which to criticized Trump."

Well, if Althouse has been critical of Trump in the past few months, I must have missed it. I anticipate her upcoming post "How Trump Won Me Over" which will have plenty of references to Scott Adams.

Chuck said...

No, Brando, that is my point. A curious near-complete absence of Trump criticism on Althouse. What is the term? "Cruel neutrality"?

Chuck said...

Bad Lieutenant said...
Chuck,
Why don't you "entertain the deserving Trump criticism" after the election?


I'm just not a team player, am I? Well not Team Trump, anyway.

mockturtle said...

Sebastian proposed: Forget all the integration BS, everyone for himself. No more redistribution for you, no more affirmative action, no more Medicaid and housing subsidies and school lunches. Y'all are on your own.

Whites have, for several decades now, been bending over backward to appease the demands of the black community. Or, more correctly, the demands of the Progressive Liberal establishment that wants to keep the race card up its sleeve to play for political advantage whenever they want. Only until [or unless] we are truly color blind to race will these problems be resolved.

Brando said...

"No, Brando, that is my point. A curious near-complete absence of Trump criticism on Althouse. What is the term? "Cruel neutrality"?"

Yeah, I'm not sure why she puts up a pretense of being neutral here--she fell for Obama's swooping rhetoric eight years ago, and clearly has learned nothing from having been burned on one cipher of a celebrity candidate. She's now bought into this one hook, line and sinker.

I don't care too much about that--she's not curating comments to keep out Trump criticism, and her Hillary criticism is very welcome. And ultimately, none of this matters this year--the next four years will be a march of the same in this country.

Brando said...

"Or, more correctly, the demands of the Progressive Liberal establishment that wants to keep the race card up its sleeve to play for political advantage whenever they want. "

That's just it. My evidence is anecdotal, but the black people I work with and associate with tend to not overly focus on race, and have the same struggles everyone else has. Replacing economic struggles (which are very real, and widespread) with racial struggles (which exist, but at a far smaller level than the racialist left would have you believe) is a mistake and a distraction. Most people aren't marching and blocking traffic--they have too much else to do.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck said...
Bad Lieutenant said...
Chuck,
Why don't you "entertain the deserving Trump criticism" after the election?


I'm just not a team player, am I? Well not Team Trump, anyway.

9/22/16, 2:26 PM


SUCH a team player for Team GOP, though! But Team Trump is Team GOP now.

Fact. Horrible horrible fact.

So, taking you at your word, through your lack of spannugsbogen (the capacity for delayed gratification), you work to defeat yourself through childish tantrums. Literally like a spoiled child.

Nice. And people pay you for counsel?

Bad Lieutenant said...

You know what it is you're doing, Chuck?

You're squirming.

Chuck said...

Team Trump is Team GOP now.

Not according to a great many Trumpsters. Who want to destroy "the GOPe."

I'm not squirming. I'm waiting for Trump to sell me on why he should get my vote. Every voter should do that; be sold on who to vote for. Normally, it is a no-brainer, to sell me on a Republican candidate. Not this time.

I expect that Trump won you over quite some time ago, on the basis that Trump would blow up much of the establishment GOP.

So you see how that works?

Birkel said...

...said Chuck, the Hillary Clinton supporter.

FullMoon said...

Chuck,
As one who delights in pulling your chain upon occasion, I feel it only fair to acknowledge you have braved incoming , some pretty good, some kind of lame, with civility and decorum today. No vulgarity, name calling, or threats of violence (yet). New meds? I'm kidding, I'm kidding!

Bad Lieutenant said...

on the basis

That Trump was the only candidate who could defeat Hillary Clinton.

Electability, Chuck. End of story. Don't confuse me with others, although they may have valid points. I decided that no one else stood a chance against her.

Oh, I also think that he could do well in office, and his wilder flights if any could be managed, but anyone not named Clinton is who I will crawl over broken glass to vote for.

I didn't tell GOPe to become his enemy.

Clintons delenda est. That's all the reason I need, and the only reason that I am mad at you really. Before the primaries this was all fun and games, but now the die is cast and you need to grow the fuck up.

If Kucinich or Cruz cost Trump one vote then for all I care they can die in a fire. Rubio is smarter than they, he understands. Perry understands. Christie understands. I have a large reservoir of goodwill towards the Bush family, but they don't seem to understand.

If Hillary Clinton becomes the President them the America I know is dead. Nothing else matters to me.

Bad Lieutenant said...

If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. Winston Churchill

Birkel said...

FullMoon:

Chuck has cursed himself blue on many an occasion. He is not conservative in that regard.

tim in vermont said...

Chuck will grant you that the FEC is infested with liberal activist who take unreasonable actions based on questionable grounds. As we saw with CU, the only check on them has been the Supreme Court.

He will grant you that the IRS is infested with liberal activists who are happy to rewrite the tax laws to the Democrats' advantage by modifying regulations.

He will even grant you that the Justice Dept and the FBI are now corrupted.

Still he is happy to have Hillary appoint the next several Justices, who will cement in the power of this cancer on the state by removing the one remaining check on them.

But it is more important to defeat Trump than to maintain at least that bulwark against this deep rot and corruption by defeating Hillary.

It just makes me think he doesn't really mean it when he assures us he is not for Hillary. What exactly is the other choice with a realistic shot he is working for?

Birkel said...

tim in vermont:

Chuck is working on an appealing platform of "fuck you, plebe."

Chuck said...

Still he is happy to have Hillary appoint the next several Justices, who will cement in the power of this cancer on the state by removing the one remaining check on them.

You miserable, worthless, lying sack of shit.

It's one thing to argue with me. It is quite another to try to put words -- words that I do not believe and would never write -- in my mouth. When I have written time and time again that the main reason that Trump is the lesser of two evils is the issue of Article III judicial nominations.

I don't know why I give you the time of day, you fuckhead.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Jesus, does Ted Cruz read Althouse? I think he heard me! Good man.

Bad Lieutenant said...

As for you, Buck Buck Chuck, you've already said that your first priority, your chief aim, is to defeat or was it destroy Trump and all his supporters people.

Therefore, objectively, you support Hillary. I know you don't seem to understand so I'm happy to explain it to you over and over again.

S*** or get off the pot, "Michigan election lawyer lifetime Republican."