Matt Bai Calls Trump A Bully

I don’t want to make things personal, but since I am the Phantom of the Media it is my mission to criticize the media and lay open their foolishness for the whole world to see.

That being said, if you have spent any time at all on Yahoo, you have probably come across Matt Bai articles, which are really just editorials.  Reading a Matt Bai article is almost like getting an estrogen shot, as it’s clearly the impetus behind the cloying, maudlin, emasculated diatribes.

“Dats misogynist!”

So what?

Dealing with a leftist is really as simple as that hypothetical example I just gave.  That is one reason why people like Trump, because he outs the fools for their foolishness.

Grown men should not be talking about bullying, sensitivity, and hurt feelings.  A man who cannot control his emotions is like a castle with no walls, useless, and good for nothing but taking up space.

Democrats do nothing but cry persecution and make appeals to emotion.  They have nothing substantial to say, and have long ago given up making rational, fact based, arguments for their policies.  To someone who cares about facts and logic, the emotional rhetoric is just noise.  Just like how rap and hip-hop are just noise to someone who prefers classical music, opera, and any sort of music with a regular structure that requires an above room temperature IQ to create.

Any grown man who seriously votes for the Democrats ought to be ashamed of himself in the same way that a grown man who still wears diapers should be.  Being developmentally stunted, either emotionally/mentally or physically is a point of shame, not a point of pride.

That being said, I would like to go through Matt Bai’s article about the 2015 Republican debate, where he accuses Trump of being a bully.

The full article can be found here:

Here we go…

You see, the primetime debate brought into sharp relief the actual schism that divides the Republican candidates heading into the fall. It isn’t conservative versus moderate. It isn’t simply insiders versus outsiders, or the party establishment versus the Tea Party types.

It’s about governing Republicans versus ideological provocateurs. It’s politicians who believe in wielding and reforming government as a vehicle for change on one hand, and those who see a career in public service as a mark of ineptitude, if not an outright vice, on the other.

So what?  Better to have someone in charge who thinks government does too much than too little.  Why?  Because the government already does way too much, and it’s an enormous drain on the economy.  Being independently wealthy is more of a bragging point than living off the tax payer, or should we also esteem the generational welfare moms?  Matt Bai would probably say yes to the latter.

The 10 leading candidates to this point break down roughly into equal groups, although a few of them (namely Scott Walker and Rand Paul) are hard to categorize. On the governing side you have Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, John Kasich and Chris Christie.

Those would be the cucks who are really just liberals.  These cuckservatives will maintain all of the existing leftist policies, and give into the Democrats when they want something.

The provocateurs include Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson and Ted Cruz, but the loudest, crassest voice in the pack clearly belongs to Donald Trump.

These would be the candidates who might be actual conservatives or right wing, and who are most likely to actually fix the problems.  Out of them, Trump is the one who CAN actually do something because he has no sponsors, and his personal success has demonstrated his competence in the area of managing finances, wealth generation, organization, and negotiation.

It took only a few minutes for Trump to start denigrating everybody who chooses to serve in government rather than do something truly ennobling, like build casinos and high-rises for millionaires.

This sarcasm would be witty, were it not for the fact that generating wealth requires greater intelligence than redistributing it.

“Our leaders are stupid,” Trump said in regard to immigration, after refusing to rule out an independent run and laughing off his record of misogyny. “Our politicians are stupid.” (Mexico’s leaders, he added, are considerably smarter and “more cunning.”)

Which is true, and no one on the right cares about being called misogynist.  A real man does not apologize for irrelevant things.  He shows strength and leadership, not cloying, maudlin, simpering, begging for acceptance and apologizing for what he is.  That sort of behavior is not respectable.

I mean, not entirely. Bush talked about the power of education reform, and Kasich had a nice riff about lifting up the poor through more efficient programs, and Christie pushed his plan to modernize Social Security. Each of them sounded downright Clintonian at times — as in Bill, not Hillary.

Which is why they’re cuckservatives.  How about we privatize education?  Let’s just take the government completely out of education.  We can get rid of property taxes and minimum wage in the process.  If it creates an international issue we can cut off all unskilled immigration and put tariffs on foreign goods.

But where Clinton coupled his calls for policy reform with a spirited defense of government generally, the best potential nominees in the Republican Party just stood there while Trump dismissed everyone who serves in government as a moron.

So what?  Most of them are morons.

When Kasich, who served with distinction for 18 years in Congress before winning two terms as governor of Ohio, was asked to respond specifically to Trump’s “idiot” comment, he responded with compliments.

Because if they go against him for being right they will only look like greater morons and subversives.

But let me break it to you, guys: You’re not getting Trump’s supporters. They don’t like what you stand for. They don’t like government, period.

This is the first intelligent thing Matt has said, and the only bit of intelligence in this entire article.

You’d think at least one governing Republican would have the courage to jump in and say: You know what, Trump? Governing matters. Politics matters. It helps to know something about policymaking before you go running down everyone who devotes years of their lives to it.

It’s true that most people who get themselves elected to something or who lead government agencies will never own a tower with their names on it. But that doesn’t make them stupid; it makes them committed.

Committed to what, exactly?

And, just by the way, while you were pretending to fire people on TV, a bunch of us were agonizing over hard decisions that affected millions of families devastated by a real recession. We may be stupid, but we’re not callous, and we’re not amateurs.

They weren’t agonizing over anything.  They were living off of tax payer money.  Most of these guys are just renters, with no personal stake in the survival or successful continuation of the country.

Again, generating wealth requires more skill and intelligence than redistributing.  When I was a little kid my parents experimented with giving me an allowance.  You want to know how much of that money I have today?  NONE, because as soon as I got it I immediately went to the candy store and spent it all, then I ate the candy in the same day.  That’s how most of the politicians/renters are, and they are grown men who supposedly have “experience.”  The politicians are handed all this money from the tax payers, and given permission to do pretty much whatever they want with it.  They didn’t earn any of it, or create any of the wealth it represents, and we have seen the skill by which they have handled it in both the Federal deficit and the moribund state of the economy.

Seems to me a moment like that might have done a lot to lift one of these guys out of the middling pack. It might have resonated with all those other conservative voters — the ones who nominated George W. Bush and John McCain and Mitt Romney, because in the end they aspired to something more than a doomed revolt.

Those guys are all cuckservatives, and the “revolt” is not doomed unless the game is rigged.

What voters want, too, is a nominee who won’t let himself get pushed around when his closely held values are under attack. On that score, you can give this round to the bully.

“Bully” = Real Man, in this case.  Maybe a lot of us are tired of the constant sensitivity training, lack of responsibility, and general cuckoldry that has been going on for years?

Published by:


I could be described as a libertarian monarchist with religious leanings and sympathies towards anarchy and nationalism. I have realized that a lot of my views are reactionary. Most of the time it's when I see something I don't like that I feel inspired to write. I'm basically like a badger being poked with a stick. I'm fairly ornery when poked, but I don't wish people harm provided that they don't seek to harm me either directly or indirectly. I don't at all care for the left, and I am not at all happy that they are out to destroy my way of life and undermine my freedom. But one of my goals is to spread awareness as much as I can. My Manifesto in Short.: 1. Dejure rights and positive liberty are invalid concepts. Man in his natural state is free. He is free to create what he wants, occupy and defend a territory he exists in, associate with who he wants, wear what he wants, say what he wants, follow whatever religion he wants, and essentially do whatever he pleases. Government is an artificial imposition which requires force both to come into existence and to exist. Therefore, government is not in a position to grant freedom or rights, as those already exist prior to the institution of government. Government can curtail freedoms, but it can never give them. The only fully legitimate function of government is to protect the natural rights of others from being violated by forces which they are incapable of combating, for example, protecting a farmer from the Mongol invasion. Protecting someone from having their feelings hurt is not a legitimate function, as never having hurt feelings is not a natural right. 2. Freedom of association and speech are more important than anyone's feelings. Feelings are subjective, and there is no reason why one person's feelings are any more valid than anyone else's. A law to protect one person's feelings from being hurt is certain to harm another person's, therefore, feelings cannot be a basis for law. My freedoms do not end where another person's feelings begin. 3. Democracy is a failure, and it is predicated on faulty premises. In order for Democracy to work, two criterion must be fulfilled, 1) those who tally the votes must do so honestly, and 2) those who vote must be moral and intelligent enough to make wise and proper decisions. The first premise is impossible to prove, and the second is not true of most people, therefore, Democracy is a questionable endeavor at best, and ultimately doomed to failure. In fact, under the best of circumstances Democracy is mob rule, but aside from that it also opens the door to demagoguery, tribal politics, and lobbying. 4. Communism and Islam are no less evil than Nazism. Communism has killed more people than Nazism, and in fact Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Islam has killed, and continues to kill more people than Communism and Nazism together. The only reason why communism and Islam are given a free pass is because Cultural Marxists are in charge of education, the media, and entertainment. Cultural Marxists have decided to institute communism by attacking the culture, and they have recognized Islam as something which they can use as an ally (for the time being). That is why both of those toxic ideologies get a free pass, but really they should not. Hitler worked with both Communists AND Muslims before the allies entered the war, and during the war he continued to work with Muslims. If some guy were to go around in a Nazi uniform and goose-step and Sieg hiel as he walked down the street he would never be able to get a job. His life would be over, and he might even be met with physical violence. If a white guy did it then things would be even worse. However, Muslims are able to walk down our streets wearing their terrorist clothing, their robes and hijabs, which represent thousands of years of slaughter, antisemitism, and persecution of religious and ethnic minorities (not to mention violence against women), and people just let them go. I want a complete and indefinite hiatus on Muslim immigration, and I want us to start repatriating the Muslims that are already here. 5. I utterly reject the concept of the "social contract." I did not ask to exist, nor did I have any control over what part of the world I was born in, which people group I was born into, or what other groups might happen to exist around me. Since my existence is entirely involuntary, I cannot be held responsible for the fact that I exist, nor is my existence sufficient grounds to argue that I owe something to someone else. I do not owe anyone money, goods, or services simply on the basis that I exist or that they exist. 6. Collective guild is a rubbish concept. No one can help what group they are born into, and no one is born owing anyone else anything. Debt is the result of borrowing resources on some level, and having just entered in the world one does not have the capacity to borrow, or really do anything beyond the most basic biological functions. Therefore, the notion that one baby is born owing something to another baby is absurd at best. 7. I thoroughly support Israel. I fully admit to supporting Israel for religious reasons, but if those were not in place I would still support Israel out of enlightened self-interest. Israel fulfills the real world equivalent of the function Gondor serves in Tolkien's Middle Earth. By that I mean they are close to the evil army, and draw a lot of it's attention and focus, and in doing so they protect the west. The difference is, that in Tolkien's world the west does not actively seek to import orcs and other members of the evil army, behind Gondor's back, whereas our moron leaders in real life do constantly import the evil army. Also, Jews are not a monolithic group, There are both left wing and right wing Jews. Those who are on the left are not motivated by religion to do what they do, but by the perverse Marxist ideology which they have adopted in place of their religion.

Categories UncategorizedTags , , Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s