Election 2016

Phonies Dominate Presidential Race

Don't hurl yet, you've got more than a year of this left.

|

"One of the biggest reasons I left Elkton Hills was because I was surrounded by phonies. That's all. It was the phoniest conversation you ever heard in your life… I was all set to puke when it was time to go sit down again. I really was."

– The Catcher in the Rye

Speaking in Northern Virginia just after the Supreme Court ruled for gay marriage, Hillary Clinton seemed deeply disappointed in her Republican rivals, and the GOP generally, which she labeled the party of the past. "They all decried the Supreme Court's ruling," she said. "We even heard them call for a constitutional amendment" to overturn it.

Wow! Those Republicans have some nerve, don't they? What kind of reactionary extremist wants a constitutional amendment to overturn a Supreme Court decision?

Well — Hillary Clinton, for one. Apparently she is still seething over the court's ruling in Citizens United. "We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccounted money out of it once and for all," she said a couple of months ago, "even if that takes a constitutional amendment."

At least the Republicans who were talking about a constitutional amendment to overturn the gay-rights ruling can claim they were speaking in the heat of an emotional moment. Clinton has had five years since Citizens United to "move on," as she instructed Republicans to do.

She's had even more time to get over the high court's rulings on gun rights. It's been seven years since the Supremes correctly read the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right to arms. Yet in her remarks in Fairfax, she called for "common sense" gun control. A few days before that, she declared: "The president is right — the politics on this issue have been poison. But we can't give up. The stakes are too high, the costs are too dear, and I am not and will not be afraid to keep fighting."

Fair enough. But then why should Republicans who feel just as strongly about gay marriage, or the Affordable Care Act, just lie down and quit?

Republicans can be phonies, too — no doubt about that. When he started running for president, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal promptly flipped from supporting Common Core educational standards to opposing them. So did Chris Christie. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has changed his tune on immigration. Rand Paul, who once wanted a Pentagon small enough to drown in the bathtub, now wants to jack up defense spending.

And a special place in the Phonies Hall of Fame must be reserved for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. He opposed arming Syrian rebels or bombing the Syrian regime, which he said would turn the U.S. into "al-Qaida's air force." And then, months later, he blasted the White House for following his own advice: "President Obama announced his now infamous red line in Syria and then did nothing," he proclaimed, which "gave the green light to aggressive or oppressive regimes across the globe that America is not to be feared."

The phoniness of American politics has become so entrenched that people expect it as a matter of course. It's common to read news stories analyzing how candidates will tack hard to the left or right during a primary, and then swerve back toward the political center for the general election. It's so common, in fact, that Jeb Bush has spoken openly about trying a different strategy: He will "lose the primary to win the general."

Little wonder that the public is cynical. Little wonder people are turning out in droves when Bernie Sanders appears. "People are used to candidates who are calculated, produced and measured," one Sanders supporter told The Washington Post recently. "Bernie's different." Said another, "My impression [of Hillary Clinton] is she'll say whatever she needs to say at the moment." Sanders might not beat Hillary in the primaries, but he already has thrashed her in the authenticity sweepstakes.

Which is a mixed blessing, admittedly. Brutal honesty usually has an inverse relationship with winnability. Just ask Walter Mondale, who in 1984 told the public, "Let's tell the truth… Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did." Reagan won 49 states that year. For his part, Jimmy Carter was a pretty sincere fellow. Fat lot of good it did the country.

And authenticity has its drawbacks. It's a defining characteristic of history's greatest monsters, for one thing: Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot — nobody ever would have accused them of insincerity or ironic detachment. Then again:  Nobody would have accused George Washington, Mother Teresa, Winston Churchill or Nelson Mandela of insincerity or ironic detachment, either. A late-night comic never sent anyone to a concentration camp — or liberated one, either.

Granted, it's a trifle naive to ask for authenticity from most presidential candidates. You might as well ask a school of hungry piranha to show a little self-restraint. Still, if recent history offers any clue of what is to come for the next 18 months, it's a safe bet Holden Caulfield won't be the only one who wants to throw up.

This column originally appeared in the Richmond-Times Dispatch.

NEXT: Fix the Sex Offender Registry: This 19-Year-Old Is Not a Threat to Children

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Reading this article is 2 minutes of my life I will never get back.

    1. +1 minute for writing your comment

    2. Reading your comment is 2 seconds of myife I will cherish, as I love inanity.

  2. Wow! Those Republicans have some nerve, don’t they? What kind of reactionary extremist wants a constitutional amendment to overturn a Supreme Court decision?

    Well ? Hillary Clinton, for one.

    Principals, not principles.

    1. Although in fairness, it’s actually the First Amendment she wants to overturn.

      1. C’mon, she wants to turn over a lot more amendments than the first.

        1. Well, she’ll start with the First and continue on from there.

      2. And a special place in the Phonies Hall of Fame must be reserved for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. He opposed arming Syrian rebels or bombing the Syrian regime, which he said would turn the U.S. into “al-Qaida’s air force.” And then, months later, he blasted the White House for following his own advice: “President Obama announced his now infamous red line in Syria and then did nothing,” he proclaimed, which “gave the green light to aggressive or oppressive regimes across the globe that America is not to be feared.”

        No fan of Cruz, but in fairness, it’s one thing to say nothing and do nothing, and quite a different thing to “draw red line in the sand” threaten reprisals, and THEN do nothing. Leaving the bluster and threats unsaid gives one more leverage – because if there’s a chance you might not follow through, specific threats not followed undermine your credibility. However, saying nothing – and then doing anything or nothing, doesn’t have the same effect.

  3. “And authenticity has its drawbacks. It’s a defining characteristic of history’s greatest monsters, for one thing: Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot….”

    You know who else… oh, nevermind.

    1. Antiques Roadshow?

    2. Pawn Stars?

    3. The Biggest Loser?

    4. Momma’s Ragu?

  4. Shorter:

    Politicians are hypocritical, mendacious twunts – water is wet.

    … but I DO wish some of these jackholes would publicly justify their hypocrisy.. it might be good for a chuckle.

  5. All the phony people, where do they all come from?

    1. Well it appears we’ve found where they all belong.

      1. Does it start with a W and end with a R?

          1. Damnit, you got that too easy!

        1. Worcester?

    2. Would we all be phony too if we were them?

  6. It used to annoy me that campaign coverage in the media seems to mostly consist of “how will this affect the poll numbers?” in reporting whatever a candidate does or says rather than examining the issue in terms of “is this a good thing or a bad thing?”. But more and more I think the media has it right – the candidates don’t do or say anything because they believe it’s a good thing but only because they think that’s what will boost their poll numbers. “Standing for election” used to mean standing before the electorate and saying “here’s what I believe and if you believe this, too, you should vote for me” . “Standing for election” now seems to be “What do I stand for? I stand for getting elected”. Whatever else they may say, the number one issue in any campaign is getting elected. So why bother reporting on how a candidate’s opinions on Iran or the economy or Obamacare or gay marriage or any other issue may affect the electorate or whether it’s a good or bad thing when all of that is of secondary importance anyways? Nobody cares – even (or especially) the candidate – when a candidate says “Vote for me and I’ll double defense spending” whether or not doubling defense spending is in and of itself a good or bad idea. It’s a good idea if it gets the candidate more votes and a bad idea if it doesn’t.

    1. Exactly, and while in office, the goal is usually to avoid being held accountable for anything, lest that come back to haunt them in an election. They’re all cowards and the electorate encourages it.

      1. the goal is usually to avoid being held accountable for anything

        While stealing as much money from the public as possible.

    2. It used to annoy me that campaign coverage in the media seems to mostly consist of “how will this affect the poll numbers?” in reporting whatever a candidate does or says rather than examining the issue in terms of “is this a good thing or a bad thing?”.

      With all due respect, why would you ever rely on what a Journalism major has to say about whether something is good or bad? Consistently, they’ve shown themselves to have so little knowledge of any topic other than journalism (and even there, it’s debatable) that they not only can’t identify what is the good or bad thing, but lack even the ability to assess even the criteria for identifying good or bad.

      1. Consistently, they’ve shown themselves to have so little knowledge of any topic other than journalism (and even there, it’s debatable) that they not only can’t identify what is the good or bad thing, but lack even the ability to assess even the criteria for identifying good or bad.

        You attribute to ignorance what I attribute to malice. Otherwise, you have made a great point.

        1. You attribute to ignorance what I attribute to malice.

          Why can’t it be both?

          1. It certainly can… however, the mafia don didn’t become don by being an idiot. He got there by being evil.

            Perhaps that’s just the cynic in me.

    3. And don’t forget money. According to the media and the candidate, whoever spends the most money should win. So there is a need to report on the amount of money spent so people will know who to vote for.

    4. Oh god. It’s METAPOLITICS.

  7. Please keep in mind that Hillary was also opposed to gay marriage, possibly as recently as two years ago.

    1. Also, contra the article, I would be happy to question Josef Stalin’s sincerity. He did a whole lot of lying to keep the regime together.

    2. When Republicans do that it’s called ‘hypocrisy’, when Democrats do it, it’s called ‘evolving’.

      1. Unless you’re a Republican, in which case when Democrats do it it’s called “hypocrisy” and when Republicans do it it’s called “evolving.”

  8. The alt-text should be ‘most flattering fashion look for Hillary’

    1. If the picture looked like this.

  9. Since I couldn’t possibly care less about any of these people….what ski resorts do y’all recommend in Colorado? Needs to have a lot of green trails. Needs to be fairly accessible from Denver, so no Telluride. Not too expensive, more family- and old folks oriented, as we’re not real big apres ski/party people. Should have a selection of ski-in/ski-out accommodations or weekly locker rentals with excellent shuttle services. A retail establishment or two of a certain type wouldn’t be bad, either, knowudimean?

    1. Breckenridge has the greens for you, and it has been snowing quite well there in recent years. It is very apres-oriented, but that can be avoided I suppose. I suspect it’s pricey, but I have a season pass.

      Keystone also has plenty of greens, but it never snows there for some reason, and it’s only a few miles from Breck and A-Basin. I think you can ski Breck and Keystone on the same pass, so there’s some variety there. Apres at Keystone is very low-key. There are retail outlets and such in nearby Silverthorne.

      Winter Park/Mary Jane is awesome, and they get good snow. I really don’t know what their green trail inventory is like, as I’m usually bumping at the Jane, and they have a lot of expert stuff. It is more local/family than Summit County.

      Steamboat gets fantastic snow, and there are greens around since it’s not a very steep mountain, but it is a little away from Denver at about 3 hrs. away.

      Vail. Huge. Varied terrain. Plenty of retail. Bring your wallet (along with someone else’s).

      My brother and his family enjoyed Monarch, and they intermediate skiers, but it’s off the beaten path and there’s no base lodging. Very, very local.

      1. I’ve been hemming and hawing between Breck, Beaver Creek/Vail, and Copper.

        I’m not looking for a variety of retail, just one particular type of retail establish, which I am unwilling to say out loud on this government computer. Though I suppose I could take care of that in Denver and bring it up to the mountain.

        1. Breck has one at the edge of town.

        2. Ah, Woodchipper Resorts. If you are new to Chippin'(this is what the forest bums call it), they start you out on a small single hp chipper and twigs to build up your Chippin’ basics. Once you feel comfortable with the twigs, you move up to the medium sized chippers and branches an inch or two in diameter. YOU DON’T NEED TO GO BIGGER THAN THIS TO HAVE FUN! Trust me when I say a 6′-long, 2″-diam branch gives me a thrill up my leg when the chipper grabs a hold and just shreads that branch to pieces. They’ll tell you that gloves are optional, but if you are chippin’ any evergreens, you’ll want the gloves. The sap can get everywhere.

          Let us know how it goes.

      2. I liked brekenridge a lot was not impressed with keystone, could have also been the lack of snow their. Vail is great if you have powder, enjoy open back bowl skiing and can put up with rude foreigners who pretend to not speak english in order to cut you in line.

        1. *there, and the last part about Vail was purely antecedal and should not prevent you from skiing the immensely awesome back bowls.

          1. I can say “Fuck you” in a variety of languages.

            1. Dust off your italian.

          2. I ski Vail quite a bit. This is not anecdotal, but rather known fact. Certain folks pretend not to know that the lift lines alternate.

            1. We ski exclusively during non-holiday weekdays. There shouldn’t be too much in the way of lift lines at any of the resorts, yes?

              1. You’ll be fine.

      3. Loved steamboat as well.

    2. Copper is fantastic. Decently priced and fun.

      1. Oh yeah, Copper. Duh. I second Idle Hands’ comment. Good snow, good mountain layout, plenty of slopeside accommodations.

        1. Yeah, I keep coming back to Copper again and again. The only issue I really have is I prefer a hotel, and my dad prefers a condo. Now that he’s getting hitched, he and his wife can stay in a condo together, but I still want my hotel. Looks like Copper has hotel-style rooms, but no actual hotels, which I suppose I could live with. I just like to get room service once, ya know?

          1. (coming back meaning, in my research – I’ve never skied in CO anywhere before)

            1. Let me know your questions as you move forward, as I’ve been skiing these here mountains for close to 30 years.

              1. Awesome – B.P. – thanks! I’m hoping you all have better snow that Park City has had for the last 2 years. I grew up skiing in Vermont, and didn’t see much difference in PC, other than the length of the trails. This past winter we literally skied in slush, just like Vermont in late March (except it was early February).

                1. It was warm in Jan./Feb. all over the intermountain west, but Utah has had it a little rough the last couple of seasons. They usually get way more snow than us (Colorado). When it was snow feet per day in the NE, it was 75 degrees in Denver.

                  1. All I ask is for temps below 30 and a few inches of snow at least once during my week there. Obviously, Vermont is a crap shoot, especially when you have to plan a couple months in advance. I wasn’t expecting such shitty conditions out West, however.

                    I hear the San Juans got hammered with snow this year, especially late season.

                    1. It was a weird season (global weirding!). We had more snow in May in the mountains than March, which is typically the snowiest month.

              2. Raping mother gaia for 30 years! And probably high on dope while doing it! Guilty! Off to the gulags with this one!

            2. You closet Rethuglican elitists are raping mama Gaia with your damn skiing! Those ski resorts should be turned into nature preserves for the endangered white snow bunny… or owl, or something endangered…

      2. The other things I like about Copper and Beaver Creek are the top-to-bottom greens. They don’t just stick you with the lower mountain.

    3. This is my ideal skiing, BTW. I like cruisers, where I can get into a trance-like state and enjoy the scenery.

      1. Nice corduroy. Beaver Creek prides itself on grooming, according to its advertising. You’ll get this sort of stuff at BC/Vail, Breck, or Copper. Vail, Breck, and Copper get crowded, but there are ways to mitigate that.

      2. All this talk of ski resorts is not helping our narrative that we aren’t all child-slaving billionaires who enjoy centuries-old cognac in diamond glasses while sitting on a throne made from the bones of “the poor”.

        Speaking of which, is anybody aware that the symbol of our white, rich, privileged libertarianism has been appropriated:

  10. Also, I just got an email from our corporate HQ saying “After much anticipation, here is the quarter’s employee newsletter”.

    Anticipation – I do not think that means what they think that means.

    1. “We’ve anticipated foisting this turd on y’all for weeks now”

    2. It’s like when a company forces employees to attend an event and then brag about how overwhelmingly popular the bullshit event was.

      1. “I want to thank everyone for showing up.”

  11. Good call leading with the Catcher in the Rye quote to warn people off of reading this column.

  12. The phoniness of politicians plays an important role in the political system – namely, we’re constantly being reminded that they’re all narcissistic power-mongers and manipulative liars.

    And then every once in a while, we also get a clown like Joe Biden whose weird antics and incoherent ramblings provide us pure entertainment and joy. The clowns serve an even more important purpose, as they make politics so much less majestic and serious. We laugh at them instead of asking them to fix everything.

    1. Uncle Joe just may be the best POTUS ever. No one will take him seriously and we can all laugh at his clownish antics every day.

  13. If I ever ran for office, I’d just run on whatever I thought needed to be done and ignore polls, marketing advice, whatever. If they like me, fine. If not, also fine. I can see playing some of the game, like dressing the part and doing some talking points in order to speak coherently when answering questions, but that’s about it.

    1. ProL for POTUS!

      Don’t forget about that cushy bullshit staff job for Hyperion.

      1. I want my appointment to the national board of directors (formerly known as the supreme court)

        1. The national board of congressional and presidential fuck up apologists and protectorate.

      2. Well, there’s a job burning most EOs.

    2. Read this recently:

      Calvin Coolidge:

      After the conventions and the death of his younger son Calvin, Coolidge became withdrawn; he later said that “when he died, the power and glory of the Presidency went with him.”In spite of mourning, Coolidge ran his standard campaign; he never maligned his opponents (or even mentioned them by name) and delivered speeches on his theory of government, including several that were broadcast over radio. It was easily the most subdued campaign since 1896, partly because of the grief, but also because Coolidge’s style was naturally non-confrontational. The other candidates campaigned in a more modern fashion, but despite the split in the Republican party, the results were very similar to those of 1920. Coolidge and Dawes won every state outside the South except for Wisconsin, La Follette’s home state. Coolidge had a popular vote majority of 2.5 million over his opponents’ combined total.

    3. I like to imagine the same, but then I remember how much of the process is meet-and-greets and actual interaction with voters, and how stupid and petty a lot of people can be. How do you respond when some Iowan voter asks you a nebulous question about bringing faith back into the country or solving poverty or instilling moral values or some shit? Do you give them your best attempt at an honest answer, even if it’s one that’s sure to disappoint them or turn them against you? “That other candidate was a nice man who didn’t talk down to me, so I’ll vote for him.” Or do you pander?

      Maybe if you’re Donald Trump and you can just step up to a national stage on your name or wealth alone, such a strategy could work. But those few times I’ve imagined what it would take to get into elected office, especially for president, I don’t see how you do it successfully with ‘honesty’ and ‘integrity.’

      1. How do you respond when some Iowan voter asks you a nebulous question about bringing faith back into the country or solving poverty or instilling moral values or some shit?

        The good ol’ gotcha question. Here’s the let them down easy response: “I don’t think that one man alone can accomplish change on that front. This is a task that every American must come together to support through their families, their churches, and their local communities. I’ll do my part by getting the government out of the way so that hard-working Americans like you can see the fruits of your labor. Let me get the red tape out of the way so that America can thrive again through you and the people like you that I’ve met in [insert other cities around the country]. Keep up the good fight, buddy!”

          1. Endeavor to persevere. We thought a long time about what that meant. And after we had thought a while, we bought wood-chippers.

        1. Good answer. I’d have probably gone with:

          “If you can point out to me which provision of the Constitution empowers the President to apply the full weight of the national government toward solving that problem, I will be happy to consider doing so.”

    4. I can see playing some of the game, like dressing the part and doing some talking points in order to speak coherently when answering questions, but that’s about it.

      This. There’s a distance between portraying yourself as a lunatic by ranting and raving *cough*RonPaul*cough* and being a slick politician like Willy “define is” Clinton. I think people would respond well to somebody who is polished but still holds to certain principles.

    5. “Let’s get this guy nominated, stat!”

      Libertarian Party National Committee

    6. Not when you get that first taste of POWER!!!

  14. Bernie Sanders 2016!

    Because Wall St. Bankers something something need to pay. Paid vacations and educations for everyone something something friendship.

    1. And less choice in shoes! Yep, ol Bernie done got the wiminz vote all locked up.

      1. You take a way the shoes, you give free contraceptive pills.

        Its a give and take kind of thing to be progressive.

        Lolbertarians wouldn’t understand my superior progressive intellect. The university taught me all of my critical thinking skills.

    2. or as I overheard a college kiddo say: “He’s so progressive! I love him so much!”

      1. How do you define the word progressive? How did this kid define the word progressive?

        Is there any politically-related word that doesn’t have two completely opposing definitions depending on whether one agrees or disagrees with it? Is there any politically-related word where everyone isn’t completely convinced their personal, emotionally-charged definition of it is the correct, dictionary definition?

  15. I have nothing against Progressives, Socialist, Neocons, Democrats or Republicans because everyone has a right to thier views. What I am getting sick of is a population that is too stupid to see someone like Hillary Clinton for what she is. We as a nation have been reduced to voting for the less of two evils or it is time for a lesbian woman or race bating black man to be President. What it is time for is a Constitutional amendment that only people how pay tax’s and are not on government welfare have a right to vote.

    1. That wouldn’t even work because plenty of taxpayers will end up chastising themselves with self-loathing progressive policy.

      People are dumb. The world will probably blow up sometime in the future because people are dumb.

    2. I have nothing against Progressives, Socialist, Neocons, Democrats or Republicans because everyone has a right to thier views.

      I have plenty against those people because they pretend to have my consent while using the government as a Miley Cyrus against my liberty. I just don’t have any delusions of being able to “force” them to change their minds. They are at liberty to be wrong.

      1. A “Miley Cyrus”?

        *feels old, shuffles away*

    3. What it is time for is a Constitutional amendment that only people how pay tax’s and are not on government welfare have a right to vote.

      Where in America are cigarettes and alcohol not taxed?

      1. I’m glad you could understand that sentence, because I was stumped.

      2. So no one who receives any kind of subsidy from the government can vote? Not business owners? Not homeowners who receive a STAR credit? Not anyone who pays taxes but gets a refund?

        Wait, who can vote?

    4. I have nothing against Progressives, Socialist, Neocons, Democrats or Republicans because everyone has a right to thier views.

      I could agree with this, if their views didn’t involve applying a jackboot firmly to the back of my neck while rifling my pockets for money, and whatever else they don’t think I should have.

  16. What’s going on with Rand Paul and defense spending??

  17. The mind numbing nonsense at today’s “colleges” is both laughable and terrifying.

    Anyone student or parent, that actually pays money to these “institutions” is a stupid sphincter.

    You?.are a sucker and a dumbass.

    1. Are the colleges dumbing down the population, or are they just giving their customers, an increasingly dumb population, what they’re asking for? Who’s leading whom?

  18. Jim Webb is authentic. He is my very first choice for many reasons.

  19. In political debate the best liar wins – and truth-tellers not only lose. they’re scorned.

  20. Not gonna read the comments, so maybe someone already pointed out that Rand Paul it’s not really calling for raises in military spending, he’s calling their bluff by introducing a bill that increases military spending but calls for cuts elsewhere.
    So-called small government Republicans wouldn’t pass it.

  21. Authenticity? Among Democrats it’s Bernie Sanders, of course. Also former Senator Jim Webb(D-VA), as we’ll see when he gets into tough issues. Some of us won’t like what he says, but it will be authentic, same as Bernie.

  22. The problem is that we don’t, or rather should not, elect politicians to make choices for us but instead elect them to represent us, their constituents both those who voted for as well as those who voted against them. This requires the House members communicate with the people they are sent to represent, and the Senators should communicate more with their State government.

  23. Why decry phonies in the campaign, when we have the biggest phony sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office.

  24. Phonies dominate presidential race…

    And in other news, water is wet.

  25. Translation: Hillary bad. Hillary bad. Hillary hypocrite. Hillary bad. Hillary bad. Hillary so bad. Hillary Hillary Hillary bad.

    And some Republicans, too.

    Reason, as always, is 100% in the GOP pocket while pretending to be neutral. I can imagine all the sad little hipster faces, scratching at their beads and wondering what happened once Hillary is elected.

    1. False. Reason is 80% libertarianism and 20% concessions to Republicans. They’re reliably with the left on the usual personal freedom issues.

  26. Organized depredation moved in on the Constitution and turned government taxation into a boodle machine to hire cronies. Of course all that matters to the Inner Party and the Outer Party is whose hand is in the till. When communists appeared on the scene in English in 1850 (as Red Republicans), an entire new religion dedicated to the worship of government coercion moved in on territory once divided between high-tariff mercantilists and ku-klux colonials. Little has changed since Plunkitt of Tammany Hall let the mask slip. Only in 1972, when the GOP Jihad lost to the communists and Nixon’s moral majority turned to German National Socialism for solutions did a free market party finally emerge. The lootward shift leveraged by spoiler votes has had 155 years to entrench organized crime in the chambers of congress and the courts. A freeward shift will follow once 5% of the voters in unfixed elections vote libertarian. The pigs will scramble to promise whatever it is that cost them a snout in the trough to the other pigs, and the slow collapse will reverse. Communism has failed and freedom has never been tried, things will change as voters vote for themselves rather than gangs of politicians and their parasites.

  27. A late-night comic never sent anyone to a concentration camp ? or liberated one, either.

    I figured you had to be wrong on this one, and I googled it — finding Michael Bentine, who participated in the liberation of Bergen-Belsen.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.