Hillary and Her Health

Time constraints have forced the followup to How Comte Overthrew Marx to be moved to this Saturday.

In the meantime, the election…

Judging by her latest fainting spell, we can assume the stress of the presidential campaign is greatly accelerating the effects of whatever underlying disease she is suffering from.

At this rate of deterioration she may, as Moses did, drop dead with the promised land finally within sight after wandering the desert for forty years with Bill Clinton.

How should Trump approach this?

I recommend he link her failure to explain her true medical condition to her secretive nature: Why is she hiding her secrets from the public?

Assuming she is even able to attend the debate, there is a risk she could faint on stage. This possibility should be taken into account by team Trump.  If she does, the media would almost certainly try to blame her episode on Trump being too aggressive. During debate preparations (will he prepare for the debates???) he should practice delivering his attacks against her in a matter of fact way. Of course, given his nature, he’ll probably just shout whatever comes to his mind.

But my recommendation is the better approach since it factors in the likelihood she could collapse right next to him.

With her health grabbing the spotlight for the moment, now would also be a good time to quietly get rid of Stephen Bannon for having altright connections.

As I explained in the end of week circulars, although Bannon is probably not an ideological ally of Richard Spencer, Spencer is working overtime making the word “altright” as toxic as possible while Bannon is on record expressing sympathies with it.

The time is ideal to “Retire” Bannon before his altright associations lead to an unneeded scandal as we get closer to election day.

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “Hillary and Her Health”

  1. I don’t think Trump needs to retire Bannon, because he’s completely out of sight. Eventually, out of sight means out of mind, and so people will not be convinced by attacks on him. Bannon who?

  2. I don’t think Trump needs to retire Bannon, because he’s completely out of sight.

    He wouldn’t be a potential problem if the brand name of the altright wasn’t being sent into the gutter by Spencer with his media whoring. But if Spencer keeps appearing on TV he will soon finish making altright synonymous with “Skinhead” or “KKK”, or whatever, with the public.

    At that point Trump would have to get rid of him just as he would have to if the media revealed Bannon was a member of the KKK back in the 1990s.

    But even if the odds of this becoming a scandal are small, why take any risk by keeping him on board when Trump has the momentum?

  3. theconservativetreehouse.com is a non-altright enthusiastically pro-Trump website with hundreds of daily non-altright enthusiastically pro-Trump comments on various threads; visiting it will cheer up any Trumpist freaked out by T’s altright supporters.

  4. visiting it will cheer up any Trumpist freaked out by T’s altright supporters.

    His normal Republican fan base is perfectly respectable.

    Unfortunately, social media blows the importance of the altright all out of proportion and makes it a nuisance as well as a false “guilt by association” connection to Trump which he has to waste time disassociating himself from.

  5. Luckily Trump will ignore.

    It depends on how quickly Spencer can finish equating the term altright, as Spencer defines it in front of every media outlet he can get an interview with, with his rehash of neonazism. Which is probably not what Bannon thought of when he associated himself with the term. But the more Spencer defines it the more likely Trump will be forced to get rid of him.

    Alt right is here to stay,

    As a laughing stock on the internet, yes. At least until you altrighters can think of something dumber to join.

  6. Alt Right isn’t going anywhere precisely because it is not some fringy phenomena but a broad based, but nascent, reaction to Leftist insanity. I’m as surprised by this as anyone. Twelve months ago I was certain that the Left had already secured their final victory and the elites were readying the planet for mass extinction to make way for the immortals. (Seriously, the elites believe this).

    It’s still building but there’s no doubt that it will eventually crest. It’s unknown as yet whether it will be channeled into a religious, Christian direction/focus or whether it will be secular in nature. But it isn’t going to be stopped.

  7. A pretty obvious anti-Progressive political alternative to White-Powerism (which is what, I take it, “alt-right” signifies): permit discrimination on any basis, anywhere (hiring, housing, school admissions, etc.). Then things will tend to order themselves along roughly, but only roughly, ethnic lines, with ethnic specialization and ethnic hierarchies, with some degree of intermingling since individual variations (Bob’s much smarter and more disciplined than the average member of his group) will tend to be recognized. The result will be a much more pleasant social environment for most members of all groups, without any need for mass relocations and accompanying massacres. Sex-roles will also start sorting themselves out.

  8. The result will be a much more pleasant social environment for most members of all groups, without any need for mass relocations and accompanying massacres. Sex-roles will also start sorting themselves out.

    I suppose it would sort out over time. But you would still have major urban areas occupied by welfare dependent minorities instead of more productive whites. Still better than what we have, but it still seems like a waste of good land.

  9. it is not some fringy phenomena but a broad based, but nascent, reaction to Leftist insanity.

    You are confusing the success of Trump as somehow related to the altright.

    Those two variables are functioning entirely independent of one another: If the altright did not exist, Trump would have campaigned exactly as he has up to now. If Trump did not run, on the other hand, the altright would be exactly where it is now, they would be an internet meme without influence hoping that some lost cause in the primary, like Rand Paul, could win a primary state or two before quietly fading to the establishment candidate.

  10. “you would still have major urban areas occupied by welfare dependent minorities” — the Lion-solution of sterilization-for-welfare would take care of that problem in a couple of decades. Letting people starve or moving them around at gunpoint would be a lot ickier than letting them be and feeding them if necessary. In addition to unlimited discrimination, neighborhood-watchgroups like the Shomrim, allowed considerable latitude in how they deal with questionable outsiders, might be helpful. Anti-Progressive propaganda (an entirely private project) would encourage people to actually discriminate and set up neighborhood watchgroups. A helpful slogan would be “Everyone in his proper place, everyone knowing his proper place.” Something like that.

  11. What if “workfare” could be somehow farmed out to private companies … there’d be a “workfare” contract between the company and the recipient … it could be a seven-year contract, or a lifelong contract … it would be completely up to the company whether signing up for “workfare” required sterilization or not. The contract might stipulate relocation to special “residential labor-parks”. The goal is something resembling livable serfdom, of course, NOT anything horrible. No need for hostility toward any group. All groups have a role to play in the new America, in accordance with God’s plan …

  12. the Lion-solution of sterilization-for-welfare would take care of that problem in a couple of decades.

    That’s one of my preferred options as well.

    In addition to unlimited discrimination, neighborhood-watchgroups like the Shomrim, allowed considerable latitude in how they deal with questionable outsiders, might be helpful.

    I’m not keen on the idea as a Hamiltonian.

    I consider private citizens setting up militias to deter criminals a failure of the police forces and of the government responsible for maintaining them. The police should have already deterred so much crime that private citizens with guns at home should be sufficient, non-police, deterrence for any criminals that evade standard law enforcement.

    What if “workfare” could be somehow farmed out to private companies … there’d be a “workfare” contract between the company and the recipient … it could be a seven-year contract, or a lifelong contract … it would be completely up to the company whether signing up for “workfare” required sterilization or not.

    Any worker for whom their sterilization would be a benefit to society is probably not employable under any contract.

    Welfare for sterilization, coupled with strong encouragement of prisoners to be sterilized, are preferable to contracts.

  13. Yes, you’re right; most Blacks wouldn’t make good serfs. Lower-class Europeans would make good serfs, which is why lower-class Europeans WERE serfs. Mexicans would make good serfs too. So just dump food and pills on an idle, slowly-dwindling population in contained areas? Contained by government Toughs, rather than private Toughs? Lots of I.D.-checking and questioning at the exit-points?

  14. Eh, forget about the containment. That would be grosser than the problem. Just encourage gentlemen and their attendants to clobber ruffians if necessary. All gentlemen shall be expected to walk about with stout staffs for the clobbering of ruffians if necessary.

  15. Yes, you’re right; most Blacks wouldn’t make good serfs. Lower-class Europeans would make good serfs, which is why lower-class Europeans WERE serfs. Mexicans would make good serfs too.

    I see no need for Mexicans either. Even if they are docile servents, they make for lousy citizens: they keep filthy neighborhoods, commit petty crimes (I don’t consider “not as bad as black criminals” to be a compliment in their favor), take up valuable real estate better populated with white citizens, consume more in taxes than white servants, and they can’t run their own cities.

    So just dump food and pills on an idle, slowly-dwindling population in contained areas? Contained by government Toughs, rather than private Toughs? Lots of I.D.-checking and questioning at the exit-points?

    In a way, black neighborhoods are contained by police. To keep them mostly under control, there is no pressing need for extra police operations to exceed what measures are already in place. Combined with birth control initiatives the situation would radically improve without the construction of a MadMax containment area.

    All gentlemen shall be expected to walk about with stout staffs for the clobbering of ruffians if necessary.

    A model of Anglo-Saxon individualism!

    Hamilton and Lincoln would both approve.

  16. Just to be fair — the Mexicans that fill my Brooklyn neighborhood are perfectly innocuous family-people. The kids are nice too. And to be fair to Blacks — aside from the rare crazy, NYC Blacks are only aesthetically offensive (in various respects); I tend to misinterpret ugliness as latent hostility. European gentlefolk found the urban masses aesthetically offensive as well. Our problem is that we can’t afford to separate ourselves from them. So the real political issue for us should be how to enable ourselves to move away from the Uglies, not how to contain them.

  17. There’s a lot of sort of aggressive ugliness that you can’t object to without a high likelihood of potentially violent confrontation, too … loud (or no) headphones on public transportation, groups filling the sidewalk as they stride along, teenagers bicycling in groups of 10-12 at top speed, lots of ordinary explicit rudeness and sullenness. As an adult in NYC I’ve been head-slapped (knock-out-game-mode) by a member of a group of three and (separate incident) hard-shouldered in passing. (Crotch-kicked by a PR who was in the process of assaulting a pudgy officeguy when I stopped to indicate readiness to intervene doesn’t count, since we’re not talking about PRs.) But I’ve had lots and lots of friendly interactions too.

  18. Just to be fair — the Mexicans that fill my Brooklyn neighborhood are perfectly innocuous family-people. The kids are nice too.

    How does that make them Americans? They smile and nod when they hand you your pizza at your local pizzeria, but you have no deep interactions with them like you do with white Americans.

    It is only under the low standards of today that they would be considered true citizens instead of what they are: lame, detached, foreigners wandering around the country doing menial work.

    A Hamiltonian state, and Western Civilization in general, is only worthy of a strong citizenry.

    NYC Blacks are only aesthetically offensive (in various respects); I tend to misinterpret ugliness as latent hostility.

    Israeli Jews of today can also have pleasant interactions with Israeli Muslims. But just as Lebanese Christians had friendly interactions with Lebanese Muslims before their Civil War, the friendliness is just a superficial mask the uncivilized actor tolerates in exchange for welfare, a minimum wage, and the threat of retaliation if they strike out constantly, or not at the right moment.

    When it counts, they will be enemies whenever they believe they have an advantage.

    European gentlefolk found the urban masses aesthetically offensive as well.

    Not comparable. Europeans did the best they could given the fact the masses did not have antibiotics until fairly recently.

    Blacks today have no excuse.

    Our problem is that we can’t afford to separate ourselves from them. So the real political issue for us should be how to enable ourselves to move away from the Uglies, not how to contain them.

    There is no where else to go.

    And why do you conclude we can’t afford to part ways? If the Left can softly ethnically cleanse an exceptionally valuable piece of geography like California of whites, the cleansing can certainly go the other direction. In the absence of liberalism, the economic advantages alone of discarding them and replacing them with whites would be irresistible – consider how the real estate industry would be swimming in money if, for example, Los Angeles and New York were 90% white.

    And if you disagree, keep in mind all of the founding fathers and the greatest president of all time, Abraham Lincoln, would have supported my statements regarding their inherent incompatibility.

  19. Re Mexicans, sure, build a wall and all that. I’m just saying that the ones that fill my Brooklyn neighborhood are pretty nice and they don’t block the view either, because they’re so short. Re Blacks, I don’t think they can really be viewed as a hostile population like the Arabs in Israel. They’re just a childish population — lots of unruly and some downright dangerous kids among them, but on the whole mainly a management-problem.

  20. I’m just saying that the ones that fill my Brooklyn neighborhood are pretty nice

    A nicer Brooklyn is a whiter Brooklyn.

    Blacks, I don’t think they can really be viewed as a hostile population like the Arabs in Israel.

    Under a firm hand – a hand which is not hanging over them in any other Western nation except Israel, and Israel’s hand would do well to be firmer – Arabs will usually bide their time and wait for the Infidels to become vulnerable before striking seriously. Until then they will content themselves with petty crimes, and an odd terrorist attack here or there.

    They’re just a childish population — lots of unruly and some downright dangerous kids among them, but on the whole mainly a management-problem.

    Such a management problem that those two great heirs to Hamilton, Abe Lincoln and Henry Clay, both thought they should ultimately be removed to a colony in Africa.

  21. Yes, Muslims whether Arab or not are a hostile population. Blacks as such are not, just generally ugly and childish with a tendency toward occasional dangerousness. (I say “as such” because Black Muslims and Commies are hostile as Muslims and Commies, not as Blacks.) Of course you’re not proposing “removal” now — that would be uglier than the problem it would be supposed to solve — you’re just citing Lincoln and Clay on this to emphasize the magnitude of the management-problem. Agreed — big management-problem. But that’s all it is.

  22. Of course you’re not proposing “removal” now

    If we really wanted to do it, the country could setup a colony in Africa for them and move them there. The colony could even potentially have first world living conditions if we had a business consortium or the military run it well.

    The Rhodesia of Ian Smith proved a black nation ruled by a very small white governing class could exist as a modern state, provided the blacks have little say in how the place is managed.

    But as far as management goes, sterilization of problem cases, even if not directly targeted at blacks, would have a sufficiently dramatic impact on black fertility to suit Hamiltonian ends.

    30% of all black males will spend time in prison. If the government were to begin sterilizing the prison population regardless of race, that alone would remove a significant percentage of the black male population from the future gene pool and cut deeply into the black birth rate.

    Combined with other birth control policies such as long term welfare for sterilization, encouraging drug addicts to be sterilized, &c., black fertility could easily be reduced to 1.0 or lower.

    Over time they would naturally be replaced with whites without doing excessive harm to them or having them realize what was going on.

  23. It would be eugenic for Blacks; within a century Blacks would be a lot more intelligent and disciplined, on average. I can imagine visionary Black leaders really getting behind the Lion-UJ selective sterilization program. Hey, why should they alone reap all the benefits? Do this for ALL groups!

  24. I can imagine visionary Black leaders really getting behind the Lion-UJ selective sterilization program.

    They won’t support it. But that can always be solved by simply ignoring everything blacks say.

    Hey, why should they alone reap all the benefits? Do this for ALL groups!

    There is no need for white criminals to have children either.

  25. within a century Blacks would be a lot more intelligent and disciplined, on average.

    They would still be behind whites in intelligence and less than 25% of their current population. But the ones who would exist would be much less likely to set cars on fire, so that would be some improvement.

Comments are closed.