When Trump is nominated, on his way to the White House, I would like him to pick the following for his Cabinet (I leave out a few that in my estimation don't matter much to the guiding raison d'être of my list here -- namely, their role in effecting a more robust & intelligent redirection of American policy vis-à-vis the problem of Islam -- such as Secretary of Agriculture or Chief of Staff).
Without further ado, here is my Trump “Dream Team”:
VP: Michelle Bachmann. She risked her career and was ostracized by many fellow Republicans for pursuing conscientiously her concern about Muslim Brotherhood influence in Washington -- and she's a woman, though handicapped in our PC MC culture by being Conservative and Christian (black eyes in our time if expressed seriously).
Secretary of Defense: Stephen Coughlin. He was dismissed from his post at the Pentagon back on Jan. 3, 2008 (while Bush was still in office) because his diligent pursuit of the evidence against Islamic Sharia as crucial to our knowledge of the enemy raised the hackles of a Muslim also working at the Pentagon, Hashem Islam, who apparently exploited his toadying relationship with Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England, who forthwith dismissed Coughlin. Since that time, Coughlin has done great work for the Counter-Jihad, including his exhaustive book Catastrophic Failure and his many videos. Even if I have certain misgivings about certain facets of his approach (see here and here), he's obviously light years better than most of the Washington establishment pool from which to draw a SecDef candidate.
Secretary of State: Newt Gingrich. He has the advantage of decades of Washington experience, and has shown signs of waking up intelligently (though likely still imperfectly) to the problem of Islam.
Press Secretary: Ann Coulter. Oh, that would be rich, to see her dish & trash the Press Corps...!
Attorney General: Thomas Sowell. Need I say more...? What a wondrous corrective for the years that racist, paranoid hatemonger, Eric Holder, held the office (followed by the equally disastrous Loretta Lynch)!
Secretary of Education: Sarah Palin. A modest gesture of our collective middle finger at the PC MC mainstream.
Secretary of Homeland: Frank Gaffney. Notwithstanding his soft spot for Better Cop Muslims like Zuhdi Jasser, he's far better than most other contenders out there, what with his fine work at Secure Freedom Radio and over the years his tireless efforts to get the word out about Muslim Brotherhood influence on Washington.
And, finally, a new Cabinet position, to work in collaboration with the SecHome:
Counter-Jihad Czar: Robert Spencer. Though many of my readers know I've had many problems over the years with Spencer's methodology in certain respects, I think his role on this "Dream Team" would be an enormous boost and shot in the arm for our collective graduation as a society along the LCPOI (Learning Curve on the Problem of Islam). And, contrary to Spencer's own silly (if not bizarre) belief that I "hate him", I don't hate him. As I've said many times over the years, I rather esteem a large chunk of his fine work educating countless people over the years around the world in his books, lectures, and perhaps most importantly, his influential blog, Jihad Watch. That said, Spencer would not be absolutely ideal for this position, given that he has said many times that he is "not anti-Islam" and "not anti-Muslim" -- but again, better may not be best, but it's better than worse, is it not...?
12 comments:
It would be interesting to hear what post, if any, would you be prepared to give to Laurence Auster if he was still alive.
I hadn't thought of Lawrence Auster: Perhaps a useful manipulation could be forced, ever so gently: stipulating that the Robert Spencer Cabinet position of "Counter-Jihad Czar" would have to work with a team, including individuals he -- for some mystifying reasons he has never disclosed -- declines to work with: Lawrence Auster (were he still alive), Andrew Bostom, Baron Bodissey, and Diana West.
Also, another position: Hugh Fitzgerald (if he could snap back into his old self which for some inexplicable reason he has abandoned since Spencer unceremoniously eased him out of Jihad Watch many moons ago) as Poet Laureate of the Anti-Islam West.
Do you mean to say that Hugh Fitzgerald has gone soft on Islam, or that his prose is not as good as it once was or both?
And here is something from Donald Trump that ought to disturb you:
“There will always be exceptions,” Mr. Trump said when asked in an interview on Monday how his proposed ban would affect London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan.
“I was happy to see that,” Mr. Trump said of Mr. Khan’s election. “I think it’s a very good thing, and I hope he does a very good job because frankly that would be very, very good.”
Asked why, Mr. Trump said, “Because I think if he does a great job, it will really — you lead by example, always lead by example. If he does a good job and frankly if he does a great job, that would be a terrific thing.”
-New York Times May 9 2016
I can see that exceptions to keeping Muslims out of the US must be made for diplomats and heads of state, but since when is it a good thing that a Muslim becomes the mayor of a major world city? Unfortunately, the mayor of London will have some real power and responsibility. It will only be worse for Londoners in particular and Britons in general.
And many people may be very disappointed if Mr. Trump becomes president. I fear that he will not deliver on even the vague, tepid promises he has made regarding Muslims. What say you?
Almost forgot. Your picks for VP and Sec Def are very good.
Yorick of Snarkinore
The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise
http://www.newenglishreview.org/Norman_Berdichevsky/The_Myth_of_the_Andalusian_Paradise/
Yorick,
Well, I am wearily unsurprised. Anyway, there's no argument here. As PC MC as Trump may be, he's less so in certain important ways than anybody else in American politics. Trump has three qualities:
1) he's hamfisted and blurts things out in unscripted, uncensored fashion
2) he's capable of at least glimpsing outside the Box and then at odd moments letting #1 take over
3) he's PC MC.
Now with #3, the majority (if not the vast majority) of the West seems to be PC MC, and though there seems to be a diversity of degrees, in some ways it is monolithic in terms of certain basic principles (e.g., the vague yet powerful feeling that "not all Muslims are bad" leading the person to tend to lapse into a default of the TMOE meme (the Tiny Minority of Extremists -- or its seemingly more robust variant, the MOE, where the "Minority" is large enough to make you feel like you are aware of the problem but Heavens forbid, not so large & rampant as to start to make you sound bigoted and Islamophobic). I would never expect Trump to be free of #3. It is the chemical combination of #2 and #1 that make the difference -- a difference that becomes more marked by contrast with the pathetic dearth of them in American politics.
Before he came out with his moratorium on Muslim immigration and before he blurted out on CNN that "Islam hates us!" -- but after he had energized one of the first Republican candidate debates with the issue of Islam, raising the issue at all and forcing the other candidates to engage with it as the major problem it is -- I recall having a long argument with a counter-jihad acquaintance who thought what Trump did in that debate was momentous, while I thought he was just too PC MC for it to matter. Then the new data came in, and I changed my mind -- not to the position that Trump is actually counter-jihad or anti-Islam, but to the position based on the feeling that he's a refreshing change from the status quo.
I don't doubt that if he won he would continue to have PC MC spasms; and even that their number and quality would likely outweigh his "incorrect" reflexes. It's a comparative, relative thing: He's not a full-blown temperate clime of a perfect 77º F (25 C) lasting lasting a long wonderful season; he's largely just a cool breeze to a face parched by a bleak desert of years of weather harsh & hostile to reason; and the man lying prone in the unforgiving sand looks up from his dead hope wondering where it came from and if it proffers more to come, and almost mechanically starts crawling in that direction...
As for Hugh Fitzgerald, I only meant his literary style. In the golden age of Jihad Watch, he used to wax erudite like there was no tomorrow. After he was eased out of Jihad Watch in 2010 under still mysterious circumstances, he holed up in a tiny niche over at the New English Review collaborative website of other incorrect souls, in his little perch there called "The Iconoclast" (it's on my blogroll) -- and for the following approximately five years he lapsed into a shell of his former self -- still doing good work in one battle space of the war of ideas, but markedly unremarkable activity (posting one notice after another from a wide diversity of news related to Islam & the West), an egregiously pale & prosaic version of what he had done before. Then, when he returned to Jihad Watch about a year ago (returning just as mysteriously as he had exited), he began publishing various long essays, but every one of them was curiously lackluster, compared with the literary marvels he had produced eons ago.
For more details on him, see my 2015 essay upon his unceremonious return (which in its first paragraph links to another essay about his unceremonious exit):
We Hardly Hugh Ya
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2015/06/we-hardly-hugh-ya.html
Correction -- there are several links in that essay on Fitzgerald, not just the one in the first paragraph.
Ah Hesp, Spencer has been funded by 'former' self-admitted leftist heir apparent 'politics is war' Jewish 'muscular Zionist' David Horowitz - and Spencer has partnered with Jewish Pamela Geller who has labeled some nontrivial amount of non-Jewish anti jihadis as anti-Semites.
Have fun reading Horowitz's asymptotic twitch: 'What did Mohammed Atta hope for but a better world?' Yeesh!
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/98401/david-horowitz
Horowitz (et al.) funds Spencer: http://spencerwatch.com
Gates of Vienna addresses Geller's EDL smear: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/06/open-letter-to-pamela-geller.html?m=1
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/07/unwavering-support-for-humpty-dumpty.html?m=1
Geller fights back: http://pamelageller.com/2011/07/what-they-are-saying.html/
Again, I truly think Geller is a Mossad agent. :)
Riddle me this: Did 'muscular Zionist' David Horowitz support Diana West? If not, why not?
Oh, you know the answer....
Here's the key to Trump:
Trump is a billionaire who is intellectually curious (according to his bright daughter Ivanka).
Rich people often subscribe to private news sources that give them a better window on the real world than PC MC news. We can presume that Trump subscribes to one or more private news sources.
Trump owns a lot of real estate - especially of the type and in locations targeted by jihadis.
Trump and his family live in New York City. Trump experienced 9-11 and its aftermath firsthand.
I speculate that Trump convinced Chris Christie from NJ to come onto his campaign because NJ is next to NY - and what catastrophic event that affects one state will affect the other.
Trump will stay serious - if he can get into office and stay alive once there.
Hesp, This article is crazy good:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/07/diana_and_ron_what_was_going_on_.html
What was censored says more than what was allowed. ;)
Read the article and connect the dots that:
1. The vast majority of Communist agents in the US government during the WWII era have still NOT been identified - and you can bet that, before they retired, they hired their Communist agent replacements, so the US is still highly infiltrated.
2. The US news and entertainment media is radio silent on this historical - now current - issue. Who controls the US media?
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/opinion/oe-stein19
Who wants to bet that dots 1 & 2 are related?
Post a Comment