NYT: Whatever Happens, We Have Got / the Megaphone, and They Have Not.
Print Friendly and PDF

Here’s the top story on the NYTimes.com homepage right now:

Screenshot 2016-10-01 00.28.05

Obviously, the Alicia Machado brouhaha was a big set-up that has been in the works for a long time, and it’s embarrassing to Team HRC/MSM that they forgot to Google her. But the NYT’s quadrupling down on people not noticing her Bobby Abreu scandal — not to mention her three much bigger scandals involving murder, plus the crucial meta-scandal of how she got to immigrate here and become a citizen and voter — is getting bizarre.

The Mexican attorney-general’s 2010 accusation that the father of her child is a narco cartel hitman whom the U.S. government put a $2 million bounty on his head seems increasingly plausible. I’ve found a new piece of quite recent evidence strongly supporting that theory, but I’m not going to link to it because I feel sorry for a person who didn’t ask to be involved in Machado’s comic/sinister life.

The single central political issue of our time is whether it’s a Bad Thing or a Good Thing to import foreign ringers to vote in democratic elections to subvert the will of the people.

When you stop and think about it objectively, it’s obviously tawdry to do that. It’s a practice straight out of Ibn Khaldun 101: in a decadent polity, elites forgets about investing in asibaya, solidarity, and instead obsess over stabbing each other in the back.

The urge to defeat your rivals using foreign ringers is really easy: We could work really hard and honestly and hope the electorate rewards us … or … we could import a whole bunch of people who will vote for us for racialist reasons!

It corrupts elites.

In the early 1920s American elites finally agreed: okay, let’s not do that. Let’s fight our battles over who most has the support of the American people using only the American people.

In the ensuing generations, America won the Big One and went to the Moon.

One of the more corrupting effects of the foreign ringer urge is that it’s so obviously crooked that vast effort is invested in indoctrinating Americans in not noticing it and when they do notice it, to think of it as virtuous.

Thus, at the very end of the debate, Hillary presented narco moll Alicia Machado voting in November as a triumph of righteousness.

There’s possibly some tiny fragment of Hillary’s brain that knows that’s just self-serving BS. But that just makes the rest of her brain hate even more anybody who would dare to point that out.

[Comment at Unz.com]

Print Friendly and PDF