Tag Archives: Obama

Current Events

DID YOU KNOW THIS?

7 Comments

I rec’d the following this morning from a Blog to which I subscribe (Bunkerhill – God, Guns, and Guts Comrades). It is a very informative, truthful, well-researched blog filled daily with astounding facts very few are aware of, and this morning’s is a whopper. Today’s blog references an article from The Telegraph, the British News Service, dating back to 15 July 2015. The piece was written by Mr. Con Coughlin, the paper’s Defense Editor on the Iranian Nuclear Deal.

Obama’s Iran deal has just granted an amnesty to the world’s leading terrorist mastermind.

As head of the Quds Force in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Qassem Suleimani is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading terrorists. Now Barack Obama has effectively granted him an amnesty.

By , Defence Editor

2:03 PM BST 15 Jul 2015

Qassem Suleimani, the head of the elite Quds Force in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, fully deserves his reputation as one of the world’s leading terrorist masterminds.

For a decade a more he has been the driving force behind an array of Iranian-sponsored terrorist groups, from Hizbollah to Hamas, which have orchestrated a reign of terror throughout the Middle East.

From a purely British perspective, he was responsible for training and equipping the Shia militias in southern Iraq who killed scores of British troops during the dark days of Iraq’s sectarian conflict following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and was reported to have trained the Taliban in the art of making deadly roadside bombs that killed and mutilated our Service personnel serving in southern Afghanistan.

So you can imagine my amazement when, leafing through the more obscure annexes of President Barack Obama’s “historic” deal with Iran (page 86 of the annex, to be precise), I found that Mr Suliemani – as the White House no doubt now refers to him – has been granted an amnesty and taken off the list of proscribed Iranians – together with a number of senior members of the Revolutionary Guards.

Thanks to Mr Obama’s scandalous capitulation to Tehran, Mr Suleimani has overnight gone from being one of the world’s most wanted terrorists to the White House’s newest best friend.

This is just one of the many troubling indications contained in the detail of the accord struck in Vienna between the P5 +1 and Tehran – that’s the official line, of course. The reality is this shoddy deal was worked out between the ayatollahs and the White House, with countries like Britain – which used to take a robust view of Iran’s endless procrastination on its nuclear activities – left impotent on the sidelines.

Another example of the craven concessions the White House had made to Tehran is the way future inspections will handled. Iran’s disinclination to make full and transparent disclosures on its nuclear programme is well-documented. Given the opportunity to cheat, they will do so. Which is why inspections by qualified teams of nuclear inspectors is so important.

Only from now on the onus will be on the West to make the case that Iran is not playing by the rules by handing over its intelligence to prove so. For under the terms of the accord, we must “justify” the need for inspections, which in effect means handing over all the intelligence we have on Iran’s illicit activities. Of course Iran has been desperate to find out how Western intelligence learned about the existence of nuclear enrichment sites like Natanz and Fordow and, if we comply with the requirements set out in the accord to the letter, this is what will happen, with all the implications that will have for all our sources who risk their lives to tell us the truth about what the regime is up to.

If I were Suleimani, I’d be organising an enormous party right now to celebrate a deal that is truly a “historic victory” for Tehran.

Should you not believe Mr. Coughlin, you may read the entire piece of trash (below) forced on America by a Muslim loving, narcissistic, incompetent POTUS and brokered by his  communist, lying, POS posing as his Secretary of State.

I don’t know about any of you, but I did not know any of this at the time, but there should have been some honest, caring , patriotic Americans at the time who should have been knowledgeable enough to raise holy hell. Now that we have killed the POS someone finds out he was given free reign to do as he pleased by our own hand. Did any of our illustrious MSM take the time to read the entire transcript or did they simply assume if it was brokered by the “Messiah,” it had to be a good deal. Our elected officials, and all the departments of government involved in over site and justice were obviously asleep at the wheel.

What have we become? Sheep!!!

Originally posted 2020-01-13 09:40:26.

Recent Posts

Impeachment Coup Analytics

2 Comments

A very well written article by someone with a brain and knows how to use it, oh, and BTW, a Californian.

The Democrats have exhausted every other mechanism for destroying Trump—and they are running out of time before November 2020 election.

Victor Davis Hanson

– September 29th, 2019

Aside from the emotional issue that Democrats, Never-Trumpers, and celebrities loathe Donald Trump, recently Representative Al Green (D-Texas) reminded us why the Democrats are trying to impeach the president rather than just defeat him in the 2020 general election.

“To defeat him at the polls would do history a disservice, would do our nation a disservice,” Green said.  “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach the president, he will get re-elected.”

Translated, that means Green accepts either that Trump’s record is too formidable or that the agendas of his own party’s presidential candidates are too frightening for the American people to elect one of them. And that possibility is simply not permissible. Thus, impeachment is the only mechanism left to abort an eight-year Trump presidency—on a purely partisan vote to preclude an election, and thus contrary to the outlines of impeachment as set out by the Constitution.

Consider it another way: Why is it that the House is controlled by Democrats, yet its leadership is not pushing through any of the policy proposals voiced so openly on the Democratic primary stage?

Why aren’t progressive representatives introducing bills to pay reparations to African Americans, to legalize infanticide in some cases of late-term abortion, to offer free medical care to illegal aliens, to confiscate AR-15s, to extend Medicare for all, to impose a wealth tax and raise top rates to between 70 and 90 percent, to abolish student debt and ensure free college for all, or to grant blanket amnesty to those currently living in the country illegally?

Simple answer: none of those issues poll anywhere near 50 percent approval. And no Democratic candidate would expect to beat Trump as the emissary of such an agenda.

If the economy was in a recession, if we were embroiled in another Iraq-like or Vietnam-sort of war, and if Trump’s polls were below 40 percent, then the Democrats would just wait 13 months and defeat him at the polls.

But without a viable agenda and because they doubt they can stop Trump’s reelection bid, they feel they have no recourse but to impeach. If Trump were to be reelected, not a shred of Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation” would be left, and the strict constructionist Supreme Court would haunt progressives for a quarter-century.

Why Impeachment Now?

The Democrats have exhausted every other mechanism for destroying Trump—and they are running out of time before November 2020 election.

Think of what we have witnessed since the 2016 election. Do we even remember charges that voting machines in the 2016 election were rigged, and the efforts to subvert Electoral College voting, or to invoke the Logan Act, the emoluments clause, and the 25th Amendment?

The “collusion” and “obstruction” fantasies of the Mueller investigation now seem like ancient history. So do the James Comey leaks, the palace coup of Andrew McCabe, the Trump tax records, the celebrity rhetoric about blowing up, shooting, stabbing, burning and variously killing off the president of the United States—along with the satellite frenzies of Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, Charlottesville, Jussie Smollett, the Covington Kids, and the Kavanaugh hearings.

What is left but to try the new “Ukraine collusion”—especially given three other considerations?

First, volatile and always changing polls appearing to favor impeachment roughly reflect Trump’s own popularity (or lack of same). Around 45-46 percent of Americans do not want him impeached and about the same or slightly more say they do.

Second, the hard left-wing of the party might not yet control all the Democrats, but it does not matter because they are clearly younger, more energized, and better organized. And they want something to show for all their social media and photo-op grandstanding, given their socialist agenda is mysteriously moribund.

Third, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is said to oppose impeachment on pragmatic grounds, but I am not sure that is right. It’s the equivalent of saying Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was opposed to the progressive character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh. Neither is or was true.

A better description would be that Pelosi and Feinstein simply go along with the perceived 51-plus percent surge of their party, and sit back gleefully watching the fireworks happen, willing to jump in or pull back depending on the atmospherics and polling. Impeachment, remember, will make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a seminar on etiquette, and so everything and anything can happen once dozens of unhinged leftists are unbound.

Be prepared for a half-dozen Christine Blasey Ford-type witnesses to pop up, and 20 or so unhinged Cory Booker-esque “I am Spartacus” performance acts, along with a whole slew of new Steele dossiers—all interspersed with breathless CNN bulletins announcing new fake news developments with “the walls are closing in” and “the end is near” prognostications. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is already reading fantasies to the House Intelligence Committee and passing them off as the text of Trump’s phone call to Ukraine’s new president. Only after he was called on such absurdities did he describe his performance as a parody.

Facts Won’t Matter that Much

The Left is hellbent on impeachment and the absence of a case won’t matter. They do not care if they will sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.

In the coming days, after all, we will probably learn that the whistle blower’s “Schiff dossier” was prepared by ex-Lawfare-type lawyers in service to House Democrats, who just needed a vessel to pass off the hit as a genuine cry of the heart, rather than a scripted attack with all the Steele dossier/Mueller report/Comey memo fingerprints: classification obfuscations, footnotes to liberal media hit pieces, pseudo-scholarly references to court cases, and lawsuit-avoiding, preemptive disclaimers about not actually possessing firsthand knowledge of any of the evidence, prepped hearsay, supposition, and the subjunctive and optative mood composition.

In a sane world, the impeachers would worry their charges that Trump forced Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky to investigate his possible 2020 Democratic opponent Joe Biden might boomerang. After all, Trump never actually cut off Ukrainian aid. Nor did he outline a quid pro quo deal. Essentially he is accused of unduly asking a foreign president to clamp down on corruption in his midst going back to 2016. So what? Especially if there is something more to the strange antics of Hunter Biden and CrowdStrike.

Biden’s problems are not such thought crimes, but are confirmed by his own boasting: that he used the clout of the United States to help his own family financially, by threatening to cut off U.S. aid unless a Ukrainian state prosecutor looking into his own son’s suspicious lobbying was fired within six hours. And in Biden’s own words, “Son of a bitch,” he was fired.

In contrast, Trump might have been all over the map in his call, but he kept the aid to Ukraine coming without demanding the scalp of any Ukrainian official. In some sense, Trump’s culpability boils down to one issue: progressives believe that in not-too-veiled a manner, he threatened a foreign government to start going after the Biden family without cause, whose patriarch Joe might be Trump’s 2020 election opponent.

The other half of the country believes that what is material is not Biden’s current transient electoral status (he is not now and may not be the Democratic nominee), but the fact that he was vice president of the United States when he used his office to threaten the loss of foreign aid to stop investigations of his son, who was using his father’s position to further his own profiteering.

Given that Trump denies any quid pro quo and his call supports that fact, while Biden, on the other hand, openly brags that he made threats which made the Ukrainian to cave (“in six hours”), one can draw one’s own conclusions.

For now, we await more documents—with caveats that the canny Ukrainians, for their own self-interest, will predicate their release of information on the likelihood of which party will win the 2020 election.

The Left hints it has lots of incriminating documents outlining a quid pro quo threat; conservatives suspect that Ukrainian and legal documents will show the prosecutor was neither unethical nor uninterested in Hunter Biden, but was fired precisely because he was not corrupt and very much concerned with Biden.

As far as precedent, there is a good recent example. Barack Obama got caught promising to consider cuts in Eastern-European-based missile defense if Vladimir Putin would give him some room during his reelection campaign.

Translated into Adam Schiff’s Mafiosi parody lingo: Putin would calm down on the international stage to make the U.S.-Russia “reset” look good, Obama would then get rid of Eastern-European missile defense, and Obama would get reelected in 2012.

And all three of those events transpired as planned—one can surmise whether any of the three would have happened without Obama compliance with Russian conditions. Remember, Obama’s quid pro quo was caught on a hot mic on the premise that what he said to Russian President Medvedev was never supposed to be heard. “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved,” Obama said. “But it’s important for him [Putin] to give me space . . . This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Once that understanding was excused, and the media was mute about such collusion, can any notion of collusion as a crime still exist?

Conspiracy Theories

Finally, who are the winners in these impeachment psychodramas, both short-term and long-term?

Short-term, Trump may lose traction due to the media frenzy. He lost some of his ongoing momentum that had recently seen his polls steadily creeping up. He gave a fine speech at the United Nations and sounded presidential in his talks with foreign leaders—all overshadowed or now forgotten due to the impeachment psychodrama.

Trump’s critics have become emboldened, Left and Right. The Drudge Report has flip-flopped and is as anti-Trump as Vox or Slate. Many at National Review call for or anticipate impeachment without much regret. Likewise, some at Fox News—Shepard Smith, Andrew Napolitano, and Chris Wallace—are nonstop critics of Trump and hardly disguise their contempt.

The leftist media is on uppers, and completely ecstatic in moth-to-flame fashion, as if it were May 2017 again and Trump’s demise was a day away.

Because Joe Biden faces far more legal exposure than Trump, he is mentioned (if even to contextualize and exonerate him) in every news account of Ukraine. Whether or not Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) or her erstwhile henchwoman, Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), was behind this gambit, does not matter. (Nothing much from either one had worked to slow down Biden in the last six months). Biden is simply not physically or mentally up to a year of cross-examination. And Hunter Biden is more unsteady than Joe and will thus be hard to locate.

We are starting to see the outlines of a progressive fantasy on the horizon: Biden will be sacrificed. The party will unite around Warren. The left-wing media narrative will be, “We took out one of our own, now it is your turn to depose Trump.” Chaos overload for two or three weeks might keep Trump’s polling low.

Long-term, however, Trump wins.

We still have a number of government audits coming from Michael Horowitz, John Durham, and John Huber—and the targets are not Trump. The Senate will not convict the president under any foreseeable circumstances. The full story of the whistleblower has not been told, but there are a lot of narratives to come about the sudden rules allowing hearsay, DNC involvement, and who knew far in advance about the complainant’s writ. Once the Democratic debates continue, the candidates’ screaming and hysterics return, and the impeachment hearings descend into a Kavanaugh-esque farce, the public will begin to get scared again by the Left’s shrieking Jacobins. Schiff’s “parody” is a small foretaste of what’s to come. Voters soon will surmise that the only thing between their 401k plans and socialism is Donald J. Trump.

Warren or her possible facsimile is a weaker candidate than even the enfeebled Biden. Her lack of viability will be of enormous advantage in NeverHillary-fashion to Trump. His fundraising, already ascendant, will hit the stratosphere. The idea that the new and old NeverTrumpers will be on the side of socialism will finally discredit them. Wall Street and Silicon Valley will keep trashing Trump, but privately write checks to stop Warren’s wealth tax that would be only the beginning of her Venezuelization of America.

So if Trump’s health holds out, if we don’t have a recession, if there is not an optional war, and Trump endures the next few weeks of 360-degree, 24/7 targeting, 2020 will be far more favorable than ever imaginable for him.

 

Originally posted 2019-10-06 09:31:20.

Recent Posts

Liberal Lunacy

5 Comments

Remember the Limbo song from years ago, where the main line was “how low can you go”? Every time I read something akin to this post I think of that song and wonder just how low can these liberal out-of-touch professors go before someone recommends they be sent to the loony bin or funny farm. I can imagine what this nut teaches his young impressionable charges in his classroom.

Professor Claims Tom Brady’s Popularity Tied to Rising ‘White Supremacy’

A Rhode Island professor now says that Tom Brady’s popularity is due to “white supremacy” in a “post-Obama America.”

That Brady has won six Super Bowl rings, has earned three MVP awards, three All-Pro titles, and 14 Pro-Bowl appearances, has little to do with his success, as far as Professor Kyle Kusz is concerned, Campus Reform reported.

Kusz, a professor of kinesiology (Wait, what the hell is this, can you get a major in it from this university? And you did what would you bring to society with it? ) at the University of Rhode Island, made his accusation in a screed published this month entitled, Making American White Men Great Again: Tom Brady, Donald Trump, and the Allure of White Male Omnipotence in Post-Obama America.

Brady’s great athletic success has less to do with his popularity than the “white rage and white supremacy” that has risen in the U.S., this professor of “the study of human movement” insists.

Kusz smears Brady’s 2015 Under Armour ad as an example of Nazi propaganda that “would not seem out of place in Leni Riefenstahl’s infamous Nazi propaganda film, ‘Triumph des willens.’”

Indeed, this wild-eyed professor based his entire thesis on that one commercial, according to his comments to Campus Reform.

“I decided to research Trump and Brady’s public performances of their white masculinities and how they connect with broader debates about race and gender politics after a student in one of my classes brought the Under Armour commercial to my attention, and it piqued my interest,” Kusz said.

Kusz goes on to insist that Brady surrounds himself with white people to show fans his racial purity.

“It is a vision of Brady as a wealthy, white man who unapologetically enjoys, and has even made a habit out of, spending time with other wealthy white men who treasure time ‘with the boys’ over all others,” Kusz exclaimed. Going to the Kentucky Derby, for instance, “suggests his performance of white masculinity shares much in common with President Trump’s.”

The professor also claims that Brady’s refusal to loudly denounce Trump to the left’s satisfaction also proves he is a white supremacist.

All these accusations came to the professor’s mind after he moved to the New England area and began to see how popular Brady was.

“After moving here for work I became fascinated by the idolatry given to Brady, especially after Trump began to name-drop and use white sportsmen as surrogates during his 2016 campaign,” Kusz said. He added that he follows stories about race and gender in today’s society and how those stories “reflect broader struggles about social power.”

So, just what is a professor of “kinesiology”? Kusz’s field is the study of the mechanics of human movement and often has to do with helping learn how best to rehabilitate people after sports injuries. Apparently, that makes him an expert on white supremacy.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Originally posted 2019-09-29 13:05:43.

Recent Posts

SpyGate VS Watergate

2 Comments

An excellent article by J. Marsolo of the American Thinker  on the comparison between two crimes. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. I think we can guess how it will considering a Republican incident of lying and a more serious democrat incident involving high ranking perps.

The SpyGate coup to elect Hillary, prevent the election of President Trump, and sabotage Trump’s presidency is far worse than Watergate.  It will be proven so with the investigation by U.S. attorney Durham, appointed by Attorney General Barr.  The Democrats and the corrupt media know this, which is the reason they are attacking A.G. Barr.

The Democrats, led and aided by a compliant media that reported the FBI leaks, and some Republicans, forced Richard Nixon to resign.  The immediate cause was the so-called smoking gun tape of June 23, 1972 where Nixon suggested that the CIA tell the FBI to back off its investigation.  The tape was released by Nixon on August 5, 1974 following a Supreme Court decision.

The 1972 tape was the basis for the obstruction of justice argument against Nixon.  Watergate started as a breaking into the DNC offices to search and copy records.

Compare this to the Obama Justice Department and FBI clearing Hillary of the email scandal and trying to sabotage Trump’s election and his presidency.  The corrupt media led and assisted the Obama DOJ and FBI and now continue to drive the attack on President Trump, despite the Mueller Report that found no collusion.

There is no serious dispute about the facts.  An excellent summary is Greg Jarrett’s book, The Russia Hoax (Harper Collins, 2018).

The Obama DOJ and FBI cleared Hillary of obvious violations of numerous laws over her use of a private email server so she could run for the presidency and win.  Obama knew that Hillary wasn’t using the approved secure State Department email system because Hillary communicated with Obama with the unsecure email system.  A prosecution of Hillary would involve Obama.  Hillary would have argued that Obama knew of her use of a private email server and thus approved her use, which would have been a good defense.  Obama had motive to protect his legacy as well as helping Hillary beat President Trump.

Moreover, Obama announced that Hillary made a “mistake” but did not intend to break the law.  This was a clear signal to James Comey’s FBI, which not surprisingly came to the same Obama conclusion.

But it wasn’t enough to give Hillary a pass on her violations.  The Obama DOJ and FBI then used the unverified Steele “Dossier,” full of false charges, to obtain FISA warrants, without probable cause, to spy on the Trump campaign.  In addition, the Obama FBI tried to insert informants into the Trump campaign.

The Obama DOJ and FBI, aided by their cheerleaders in the media, and the NeverTrump Republicans, could not and did not defeat Trump.  The next step was to destroy the Trump presidency to nullify the votes of over 63 million Americans.

Obama knew what his DOJ and FBI did during the campaign.  FBI agent Lisa Page texted FBI agent Peter Strzok on September 2, 2016: “Potus wants to know everything we’re doing.”

Trump fired Comey.  In retaliation, Comey leaked FBI memos to force the DOJ to appoint his friend, Robert Mueller, as special counsel to investigate the unfounded charges of Trump’s collusion with Russia to win the presidency.  There was no credible evidence to warrant the special counsel.  After two years, Mueller and his gang of 19 Hillary-Obama attorneys had to conclude there was no collusion because there was no collusion.  Mueller knew this on the day of his appointment.

How is Nixon saying that the CIA tell the FBI to back off worse than the Obama DOJ and FBI using the Hillary-paid-for dossier to try to beat Trump, and then to remove Trump, and having the FBI clear Hillary?

Nixon was trying to protect his men from criminal prosecutions for a stupid breaking and entering to steal DNC records.  Nixon did not have the DOJ, FBI, and CIA investigate George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic nominee.  Obama’s DOJ and FBI used the courts to obtain warrants based on the Hillary-paid-for dossier that they knew was not verified.  They intentionally failed to inform the FISA court that the information relied upon for the warrant was unverified — and bought and paid for by Hillary.

In the Nixon case, the FBI did not stop its investigation.  At worst, there was a discussion of an attempt by having the CIA ask the FBI to stop.  But the CIA refused.  At least Nixon’s CIA, unlike Obama’s CIA and DOJ, had integrity.

The Obama-Hillary gang did not merely “ask.”  You cannot get more active than by filing four applications for warrants, not based on probable cause, to a FISA court, and trying to insert informants.

If we apply the Nixon standard, then A.G. Barr was correct to appoint a U.S. attorney, Durham, to investigate the FISA warrants, which means investigation of Obama, Hillary, Comey, Strzok, McCabe, Lynch, Page, Brennan, Clapper, Ohr, and others.  Further, the Senate should establish a committee similar to the Watergate committee so the public can see this bunch testify.

Originally posted 2019-05-16 16:10:39.

Current Events, Recent Posts

The Real Reason They Hate Trump

5 Comments

I love it when someone, especially a professor at Yale, speaks out and explains everything in absolute terms; the kind a fellow like me can understand and appreciate.. Great read, thanks to a Marine Brother, Col David, no not the author of this fabulous piece, but a dear friend and Marine brother.

DAVID GELERNTER – OCTOBER 21, 2018

Every big U.S. election is interesting, but the coming midterms are fascinating for a reason most commentators forget to mention: The Democrats have no issues. The economy is booming and America’s international position is strong. In foreign affairs, the U.S. has remembered in the nick of time what Machiavelli advised princes five centuries ago: Don’t seek to be loved, seek to be feared.

The contrast with the Obama years must be painful for any honest leftist. For future generations, the Kavanaugh fight will stand as a marker of the Democratic Party’s intellectual bankruptcy, the flashing red light on the dashboard that says “Empty.” The left is beaten.

This has happened before, in the 1980s and ’90s and early 2000s, but then the financial crisis arrived to save liberalism from certain destruction. Today leftists pray that Robert Mueller will put on his Superman outfit and save them again.

For now, though, the left’s only issue is “We hate Trump.” This is an instructive hatred, because what the left hates about Donald Trump is precisely what it hates about America. The implications are important, and painful.

Not that every leftist hates America. But the leftists I know do hate Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable. Worst of all, he has no ideology except getting the job done. His goals are to do the task before him, not be pushed around, and otherwise to enjoy life. In short, he is a typical American—except exaggerated, because he has no constraints to cramp his style except the ones he himself invents.

Mr. Trump lacks constraints because he is filthy rich and always has been and, unlike other rich men, he revels in wealth and feels no need to apologize—ever. He never learned to keep his real opinions to himself because he never had to. He never learned to be embarrassed that he is male, with ordinary male proclivities. Sometimes he has treated women disgracefully, for which Americans, left and right, are ashamed of him—as they are of JFK and Bill Clinton.

But my job as a voter is to choose the candidate who will do best for America. I am sorry about the coarseness of the unconstrained average American that Mr. Trump conveys. That coarseness is unpresidential and makes us look bad to other nations. On the other hand, many of his opponents worry too much about what other people think. I would love the esteem of France, Germany and Japan. But I don’t find myself losing sleep over it.

The difference between citizens who hate Mr. Trump and those who can live with him—whether they love or merely tolerate him—comes down to their views of the typical American: the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife. The leftist intellectuals I know say they dislike such people insofar as they tend to be conservative Republicans.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama know their real sins. They know how appalling such people are, with their stupid guns and loathsome churches. They have no money or permanent grievances to make them interesting and no Twitter followers to speak of. They skip Davos every year and watch Fox News. Not even the very best has the dazzling brilliance of a Chuck Schumer, not to mention a Michelle Obama. In truth they are dumb as sheep.

Mr. Trump reminds us who the average American really is. Not the average male American, or the average white American. We know for sure that, come 2020, intellectuals will be dumbfounded at the number of women and blacks who will vote for Mr. Trump. He might be realigning the political map: plain average Americans of every type vs. fancy ones.

Many left-wing intellectuals are counting on technology to do away with the jobs that sustain all those old-fashioned truck-driver-type people, but they are laughably wide of the mark. It is impossible to transport food and clothing, or hug your wife or girl or child, or sit silently with your best friend, over the internet. Perhaps that’s obvious, but to be an intellectual means nothing is obvious. Mr. Trump is no genius, but if you have mastered the obvious and add common sense, you are nine-tenths of the way home. (Scholarship is fine, but the typical modern intellectual cheapens his learning with politics, and is proud to vary his teaching with broken-down left-wing junk.)

This all leads to an important question—one that will be dismissed indignantly today, but not by historians in the long run: Is it possible to hate Donald Trump but not the average American?

True, Mr. Trump is the unconstrained average citizen. Obviously you can hate some of his major characteristics—the infantile lack of self-control in his Twitter babble, his hitting back like a spiteful child bully—without hating the average American, who has no such tendencies. (Mr. Trump is improving in these two categories.) You might dislike the whole package. I wouldn’t choose him as a friend, nor would he choose me. But what I see on the left is often plain, unconditional hatred of which the hater—God forgive him—is proud. It’s discouraging, even disgusting. And it does mean, I believe, that the Trump-hater truly does hate the average American—male or female, black or white. Often he hates America, too.

Granted, Mr. Trump is a parody of the average American, not the thing itself. To turn away is fair. But to hate him from your heart is revealing. Many Americas were ashamed when Ronald Reagan was elected. A movie actor? But the new direction he chose for America was a big success on balance, and Reagan turned into a great president. Evidently this country was intended to be run by amateurs after all—by plain citizens, not only lawyers and bureaucrats.

Those who voted for Mr. Trump, and will vote for his candidates this November, worry about the nation, not its image. The president deserves our respect because Americans deserve it—not such fancy-pants extras as network commentators, socialist high-school teachers and eminent professors, but the basic human stuff that has made America great, and is making us greater all the time.

Mr. Gelernter is computer science professor at Yale and chief scientist at Dittach LLC. His most recent book is “Tides of Mind.”

Originally posted 2018-11-04 16:09:12.