THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

TRUMP AND THE GOP SUCCESSION | 2016-03-25

Barry Goldwater always felt inferior to the snobs his side chased out of the Republican Party to take it over briefly.

The minute Goldwater got trounced in the election he called the old Establishment and groveled and pissed his way back into their grace.

Upon getting the nomination in 1980, Reagan sealed the Party's long-term doom by, albeit reluctantly, taking on George Bush as his VP and successor.

Win or lose, we can only hope that Trump will not become the typical Groveling WASP.

In 1964 Goldwater doomed the Party to many years of moderation and disaster.

In 1980 Reagan gave those same moderates back control of the Party in 1989.

To younger people, this election is everything.

To me, no matter what happens, there will be many more.

What Trump decides to do AFTER his nomination will be a big decider of our future.

Will he, like Reagan, give the moderates SOMETHING, like Bush, which meant everything in the future?

Will Trump, unlike Goldwater, insist on his right to say what he says, and not grovel to the establishment and give the future to them, as Reagan and Goldwater both did?

Will Trump be Trump, and take victory as VICTORY, without conceding the future to our enemies?

ACCORDING TO ALL OF TODAY'S CONSERVATIVE SPOKESMEN, MCAIN IS RIGHT -- LOYALTY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS TREASON TO TRUE AMERICANISM | 2001-07-14

Pro-immigration people always equate resistance to open borders with racism. They say that there is no room in America for whites who worry about white people. The natural corollary to this is that there is no room here for Americans who worry about Americans.

According to Lincoln and McCain, Americans have no more right to be here than anybody else. This is a nation of immigrants. So good whites are not loyal to whites, good Americans are not loyal to Americans. Both must only be concerned with all races and all nationalities.

ON THE OTHER HAND, liberals and conservatives agree that non-whites are naturally concerned about the well-being and the fate of their own kind. It is logical that the same principle would apply to good Americans.

To be a non-racist, you can't be pro-white. To be a good American, you cannot be especially concerned about Americans.

But if your loyalty is to something which is either non-white or non-American, other rules apply. For example, "Hispanic" refers to an official minority. It requires fealty to a culture based outside the United States.

It follows, as McCain said, that American Hispanics should be loyal only to their own race and culture.

This is no contradiction if the required definition of a non-racist white person is correct.

This is the inevitable logic of the Gettysburg Address. Liberals and conservatives have repeatedly agreed that America is a Melting Pot united only by paper. They agree that this the basis of Holy Diversity. This, they tell us, is True Americanism.

So McCain says that an American of Hispanic origin should be loyal to the people of his real race and his real culture, not to the American people.

Unless we change our present definitions of racism and Americanism, he is perfectly correct.

ELIZABETH | 2006-04-21

Elizabeth is going to get the same treatment, but her added comment about not being asked reminds me of my sweet but sometimes blunt older sister.

Back in the late 50s down South white women were expected to marry and have children. If a woman took a Master's Degree and were doing professional work back then in our benighted section of the country, people would ask you why you weren't married, especially if you were getting close to the ancient and dread three oh (30).

This was an irritation to my sister, though now she would prefer the old days when people were that nosy to nowadays when people feel white women shouldn't HAVE children.

Besides, being a Whitaker, my sister came up with an answer taht shut them up.

When they asked her, "Why aren't you married yet?" she answered,

"Nobody's asked me."

I was sitting in a bar once with my doctor brother. The place was full of drunk college students.

Remember, these guys were all whit and they were college students. My brother wouldn't go toa redneck bar with me.

Suddenly my brother said, "Bob, stop a minute and look around you."

I did so.

Then he said, "Do you realize that some poor woman is going to have settle for every one of these clowns?"

It gave me a whole new sympathy for the female dilemma.

Elizabeth does not associate with the trash. Finding a decent guy, a rare bird in any case, who will actually commit himself is MUCH harder now than it was in 1950s.

I had to go ten thousand miles to find a woman who would marry me.

And now I'm divorced.

I feel sorry for all you younger people.

But I fought to prevent all this from happening to you.

Now, Elizabeth's general comment with reply I have have just given two others:

Like everybody else, Shari is correcting me without referrijng to the general point I was trying to make.

Sigh! OK, let's do the drill:

No, Elizabeth, I am saying that every aspect of Catholicism is for sterility. In fact, parts of Germany and the Netherlands that went Protestant have lost population relative to the ones that stayed Catholic.

Congratulations. You have made a point you could have made if Bob had never been born.

I also said that Protestant churches are as desperate to prove that Jesus never had a sexual thought in his life as Catholics are, but that was ignored.

So we are back to your correction,, which was all you got out of the article.

Which is exactly what the article is about.

There is a conviction in white countries with Christian cultures that a high morality means steility for us. All mention of genetics is evil because of a mind set deep within us.

I was trying to deal with that mindset.

So, Elizabeth, we have concluded that the only point you got out of the article, that the Catholic Church has been treated unfairly, represents unfairness on Bob's part.

Once again, congratulations

ANTONIO | 2006-03-05

Antonio says:

"Bob an old truism states that what a man needs to get ahead in life is a few dedicated enemies. I'm glad you're back, as I check the blog a couple times a day for new kernels of wisdom. "

"I've been trying to listen to your "Tide of History Podcast" for a while now but the link doesn't work on this and a few earlier podcasts. Any chance of restoring it? It's a classic show and I'd like to record it and the other Untrained Eye podcasts for my subway listening. "

Antonio, you and the rest of you brats do not understand how helpless I am.

When some Brits asked me if they could use my stuff on i-pod, I said they were welcome to it with my gratitude.

I then added that I have no idea what an i-pod is and if I had one I wouldn't even know what to feed it.

[email protected]

What in the hell are you talking about?

Explain this to me as unto a child, for my second childhood began some time ago.