Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – By the by, folks, these are the same people that were in charge of the conservative movement – they were charged as parents, as stewards over conservatism. These are the same people that are now marching in lockstep. They are a veritable in-sync army, marching in lockstep and saying that sodomitical marriage is the future of the Republican Party. That’s right, you’ll go gay and like it. Check out today’s transcript for the rest….
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: Here’s Megan McArdle at BloombergView.com:
Over the past week, as it’s begun to sink in that — no foolin’ — Donald Trump might really be the nominee, I began to notice a trend among family and friends who are stalwart Republicans. These are people who consistently vote, and consistently vote (R) straight down the line. And they are tortured because they cannot bring themselves to vote for the Republican nominee this year, if the Republican nominee is Trump.
“She’s beside herself,” my mother said of a near relation, who is apparently seriously considering voting for a Democrat for the first time. I wanted to understand this phenomenon better. I asked on Twitter whether this was a real thing, just as the hashtag #NeverTrump began trending. And I got an earful. So I invited lifelong Republicans who had decided that they couldn’t vote for Trump in the general, even if he got the nomination, to tell me their stories. Hundreds of e-mails poured in, and are still arriving. They’re informative.
What surprised me? First, the sheer number of people who sat down and composed lengthy e-mails on a weekend.
Second, the passion they showed. These people are not quietly concerned about Trump. They are appalled, repulsed, afraid and dismayed that their party could have let this happen. They wrote in the strongest possible language, and many were adamant that they would not stay home on Election Day, but in fact would vote for Hillary Clinton in the general and perhaps leave the Republican Party for good.
Mike: Folks, this is why they’re rejecticons. It’s the conservative movement that they created or they participated in. They were the stewards of it. They were in charge of it. What does Philip Seymour Hoffman tell the little Lebowski in the movie? Life is in your hands, dude. No, man, don’t say that. Mr. Lebowski was very clear. Her life was in your hands. Well, the life of conservatism was in the hands of the Republican Party.
Here’s the question of the day. Call me and answer this or send it out on the Twitter feed @thekingdude or email firstname.lastname@example.org. Or, if you’ve downloaded the brand-new Veritas Radio Network app, you now have a little button on your app. It says “Call Crusade.” It’ll say: Really, do you want to call? Click yes.
What’s the question? Has the Republican Party now been proven to have failed in raising the little baby conservatives? Just imagine conservatism as a little babe that was wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in Barry Goldwater’s manger. Well, how have the ruling masters that were in charge of conservatism, what kind of job did they do? Would you grade them as good parents or did they let the kids determine their own punishment? Did they let the kids determine the limits and the boundaries under which they could conduct their moral affairs?
By the by, folks, these are the same people that were in charge of the conservative movement – they were charged as parents, as stewards over conservatism. These are the same people that are now marching in lockstep. They are a veritable in-sync army, marching in lockstep and saying that sodomitical marriage is the future of the Republican Party. That’s right, you’ll go gay and like it. We lost the battle, says Rod Dreher. It’s over. Everybody surrender their arms. We’re going to have to find something else to defend. No, you’re going to have to find something else to defend.
There is no question mark at the end of what a Catholic or a Christian gentleman must do when confronted by sodomites claiming that they can marry one another. That is, no, you can’t. You are not going to co-opt the term. It is not your term. The term belongs to the Church. The term belongs to those that have defended it for 2,000 years, some of them with their very lives (see St. Thomas More, St. John the Baptist). These people got their heads whacked off because they would not go along with the loudmouth convenience at the time and what the crowd was saying. They would not turn their back on what they knew to be the one true definition of marriage. It’s as simple as that.
St. John Fisher lost his head. Seriously. St. Thomas More lost his head. When they asked him: I’m going to give you a piece of paper. Just write some kind of excuse that will say Henry is justified in doing this. You don’t even have to say he’s justified according to the magisterium, just that he has the authority to change the law, to change the rule and we’ll let you go. Of course, St. Thomas More said: I don’t even know what you’re talking about, dude. I surrendered my authority. I have abdicated my position here on this. I am no longer the king’s attorney. I am no longer the king of the consular court or the head of the consular court. I have nothing to say on the matter. I have no legal recourse to it. Even if I did say something, it wouldn’t be legally binding on Henry so it wouldn’t matter. They tried to set him up. He wouldn’t do it.
The Rod Drehers and the rest of them out there in the world, the entire political class that have now surrendered, given up the ghost when it comes to things like sodomitical marriage, they’re the ones that were the stewards of conservatism that have given up the ghost. They’re the ones that are responsible for the rejecticons who are in ascension today.
Here’s a good question: What do you go to now? You’ve killed conservatism. It’s over. That’s dead. That ship sailed; it sank to the bottom of the sea. What do you hitch your wagon to now, rejectivism? What’s the next big thing? You’re going to rally around what? What principle do you clowns have besides killing people in the third world with your army? What principle do you have to organize around? There is no principle other than pure political power, naked political power to the tune of $4 trillion. That’s the principle.
Folks, we spent almost an entire hour and a half, almost 90 minutes yesterday – I’ll show you the book. Those of you that missed segment three and segment four, Rethinking the American Union for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Donald Livingston. If you missed those segments, go to the Founders Pass and go download and go listen to segment three and segment four of yesterday’s program and you’ll be all caught up. I believe that – actually Kirkpatrick Sale – I didn’t do anything. I just read what Kirk had written.
I believe that Kirkpatrick Sale made an unassailable case that the size of a successful State can be no larger than 10 million people. [mocking] “Mike, what do we do about ‘Muricah?” Well, think about it. You’ll figure it out. The size of a successful state can be no larger than 10 million persons. Actually it’s ideal between 5 and 6 million, but can be as little, as beautifully small in the republican sense of the word as 500,000 to a million. There are over 30 countries, republics on Earth recognized by the United Nations between 500,000 and a million citizens. They rank in the top 10, top 15 of every measure that man can create to measure man’s happiness inside the countries that man has created as states. Think about that.
I’m going to get to part two of this today. We have some other things to talk about. I only got about halfway through Kirk’s essay because the rest of it goes into the details of: How did these little countries actually become who they are? What else is it that binds them and knits them together for common purposes so that they can enjoy this success? We’re going to get into this in a little bit. Just a little bit of a teaser here. If you did not get a chance to listen to or if you’ve ever read the book, or if you didn’t get a chance to listen to the segment yesterday, when you get caught up on it, answer the question. The question I asked yesterday and answered – as Brother Andre Marie, host of ReConquest here on the Crusade Channel asks at the end of every ReConquest episode: Now that we know what’s wrong, what are we going to do about it? What are we going to do about it?
Let’s get back to the diehard Republicans who say NeverTrump. Here’s what Megan McArdle said she learned from the NeverTrump crowd.
They’re party stalwarts.
That’s not surprising: I specified lifelong Republicans, not swing voters. [Mike: She asked her friends who were lifelong Republicans to weigh in on this.] Most of the people were just that. Oh, maybe they had a youthful fling with a Democrat or two, but they married the GOP, and they’ve been reliably pulling that lever for the bulk of their adult lives. Some have done much more than that: served in Republican administrations, worked for Republican campaigns, donated and volunteered for their party.
“I’ve been involved in politics for almost as long as I can remember.… Throughout the years, I had the opportunity to meet and campaign for a number of candidates…. I’m the first to admit that they all had flaws, and some were less conservative than I, but I never met or worked for one who wasn’t a patriot. Yes, we disagreed, but never did I feel that these disagreements were personal or that they conveyed a lack of respect for our fellow Americans. Far from it. That changed with Donald Trump.”
Mike: Now Trump, not only is he a lout, not only is he a loudmouth, not only is he Trumpzilla on steroids, now according to the NeverTrump crowd, according to the rejecticons, he’s not even a patriot. How do you define patriot? This is a guy that’s willing to surrender a career that earns him billions upon billions upon billions, but he says: I’ll take some of the billions and fund my own presidential campaign. I’ll be your president. We’re going to make ‘Muricah great again. What is more patriotic than that? This is what is amazing about this. What have the clowns – you could almost figuratively take these people and put them in the Stephen King movie It, and they would be perfect foil clowns. What do these clowns give up? With the exception of Darrell Issa, most of them have made their fortunes, or their families have made fortunes, while they’ve been in politics not before.
End Mike Church Show Transcript