He is a white man who is a nationalist. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, President Trump is not a “nationalist”, he is a patriot, there is a huge difference.
Barrack Obama was a nationalist. a minority /ethnic black nationalist who conducted pressers and fundraisers which barred white reporters. Obama also attended Ralph Wright’s Chicago church for 20 years, where Wright continuously preached the racial supremacy of Black people. That’s real nationalism.Trump does not bar reporters or anyone based on race.He does not organize events based on race or support superiority of people based on race. Obama did but the press remained silent.
President Trump is right. It was a racist question,attempting to paint the President racially as something he is not.
You can read more about what nationalism is here:
“Barrack Obama: The Quintessential Liberal fascist”
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html
Trump: "I am a Nationslit!" "Use that word."
Nationslit = Nationalist
If you look up the word "nationalist" the first synonym is "patriotic".
If you look up the word "patriot" the first synonym is "nationalist".
They two words are synonyms.
Yes, both nationalist and patriot can be used in a derogatory sense, as in "chauvinist", "jingoist", "xenophobe", etc., etc.
But those describe a pathological condition of excessive or misdirected nationalism-patriotism.
So the two words -- nationalist and patriotic -- mean the same things and can be used interchangeably.
The real problem in our country today is neither too much nationalism nor patriotism, but something very different: tribalism -- people who hate their country to favor their "tribe", be it race, ethnicity, political ideology, gender, etc., etc.
If there was any 'nationalism' in that traitor Hussein, it was rooted in some misty wet dream of an Africa that never was, NOT on love of the United States and our Constitution.
You assert that the bastard was a nationalist, and then in support of same lay out 'his' overt racism as evidence when the assertion and evidence are, in the extant discussion, as different as night and day.
Obama also attended Ralph Wright’s Chicago church for 20 years, where Wright continuously preached the racial supremacy of Black people. That’s real nationalism.
I underlined the above to highlight that I categorically reject your conflation of nationalism with racism.
In America's case, true nationalism, within the context of our Constitution, is inconsistent with actual racism.
While actual racism, again within the context of our Constitution, is inherently anti-nationalist.
Nationalism and patriotism are concepts meant to unite a people, while all the race pimps, Wright and Øbama notable among them, represent the precise antithesis of that ideal.
HOWEVER, it is how you interpret the word that influences the discussion.
You say he is a patriot and I certainly agree. Sort of implicit in MAGA, I would think.
By the way, I should disclose right upfront that I don't personally like PDJT and have said so in posts here on FR since he was elected. I did vote for him because...because I sure as Hell wasn't voting for HRC. I don't like him mainly because of his big talking, flamboyant, careless NYC billionare style of expressing himself because it is so grating and, well, frankly, not very presidential. But you've got to accept him for what he is and also admit he does keep things stirred up.
That said, saying PDJT is a nationalist doesn't make him any less patriotic than anyone else and certinly a lot more patriotic than all of the elite superior people on the liberal left and in the MSM who have been attacking him continuously since before the 2016 election.
Among the many things nationalism stands for to mainstream conservative Americans are: secure national borders, respect for law and enforcement of same, respect for American history, traditions and culture, preeminent military strength, a vibrant and growing economy that has its foundation in American citizens holding good paying jobs in America, etc. There is nothing within the mainline conservative definition of nationalism that explicitly or implicitly advocates racism.
Now there are white racist groups and America haters on the left that have cooked up their own definitions of nationalism that do incorporate racist elements. But those definitions are simply made-up to serve those group's own self-serving interests. Those definitions and their advocates should be denounced for what they are: racists.
This condemnation not only includes the obvious white racists on the right but also the anti-white supremacy white liberals on the left who talk out of both sides of their mouth on the issue. The anti-white racists are insidious; saying “I'm not anti-white” when called to account in uncontrolled public settings, and spewing really vile and very undifferentiated racial hatred for whites when they feel they are in a safe, unaccountable setting among fellow travelers. By the way, did I mention they (the left/liberals) are also mostly socialists and communists?
Anyway...
To the liberal/left, nationalism = racism.
Using this reporters “logic,”
If a white man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a white racist,
Then
A black man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a black racist,
A latino man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a latino racist, and
An asian man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a asian racist,
etc. (fill in the blank)
We know this is faulty logic because any reasonable definition of “nationalism” (especially as it applies to the United States) does not incorporate racial preference in anything.
What it does is express openly a fundamental preference for ones own country and an elevation of respect for it. These things are an anathema to the internationalist left.
Conservatives need to shift the emphasis in this conversation away from the southern border. The race element (brown, mostly latino) drowns out the fact that they (the caravan group and all the other crossers)all intend to enter the United States illegally; that is, without first receiving authority to do so. This includes the supposed "asylum seekers." Apparently, Mexico just isn't good enough for them to make their application and wait. (Although, to be fair, stay in Mexico and wait for approval is what some immigration activist lawyers are reportedly now telling the real asylum seekers among the caravan's travelers.)
Let's start focusing on the other group illegally inside the country. There is a statistic being cited stating that about 40% of the illegal immigrants in the United States are visa "overstays." These persons entered the country on legitimate visas and deliberately didn't go home when they expired. Those persons come from all over the world, including Europe, so shifting focus to them should dilute the argument that imigration enforcement is being driven solely by racism.
Some analysis is needed to breakdown that 40% number in order to develop a nuanced discussion. What countries are they from? What purpose did they state on their visa application? Are there any political, social, educational, racial, sexual, educational, economic class background trends in the data? When apprehended, where have they been? How have they been supporting themselves? Etc.
Ultimately a profile of various types of visa overstayers (new word?) should emerge.
Personally, I would like to see this trend analysis applied to some sort of risk-based insurance/performance bond requirement that the visa applicant must satisfy as part of the application process. The higher the assessed risk of an overstay, the higher the face amount of the bond and the higher the bond maker's fee. Set it so the visa applicant is taking out a bond to cover all of the welfare, incarceration and administrative costs associated with finding and deporting them should they deliberately overstay. Create an incentive for the home country insurers to ensure the potential visa overstayers come back home. Show some scalability in the terms and when the policy/bond is deemed forfeit to incentivize the insurer to actively seek and return overstayers.
Forget "la migra," the home country insurance investigators/bond recovery agents are after me! Bail recovery agent vs deportation proceedings; which do you think would get an overstayer out of the country faster?
I'll bet you could initially implement it through Executive Order. Yeah, Congress wouldn't like it and there would probably the lawsuits and court stays. But we wouldn"t be talking solely about the caravans coming up from the south anymore.