May 7, 2011 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
41:35
20110507_Hour_2
|
Time
Text
Welcome to the Political Cesspool, known worldwide as the South's foremost populous radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
All right, everybody, welcome back to the second hour of tonight's live broadcast of the Political Cesspool Radio Program.
I'm your host, James Edwards, broadcasting from a raucous Bill Street at our flagship studio, AM 1380 WLRM Radio, sitting right across the street from the FedEx Forum where the Memphis Grizzlies just want a playoff game.
And Keith Alexander, who co-hosted this week for the first hour, is out there braving the sea of humanity, as they say, as the crowds disperse onto our equivalent of Bourbon Street.
But all the real action is right in here inside this studio as the political cesspool continues on into its second hour.
We are, of course, being broadcast as well to the AM FM affiliate stations of the Liberty News Radio Network, including our newest affiliate, which also happens to be right here in Memphis, AM1600WMQM.
Welcome all.
And of course, welcome to those of you who are tuning in around the world on our internet simulcast, thepolitical cesspool.org.
We have got an hour that I'm really looking forward to tonight because we're going to be joined by Richard Spencer for its entirety.
We're going to be talking about two of the biggest news stories taking place in the world this week, the Osama bin Laden hysteria and the royal wedding, both of which played out over the course of the last seven days.
And for those of you who are not familiar, and I'd find it hard to believe that you couldn't be, Richard Spencer is, of course, the former assistant editor at the American Conservative and executive editor at Takis Magazine.
He is also the founder and co-editor of alternativeright.com, which is, no lie, ladies and gentlemen, the finest website on the internet, alternative right.com.
Richard, welcome back to the show.
Are you with us, Richard?
Yes, Sam.
Can you hear me?
I can hear you now.
Welcome back.
Okay.
Good to be on the festival.
Well, it's good to have you.
And as I said, we look for any excuse at all to extend to you a return invitation.
And you've given us a couple of good ones this week.
Osama bin Laden, your commentary on that.
And, of course, the royal wedding.
When Osama bin Laden died, I was actually on vacation, or when they say he died.
And I've scrabbled together a quick commentary for the blog just to keep some fresh content up there while I was relaxing.
And here's what I wrote, Richard.
I'm going to share this with you quickly and then turn it over to you.
I wrote that I was not at all convinced that Obama was telling the truth and that it was quite convenient that they buried him at sea, quote unquote.
I said that I wasn't buying the story.
Osama bin Laden may have been dead for years.
He may still be alive.
And it is, of course, still possible that he was killed last week, just as Obama claimed.
You can believe what you want, but it's likely that last week's announcement was intended to shore up the public's waning support for our insane military misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan and to build support for even further wars with Libya and Iran.
And now we should probably add Syria to the list.
But it's all moot, I wrote, because Osama bin Laden won.
Period.
Richard, you were interviewed by Russia Today, Russia TV, over the exact same issue.
And I know many of your comments and many of my comments echoed one another.
What's your take on the whole thing?
Well, I believe I wrote as well the day that I learned about his putative death that he has won.
And, you know, before we get into any speculation about what actually happened and things like that, let me say two things.
The first is governments lie.
I mean, let's not be silly people who think that the government, oh, they've got great intentions at heart and they always do wonderful things.
And in a democracy, because we vote, you know, it's impossible for government to be bad or something like that.
No.
I don't want to, you know, we can talk about so-called weapons of mass destruction.
The fact that, you know, I can't believe that we have a definitive story about what happened on 9-11.
You want to talk about the Gulf of Tonkin.
You want to go on and on.
Governments lie.
So I think we should be extremely skeptical and we should speculate about how, you know, qui bono, who's going to benefit by this and so on and so forth.
Well, as I said, I think it is our duty to speculate and to question the government.
The people who don't are just feeble-minded limmings.
But as I wrote, and I think the point of it was, whether he died 10 years ago, whether he died this week in these supposed raid, or whether he's still alive, it doesn't matter because of all that has occurred because of 9-11.
And that's another thing that I really want to get your take on, is that they say there are certain events where you'll always remember where you were when they occurred.
And one of them was, of course, 9-11.
And I do remember where I was then.
And I'll probably always remember where I was when I first learned the official story about Osama bin Laden's death.
I was on Duval Street in Key West.
And anyone who's ever been to Key West knows what Duval Street is all about.
But I was there and I saw it come up on television.
And the first thing that I saw when I was in one of the eating establishments down there was the now almost iconic, I guess, scene from the Philadelphia Phillies baseball game.
And you saw all of these drones.
And I'll use that word, drones, chanting, go USA, go USA.
And my first reaction, just this was seconds into, you know, you see the headline flash across, and then you see this picture of all these people, you know, chanting go USA and waving American flags and pointing to their shirt that said USA.
And my first reaction, Richard, was just to close my eyes as tight as I could and cringe at the embarrassment that that site caused me.
And I couldn't even really articulate at that time why it was eliciting such a reaction, but I bet you can.
Well, I had the exact same reaction.
You know, a friend of mine, whom I usually agree with, he was kind of like, oh, Richard, you're like Uncle Scrooge.
You know, you don't have any patriotism left.
This is not patriotism.
This is crazed, raw-rawing, vulgar cheerleading for a government that essentially just did a mob-like hit on a man.
You know, look, I don't think Osama Baban is some nice person.
And obviously, you've got to deal with some dangerous characters in the military.
But you try to bring people to justice.
You don't go around just blowing people up and then everyone in a stadium starts cheering.
I mean, that is just truly vulgar and truly uncivilized.
I mean, what's next?
Are we going to slaughter him in the center of a baseball stadium or something?
I mean, truly, it's terrible.
But, you know, I, too, wrote the night that it happened that in some ironic way, Osama bin Laden has won.
And let's just take stock of what's happened over the past decade since the towers went down in New York City.
The dollar, the U.S. dollar is a good measure of your economy, your worldwide standing.
It has lost some quarter to 30% of its value.
We have spent somewhere in the order of a trillion and a half, and that is just explicit cost on war.
in the Middle East.
I don't even know how they're even justifying these wars now.
It's some vague nation building or they'd be over here if we weren't over there.
I don't even know how they justify them, but they're not going to go away.
I hear the music, so I'll return to this when we come.
Richard is a radio pro.
He knows what it means when the music starts to play.
So we're going to take a break and we're going to continue with Richard Spencer in what promises to be an absolutely riveting hour of talk radio.
Stay tuned, everybody.
Welcome back.
To get on the political cesspool, call us on James's Dime, toll-free, at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of The Political Sesspool, James Edwards.
You need somebody to love, to love.
All right, everybody.
Continuing on now with our featured guest for the evening, Richard Spencer of alternativeright.com.
If you want to read some excellent commentary, some great opinion and analysis on the Osama bin Laden hysteria, as we're calling it, you've got to go and read Richard's take on it at alternativeright.com.
Also there, and at our website, too, I might add.
You will find Richard's interview with RT, the television outlet in Washington, that also echoes his thoughts on the matter.
And Richard was making a point right before we ran into that first commercial break that I certainly share with him.
And let me first reiterate this, and I think it probably goes without saying, but you never know.
And that is, obviously, no one is on the quote-unquote side of Osama bin Laden.
This isn't that we hate America and we're siding with someone like that.
You know, my ancestors carved this nation from a wilderness.
My loyalty is always going to be with my blood and with my family, and my family settled this country.
So we are certainly dismayed and disappointed with what America has become, but our loyalty is always going to be here.
But I would also say that it could be the true measure, and I hate to use this word, of a patriot to question the government during times like this.
And the point we're really trying to make about the whole Osama bin Laden affair is that there's something wrong with this knee-jerk and gullible reaction that we see from the public.
Any public that senseless and that eager and willing to go along with whatever they see on TV isn't a public that we could have much hope or invest much hope or faith in.
But if you dig down, and Richard was making this point to summarize it all, if you accept the establishment version of 9-11, as I wrote earlier this week, a ragtag bunch of ragheads led by Osama bin Laden from a cave at the end of the earth and armed with nothing more than a few pairs of box cutters pulled off the most astonishing and effective terrorist attack in world history.
In response, we destroyed American liberties with the Patriot Act.
We bankrupted ourselves, as Richard mentioned, to the soon of trillions of dollars attacking and destroying two countries who had never done anything to us and couldn't have been a threat to us, even if they wanted.
We sent our economy down the toilet to finance these wars, which only caused most of the world to hate us.
And now we're on the verge of attacking Libya and or Syria.
And a full-blown, all-out war with Iran has probably been on the agenda since 9-12-01.
And what did we get for all of our efforts?
Well, as we have been talking about, if you believe this week's news, we got Osama bin Laden.
Compare that to what we've spent and lost in U.S. lives, trillions of dollars down the drain, a bankrupt economy, the goodwill of the world replaced with enmity and hatred.
But hey, that's no matter.
We got Osama and we can't quit now.
Richard, this is the kind of opinion on this that I don't think people are finding anywhere else but places like our radio program and your website.
And this is certainly an opinion that should be infused into the court of public opinion right now.
Oh, there's certainly not.
And you don't find it on the left.
You know, five years ago, 10 years ago, the left was quite anti-war when George Bush was in the White House.
And now we have the historic presidency of Barack Obama, and they laugh it all up.
You know, they've done just a U-turn.
You know, and to go back to that point, the point that I was making about this, the trillion and a half dollars of explicit money spent on wars, that's not counting the opportunity cost of what we could have done with that, i.e. let people keep it, for God's sake, or improved our infrastructure, which is crumbling.
I mean, you don't have to be a socialist to say we should be building roads here as opposed to building roads in Afghanistan and then blowing them up again the next week.
The other thing that I find truly disturbing about what happened over the past year is a report that was actually came out from the Washington Post, a place I usually don't like too much, but they did this report, and I imagined that they were actually sugarcoating the matter.
But they reported that over 800,000 Americans have higher-level security clearance in this massive national security state they constructed.
I forgot the exact number, but miles upon miles of new buildings that are basically all about domestic and international spying have been constructed on us.
So this is something we've created this humongous octopus in this country that its pinnacles are everywhere.
It's private business, individuals.
It's everywhere.
And I think people are beginning to see the tip of the spear of it with the TSA.
I mean, I think the TSA is the ultimate expression of what we've gained or Osama winning.
I mean, if you had showed people, let's say the 1950s or 60s, just normal Americans, you showed them these pictures of these degenerate, you know, fat, you know, gross people patting down little girls.
I mean, that is just perverse.
And, you know, and yet this is all, you know, who cares?
And, you know, to go back to these ideas of these people in the stadiums, what I like being on your show is that I get to rant.
It's therapeutic.
I don't use this show, to be honest.
Yeah, I don't actually do this show to benefit anything.
I just do it because it's therapy.
Yeah, yeah.
Just kidding, but it is at the same time.
No, no, I mean, it's sometimes good to have a little crie de cur, so to speak, a cry from the heart.
You know, I think a lot of those people in that stadium, they are not thinking of the cost, the kind of damage that we have done to this nation over the past year.
And it's basically just kind of, you know, oh, we got them.
Ends justify the means.
You know, this is all worth it kind of stuff.
And I just find this truly childish.
And I think it also goes along with this way that the people who don't want to think about the cost, don't want to think about the other side of the coin, just kind of accept this false reality given to them by the mainstream media, that the mainstream media can just roll out some new story and they just kind of accept it and they'll just move on to the next one the next week.
They won't question, even when the story being produced by the White House keeps changing dramatically.
It's preposterous.
I mean, it's strange.
I don't want to say preposterous.
Well, you know, and that's something that obviously you wouldn't have encountered in years past when people had a more sensible head on their shoulders.
But this was something I was talking about with Sam Dixon off the air not too long ago.
And as much as it brings us a sense of disdain to see this kind of stuff, it can also be used to our advantage if, and this is the biggest if you'll ever hear, we can regain control of our institutions.
And the fact of the matter still remains, and we've said it so many times on this program, and this Osama bin Laden deal is just the latest example that proves our point.
Whatever's in vogue, whatever's fashionable, that's what people are going to rally behind.
Whatever they see on TV, they are almost going to accept it as God's holy writ.
And so, as bad as it is for this to be the case, when those who don't have America's vital interest at heart controlling the apparatus, it could be something that we could use to our advantage if we could ever figure out a way to put control of these institutions back into the world.
Oh, yeah.
Well, you know, two points on that real quick.
I think liberal journalists do make up what is a kind of priestly class, that these opinion makers are very similar to people who would look to their, you know, to a religious leader for their opinions.
And this is the kind of secular version of that.
And the other thing is, and I'm sorry if this is a little too radical to say, but I think things like democracy and populism are totally meaningless in a world that is informed to this degree by the mainstream media.
You can't just think that we're going to vote our way out of it or the guy in the street, he really, you know, he knows the truth in his heart and so on and so forth.
You know, his opinions are being informed by the mainstream media and they're therefore being informed by our enemies.
Well, Richard, you're absolutely right, which is why this radio program exists to do the best we can to combat all of that misinformation, disinformation.
We've got to take a break, everybody.
I told you this is going to be a good hour.
We've got two more seconds with Richard Forth coming right after this.
To get on the show and express your opinion in the Political Says poll, call us toll-free at 1-866-986-6397.
Big girls don't fight.
Welcome back to the show, everyone, talking with Richard Spencer about Osama bin Laden.
And I tell you, I had to have Richard on the show this week because I had to have a guest on the show who could relate to me about those damn baseball fans that we saw down there.
And I'm talking about, you know, even in Key West, which is the modern-day equivalent of Port Royal, even there on Duval Street, you had, I mean, the day after, t-shirts, you know, that had been screen printed.
We got him with the crosshair on bin Laden's head.
And people just, you know, buying them like, you know, it was their last meal or something like that.
And so, and I tell you, Richard, all of the networks, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing something about this.
Mass hysteria was being whipped into a frenzy.
I even tried to get away from it by going to ESPN and even they were talking about it.
But, you know, we've talked about it to a pretty good degree so far this hour.
You know, before we stop, let me just.
Yeah, go ahead.
Yeah, what have we not covered yet?
Well, you know, I think it's worthwhile to speculate about the veracity of all this kind of stuff.
But, you know, let me just ask a question.
This story keeps changing.
You know, in the first 24 hours, we learned from a military man that there was this fierce firefight and the brave Navy Spield went in and then the sinister Obama shielded himself with his wife and all this kind of stuff.
But then 24 hours after that, we realized, oh, no, it wasn't like that at all.
And he was unarmed, and they went and they gave him the double tap in a kind of mob-like way, just killed him.
Why did they kill him like that and dispose of his body so quickly?
I mean, this is the supposed mastermind of terror.
Yeah, you know, and I did see that, Richard, now that you bring it up.
And that was something that I would not have covered tonight, just out of neglect, if you hadn't had mentioned it.
That's right.
I can remember the first night specifically listening to a story that reported that he was reaching for his gun or that he was armed or had a gun in hand when he was shot.
And then, of course, that story has changed.
And now, you know, I've been traveling, so I haven't probably been affixed to it as astutely as some others.
But that's just one example.
Wouldn't you want to bring him into the CIA headquarters or something and start waterboarding the hell out of him and get all this information and all this kind of stuff?
If it was good enough for the Nuremberg trials, why wouldn't they do it for Osama?
If they can do it to German leaders in Germany, why wouldn't they want to do it to Osama bin Laden here?
And our pictures going to be released, not that they couldn't Photoshop it these days, but what's the latest on that?
I haven't heard.
Well, I don't know.
They've actually released this video that, I mean, again, I really don't want to sound like a conspiracy theory or crank because you know me.
That's just not really my persona.
And it isn't mine either.
And I'm glad that you mentioned that as well.
But, you know, to be frank, I think people should be very skeptical of this video.
You do not see the person's face.
He's sitting down.
He's watching himself on television, which is very odd.
He's also, I mean, this is another thing.
He's using the remote control with his right hand.
Osama bin Laden is left-handed.
That's odd.
You don't see his face.
Why are they, I mean, I almost think there's a psychological technique if they want to show an image of Osama bin Laden on the screen, and then you kind of intuitively paste that onto the person watching it.
But it's all very odd.
I don't think we're going to know the truth about this matter for another decade.
And the only way we're going to know it is when independent historians or investigative journalists really delve into this without any fear.
And that's going to take a lot of time.
We're going to take some brave people.
But we are not going to learn the truth when government officials release information to us.
Well, and again, Richard, just to put the exclamation point on it, and I think we must harken back to kind of our opening remarks on this, is that it really doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter if he's dead.
It doesn't matter if he's alive.
It doesn't matter if everything they said is true.
The fact is, the effect that or the reaction that America had to 9-11 has been bad for us and bad for the citizenry every single step of the way.
So no matter whether Osama bin Laden is dead or alive or if the story is true, what has happened, our actions as a result, has been bad news for this country.
And that is really the only thing about Osama bin Laden that is not being discussed in this saturation media coverage that we're being subjected to.
I completely agree.
I have nothing to add to that.
It has been a terrible decade.
And it's only going to get worse because, as we've seen, just like that, as the polls and public approval, public opinion, was dropping for these military misadventures, now all of a sudden the fervor is right back up again.
And so we'll see where it's going to go.
But if trends are any indicator, it's not going to bode well for our blood and treasure.
Now, only in the political cesspool will you find a segue from something like that to a royal wedding.
But again, Richard Spencer talking about the things that are on my mind.
And I'm going to read Richard's commentary.
It's a pretty short entry at alternativeright.com entitled A Monarch for the People.
And I just don't know why, because I'm certainly not a guy that would get into this sort of stuff.
But there was something about the allure or the charm of the royal wedding that kind of sucked me in.
I didn't stay affixed to it as some people did.
And I certainly didn't shell out, you know, $10,000 to go over there and stand in the street and watch the carriage procession.
But nevertheless, I was somewhat interested in what was going on there.
And here's what Richard wrote.
It was hard not to get swept up in the recent royal wedding, despite the loathsome celebrification and tabloid vulgarity that accompanies it.
As many of my friends have been emailing me this morning, along with the inherent seduction of grand ritual, here before our eyes was an overwhelmingly white crowd genuinely being proud of being British.
The idealized couple, moreover, instills in the people the conviction that marriage and fidelity is royal and beautiful, not a burden.
And even if the Windsors are newcomers of German extraction, royal adulating connects Britons with millennium of ancestry and tradition.
On the other hand, a part of me views the event as much as I'd view flag-waving red state Yahoos who never stop expressing their loyalty to a government that seeks to dispossess them.
The situation is different in Britain, of course.
Now bereft of aristocratic connections, Parliament essentially stands for liberalism, endless debate, legalism, and fall representation.
The monarchy is actually the more democratic institution in the sense that the sovereign subjects the people.
As the more primal political institution, that which achieved dominion through the right of arms, the monarch commands every prime minister to defer to his more fundamental right to rule.
Though I hesitate suggesting this, Richard concludes, as I don't want to have trouble with the British border authorities the next time I travel there, would it not be in keeping with the monarch's tradition for a sovereign to dismiss parliament, establish a dictatorship, expel all foreigners, and negate all legislation of the past 60 years?
That's a good, I wish that would happen.
Richard writes that my sense is that Prince William, much like the rest of the decrepit, decadent aristocrats of Europe, wouldn't contemplate such a notion.
Perhaps the more rambunctious Harry is up to the task.
That's Richard's take on the royal wedding.
Check it out alternativewrite.com.
But Richard, what was it about the royal wedding, just to come full circle, that kind of made people like me and you bat an eyebrow?
Well, yeah, you know, I truly respect the American revolutionaries, but I don't always like this American tendency to just, you know, think monarchy is inherently bad and the British are evil.
This is fundamentally an Anglo-Saxon Protestant country.
And I think it is good and healthy to be connected with that millennium of history and to be connected to some of the great people of our race, Henry VIII, you know, Elizabeth, and so on and so forth.
I think that's a good thing.
And I think this grand ritual can be seductive.
And obviously, the current monarchy is not doing anything in favor of Western civilization and the white world.
But at the same time, I think those white Britons who were cheering were connecting to that tradition.
And I think that is really wonderful and healthy.
And, you know, with someone, my last name's Spencer, for goodness sakes, you know, I'm an uptight wasp, as, you know, so it's hard for me not to just feel a part of that and feel that this image of two young royal people embarking into marriage, and that that isn't a wonderful image to be giving our people,
in the sense that you can be royal in entering matrimony and in committing to someone, that that's something that is royal and wonderful.
It's not a burden.
It's not something you just toss away whenever you feel like it's becoming difficult.
But it is a royal duty and honor.
I think that is a very positive thing.
There's something pure and, as you said, honorable and beautiful there.
We're going to continue and explore this a little bit further in our final segment with Richard Spencer right after these words from our sponsors.
Right after these messages.
We'll return.
Jump in the political cesspool with James and the gang.
Halt tonight at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the political cesspool, James Edwards.
The hour is going by.
We have just a few more minutes remaining with Richard Spencer as we have moved from examining the Osama bin Laden question and have gone over to the royal wedding somehow.
And I'll tell you, you know, this isn't something that I have followed.
I don't pay any attention to the royal family, what they do.
Of course, everybody remembers when Diana was killed.
But above and beyond that, that was probably the last thing of significance that I can remember them doing other than maybe Harry's armband a few years ago.
I had to Google to see what their last name was.
Prince William.
What's his last name?
Well, I found out.
Yeah, well, it was von Grote or something.
It was a German name.
That's right.
They kind of pulled Windsor out of a hat.
Well, it sounds British.
It's kind of like the Buckinghams, you know, when the British invasion was big back in the 60s.
They needed a British-sounding name.
Right.
Well, I think there was a lot of anti-German sentiment with the First World War.
And so they, you know, Germans, you know, sitting on the throne.
So they decided to To choose a a British name.
Even something like this aristocratic family give us a sense of a united Europe.
You know, obviously, most of the European aristocrats now are very decadent people.
The few of them that I've met are often in love with Obama and they're drug users or whatever.
But these families do give us a sense of, they teach us or they reteach us aristocratic values of the idea that some families are more powerful or more beautiful or stronger or more creative than others and that our civilization is more powerful and more beautiful and more creative than other civilizations.
And I appreciate the pomp and circumstance as far as that goes.
I appreciate the splendor.
And you look at the couple, you look at Kate and William, and they're very, very good looking.
And I think that's something we should strive for.
Our physical appearance is something that shouldn't be neglected.
And being from a line of Edwards's and McGregor's myself, I don't know if there wasn't some sort of genetic affinity that attracted me to it that kind of defies explanation.
But nevertheless, it was kind of fun and kind of elicited a sense of pride to watch, even though, as I mentioned, I don't really follow British politics other than hosting Nick Griffin a couple of times a year here on the show.
But Richard, you really hit on something in your short article there at alternativeright.com that I wanted to explore just a little bit as we wrap up this hour, and that is you were comparing and contrasting that sea of humanity there lined up the streets outside of Westminster Abbey on the way to Buckingham Palace.
All of those people.
You touched on it briefly, but how do they differ from the crowd at the baseball game that we saw last week after the news of bin Laden's demise surfaced?
Well, I'm sure there's some similarities, and I mentioned that.
I just think basically there's a potential for something good and for something healthy and better in the British crowd in the sense that they were worshiping themselves and their own identity and their own history.
And I think that's good.
I'm afraid that though some flag waving probably is positive.
I mean, I remember talking with someone, I think when the normal kind of red state Yahoo, whatever you want to call him, wave the flag, I don't think he has an image of the government or people kicking down doors in Iraq.
I think he probably has an image of America being his hometown and his friends and his community.
And that's probably a positive thing.
But in terms of this getting excited at the baseball game, they seem to be worshiping the government.
They seem to be just worshiping the military.
We should just do whatever he wants.
And let's go over the Middle East and kick ass and kill people and however much money we spend on it, who cares?
And I think that is just an inherently negative thing.
I think both of them are mass rituals, but the first can kind of lead to something positive.
And in that way, it's kind of dangerous to the establishment.
Zeal can be a good thing, but only when it's properly channeled.
And you've got to, in some ways, admire the people who are so willing to give up to the ultimate sacrifice in defense of something.
It's just sad that they don't have better sense to know that their sacrifices are being wasted.
Now, there's one more thing, Richard, I want to touch on with regard to the royal wedding celebration, and that is you know there's got to be something good there if New York Times or New York Post columnists are denouncing it.
And we ran a short blurb on our website about just that.
And of course, that's the conservative New York Post, don't you know?
A female columnist there, Vider, pointed out that she's a Jewish columnist, and she wrote in part, it was bigger than the Super Bowl and as tacky as a legion of Elvis impersonators.
First of all, if anyone watched it, I don't know what was tacky about it.
I love those costumes.
They were very masculine.
I mean, you know, they were flamboyant heterosexuals.
You know, that's what I was saying.
You know, again, I was on my five-year wedding anniversary with my wife last week in Key West.
You know, everything happened when I was in Key West last week.
We had, you know, outbreak of tornadoes, you know, bin Laden is supposedly killed, the royal wedding.
It was all happening.
But I said, you know, we were watching, you know, some of the reruns of that before Bin Laden dominated all of the channels.
And I was like, you know, why don't we get married?
And why don't I get married in an outfit like that?
But anyway, the columnist of the New York Post was writing, it was bigger than the Super Bowl, tacky as a legion of Elvis impersonators, but most of all, it was disturbingly white.
The pomp and ridiculousness then spilled to the streets.
Brits in t-shirts and jeans gathered for days to catch a glimpse of the white folks riding to Buckingham Palace and a wedding night that is famously old news for the couple.
So this is what you get.
Now, Richard, honestly, how much diversity are you going to find at a tribal chieftain in Africa's wedding?
What's the problem here?
That's really, I was just joking.
I almost think you wrote that yourself as a parody of the New York Post.
That's just ridiculous.
But it gets to the point that we were talking about.
Something like this really does have the potential to spill over into a reassertion of Britishness, a reassertion of British history.
And I think, and I'm sure you do as well, that is a good thing.
And so I think we should find these moments and see how they can actually be turned toward our end.
And, you know, just real quick, this is a bit of a hobby horse of mine.
But, you know, what I was saying, those uniforms were very martial, but they're also, they had a splendor to them in the bright colors.
I think it's wonderful.
I think it is truly terrible, and it probably says something about us as a society, that our military uniforms are a bunch of baggy pants, gross, digital, camouflage, dumpy sacks of potatoes.
It's true.
Have you seen these military people?
When I was living in Washington, they've always been walking around.
It was like they were, it was like casual Friday every day of the week, these baggy pants.
And have you looked at the pixels?
It looks as if they were designed on an 8-bit Nintendo system.
Right.
I mean, I don't know how there might be some purpose to that.
But I think this is telling.
If you look at our military, again, there are some fine folks and some strong people in the special forces.
But our military has, quite frankly, it's become a kind of work program for the less intelligent and non-white and immigrants, Mexican immigrants.
I mean, women in the military, I think women in the military is far more disturbing than gays serving openly in the military, to be frank.
I think that is truly disgusting, the notion that we're going to dress women up in camo and give them a gun and send them out into a desert.
I think that is profoundly disgusting.
I personally don't support gays serving openly, but that bothers me so much less than this just destruction of chivalry that it putting women in combat.
The people who do that should be hanged by lampposts in the nation's capital.
They are truly evil to put women in such positions.
But this is coming kind of streaming here, but this is all part of the same thing.
When we lose this sense of aristocracy being good, this sense of honor, this sense of splendor, martial splendor that you see in the military men of yore, we've lost that.
And what we have are this egalitarian military that spreads democracy and gives full-time employment to obese blacks and so on and so forth.
You can just see how far we have fallen as a culture and how, in some ways, the task that you and I have before us, it isn't just about demographics or it isn't just about politics.
It isn't just about policy.
It's really a spiritual task.
We have got to wake up within ourselves and rediscover these great aristocratic values of Western civilization.
We've got to rediscover them within ourselves, or else all the other stuff is just impossible.
All the demographic stuff, all the political stuff, all the economic stuff, all of that is just window dressing when you think about the real issues.
And that is one of values.
That is one of spirit.
It's not one of material or policy.
Richard, I think that is a perfectly appropriate place to end our conversation this hour.
It's hard to believe that it's over, but that is certainly something for people to think about and ponder in their hearts as we head into this next commercial break.
Richard, thanks for being with us this evening.
Remember, folks, check out Richard's excellent website and support his work by visiting alternative.com.
Alternative Right.com.
Richard, we'll see you next time.
And for everyone else, I'll see you right after this for the third and final hour of tonight's show.