Jerry Falwell Jr.: Trump is the next Winston Churchill

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University. 

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University. 

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

No. I'll be snarky when I feel it's justified.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University. 

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

No. I'll be snarky when I feel it's justified.

Not everything I feel justified IS justified.  That goes for every individual.

[Kingpoleon]

I imagine if many Atlas posters (particularly the #nevertrump crowd) had been around in the UK in 1940, they would have proudly been tweeting #imwithhalifax on account of Churchill's 'unsuitable temperament', 'unaccepable remarks' and 'lack of qualifications for the Prime Ministership', in contrast to the 'statesmanlike' and 'qualified' Earl of Halifax.

uhhh he was almost over-qualified

Really? I mean, the majority of his pre-1940 political career consisted of him not doing very well as a minister and being on the losing side of most political battles (the gold standard and the abdication crisis to name but a two).

First Lord of the Admiralty in both wars, Minister of Munitions in the last, War Secretary after the armistice, going on 40 years in Parliament...

Certainly more than a bit washed up after his second party switch and disastrous stint as Chancellor, but no one would deny his experience and qualifications.

Closest analogues would be Gingrich 2012 (well known, clearly intelligent guy, but with some past scandals and way too long in the tooth), Cheney or Rumsfeld in the first GWB administration, or Jerry Brown.

Gingrich would be a good, if not great, leader, regardless of his politics and his terrible personal issues.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University. 

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

Yes, it is unfair - it's far too nice.


Liberty Pseudo-Christian Fascist "University" - burning books and promoting ignorance since 1971.

[Tartarus Sauce]

One scam artist pampering the ego of another.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University.  

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

Yes, it is unfair - it's far too nice.


Liberty Pseudo-Christian Fascist "University" - burning books and promoting ignorance since 1971.

Facism is where "safe zones" replace the 1st Amendment.

I would remind the readers here that earlier this year, Bernie Sanders was invited to speak at Liberty University by its leadership.  He was respectfully received by all.  He did not waver in his message, and he probably didn't win many votes, but he did cause many in the crowd to think of the issues he raised in the context of their Faith.  It was one of the high points of this Presidential campaign which, for the most part, has taken the low road.

If that's "Facism", then I'd hate to see what your idea of "Freedom" is.  The Falwells showed more tolerance of opposing thought in academia than a slew of so-called "enlightened" progressives.  I wonder how Donald Trump would be received if he were to be invited to speak at, say, UC-Berkeley, or even Mizzou.  Would he be respectfully received?  Would those who disagreed with him refrain from disrupting his presentation?  Could the students and faculty at those institutions live up to the standards set by the students and faculty at Liberty University? 

That's a question.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

the comparison isn't even lol-worthy considerring the source.

Clearly educated at his Dad's "university"

That's an unfair shot at Liberty University.  

Liberty University is a fully accredited University with a wide range of disciplines, and an acclaimed distance learning program.  It even has been competitive in NCAA sports; one of its alumni is former NL first baseman Sid Bream.  It's not for everyone, but neither is UC-Berkley or SUNY/Purchase, a highly rated school that I attended for a year that had Angela Davis as a guest speaker.  It's a fine University; a Christian institution, to be sure, but not deserving of snarky innuendo.  It's part of Jerry Falwell's legacy that folks ought to be able to agree is a positive thing, whatever one thought of his politics in this life.

Yes, it is unfair - it's far too nice.


Liberty Pseudo-Christian Fascist "University" - burning books and promoting ignorance since 1971.

Facism is where "safe zones" replace the 1st Amendment.

I would remind the readers here that earlier this year, Bernie Sanders was invited to speak at Liberty University by its leadership.  He was respectfully received by all.  He did not waver in his message, and he probably didn't win many votes, but he did cause many in the crowd to think of the issues he raised in the context of their Faith.  It was one of the high points of this Presidential campaign which, for the most part, has taken the low road.

If that's "Facism", then I'd hate to see what your idea of "Freedom" is.  The Falwells showed more tolerance of opposing thought in academia than a slew of so-called "enlightened" progressives.  I wonder how Donald Trump would be received if he were to be invited to speak at, say, UC-Berkeley, or even Mizzou.  Would he be respectfully received?  Would those who disagreed with him refrain from disrupting his presentation?  Could the students and faculty at those institutions live up to the standards set by the students and faculty at Liberty University? 

That's a question.

Stunts don't set a course for the future - policy does; "Liberty University" hasn't stopped teaching anti-intellectual nonsense just because they let Bernie speak to their student body who they still treat like prisoners. (The student body was forced to listen to him,  as they are to chosen speakers - how's that for hypocrisy?)

Your questions presume that Trump is a respectable candidate who deserves to be taken seriously - he is not, and his entire presidential campaign is a reprehensible fiction. There is no shame in pointing out vile stupidity, or in declining to give it a platform.


Ignorance does not have equal standing with knowledge, and hate and xenophobia are less respectable than decency and justice. Pretending that they are the same does not condemn those who reject evil, but rather demonstrates your own shortcomings.

And the symbol of this "university' is still a burning book.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

RIP THE SWING BENGALI-AMERICAN VOTE

[Cassius]

The world would be a much better place if we'd burned more books tbh.

[Sir Mohamed]

But but… I thought he would be next gipper…

[Stranger in a strange land]

I imagine if many Atlas posters (particularly the #nevertrump crowd) had been around in the UK in 1940, they would have proudly been tweeting #imwithhalifax on account of Churchill's 'unsuitable temperament', 'unaccepable remarks' and 'lack of qualifications for the Prime Ministership', in contrast to the 'statesmanlike' and 'qualified' Earl of Halifax.

The StormTrumpers would have been supporting Hitler and the Regressive Leftists would have been supporting Stalin. Whatever his other flaws, Churchill passed the pivotal moral test of his time.

[DINGO Joe]

We shouldn't dismiss this comparison out of hand, I say we send Trump to South Africa and see how he does fighting the Boers.

[GMantis]

Hey, Churchill switched parties often and was a failure until he walked into #10.

Churchill correctly predicted that appeasement was a mistake in the 1930s, the biggest call of the decade.

Churchill's whining about appeasement was as much bull as Kennedy's lies about a "missile gap". Britain and her allies lacked the military force to confront Germany; something Chamberlain's government was fixing as fast as it could.

False, it was Germany that lacked the military force to confront Britain and France, something that Hitler was correcting far faster than Britain and France were increasing their forces. When war between Germany and a coalition of France, Britain and Czechoslovakia seemed imminent in September 1938, several high ranking German generals plotted to overthrow Hitler because they knew that Germany would lose such a war. But the craven Chamberlain surrendered Czechoslovakia to Hitler, setting the stage for a much worse war in just a year's time.

[GMantis]

Hey, Churchill switched parties often and was a failure until he walked into #10.

Churchill correctly predicted that appeasement was a mistake in the 1930s, the biggest call of the decade.

"Appeasement" failed because the British and French decided to box Germany in. Germany invaded Poland, not them. They started that war. Read Buchanan's book on the subject if you get the chance, I thought it did a good job of shattering the narrative surrounding why Britain guaranteed Poland's hold on Danzig.

After Hitler had violated his promises multiple times, no one was ready to believe him and with good reason. Danzig was just a pretext to conquer Poland as part of his master plan to gain Lebensraum in the East, Hitler actually stated that the last thing he wanted was for "some bastard" to arrange a peace agreement.
Buchanan's book is extremely dishonest and unconvincing unless you already believe its message.