Kerry King Endorses Hillary Clinton, Calls Trump “Sideshow” Attraction

kerry king now

Article by Lance Viggiano.

Kerry King told Rolling Stone this week:

“I’m certainly not a political analyst, but I think that Hillary Clinton is the safe, correct choice. Trump is just a sideshow; I’m not even going to apologize to all the Trump followers. I think the reason he’s so popular is because he’s like the politics version of WWE. He’s sensational like wrestling and that’s why middle America loves him.

This gem of an opinion is brought to you by the same fan of snakes and tribal tats who was delusional enough to believe that God Hates Us All and Diabolus En Musica were well received albums; so much so that he decided to resurrect the “successful” style immediately after the only person in the band who would have told him no died. His lyrical contributions to Slayer and now public statements flaunt Repentless and irredeemably stupid opinions on human social organization.

Tags: , , ,

61 thoughts on “Kerry King Endorses Hillary Clinton, Calls Trump “Sideshow” Attraction”

  1. Interracial Porn and Arghoslent says:

    Yes, we should vote for a warhawk who has flip-flopped on almost every single issue and is also proven to be quite possibly the most corrupt presidential candidate we’ve ever had who has also most likely had many people murdered over the years either directly or indirectly. Oh and her husband is a rapist and she bullied/threatened his victims into silence. Not to mention she’s been waving the flag of feminism for years now while being best buddies with Saudi Arabia.

    Then you have Trump who said some mean things about some people.

    1. Ludvig B.B (vOddy) says:

      Make America great, ban all muslims.
      They’re gonna pay for it.

      1. Ludvig B.B (vOddy) says:

        The wall just got 10ft higher

      2. morbideathscream says:

        Well yes, that would be a nice start. But unfortunately, we live in a braindead society(especially the youth) where they think islam is a religion of peace and that guns kill people. Then again, most people are too busy playing pokemon on their phone and totally oblivious to their surroundings and what’s going on in the world in general. Just what the government wants.

    2. Rainer Weikusat says:

      Trying a less overdiscussed howler, the statements about “bombing Isis”. Bombing Vietnam back into stone age worked so well that the USA lost the war, albeit this was – at best – a half-hearted attempt, anyway. A more dedicated one was the oil offensive against Germany in 1944. This was conducted in form of night and day raids against oil production plants with large numbers of bombers, eg, 886 bombers in 1944/05/12. In the time from Jan 1944 to Dec 1944, German oil production fell from 852,000t to 294,000t, a reduction of about 65.5%. Also according to Wikipedia, the USAF has currently only 159 bombers in service and using fighter-bombers with ‘precision ammunitions’ against oil refineries is totally ridiculous: Repairing the damage will be much cheaper than causing it. Viewed abstractly, Trump ought to be elected simply because if he actually attempted to follow through with his brash statements, the outcome ought to be amusing (provided one’s one doesn’t have the mispleasure to live in a target region).

      The German term for people like him is Bauernfaenger (literally, “farmercatcher”, a pied piper whose tune is designed to resonate with people whose lifes are sufficiently removed from intellectual sophistry that they tend to take it at face value).

      NB: I’d very much prefer to read about a new US president after he was elected in some paper. But this kind of non-news has a certain, obtrusive quality.

      1. Rainer Weikusat says:

        Source for this (not Wikipedia): Overy, Richard: The Bombing War, Penguin Books 2014.

      2. LostInTheANUS says:

        You have to keep in mind when Western leaders say they’re going to “take it to terrorists” by sending bombing runs it’s basically lip service at that point because nothing actually gets done except if you send the land forces into the area like the Ruskies did.

      3. Vigilance says:

        What I find amusing is that “bombing Isis” costs millions in equipment to essentially reduce a few thousand dollars of encampments to vapors. If war is an extension of economics, we’re doing it wrong.

        1. Rainer Weikusat says:

          Reducing something to vapors by aerial bombing isn’t that easy. When looking at images of Hamburg after operation Gomorrah, eg,


          there are quite a few things still standing. And this was the result of air raids by heavy bombers day and night from Jul 24th to Aug 3 (night 24/25: 728 bombers, day 25: 218, day 26: 96, night 27/28: 729, night 29/30: 707), with the larger raids dropping about 2200t of bombs each, most of them incendiaries, on a target “expected to burn well”. Even then, most of the destruction came from a firestorm which followed the 2nd night raid and which more or less happened by accident. Result of this: about 40,000 dead of a population of 1.75 million, 2.3%, and 39% of the pre-raid buildings still undamaged.
          Firebombing is considered illegal nowadays, nobody talks about large scale raids against the general population of the Isis occupied territory, anway, the capacity for them wouldn’t be there, and even if it would, killing a few 10,000 civilians is not a particularly effective way of conducting warfare.

          The effective part of these operations is close air support for allied ground forces while (relatively) small scale ‘strategic airstrikes’ are ‘newsnight cosmetics’ (as someone else already pointed out): They demonstrate that the government Does Something[tm] but without running the risk of dead soldiers returning home in tin coffins.

          1. Internatio reloaded says:

            The effective way of fighting ISIS would start by stopping those who support them (a the US governement and CIA,or at least a section of that, who thinks this scarecrow is a usefull pretext for meddling in the business of other countries).

    3. morbideathscream says:

      Here’s how I see it, if trump wins, yeah we may still be fucked, he could be lying. The fact that the media is calling him a nazi and folks in the republican party like Ted Cruz are trying to bring him down and would rather see Hillary win should be conclusive as to what their overall agenda is, the new world order. I will take my chances with trump.

      If Hillary wins we are fucked! Anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid or delusional or both and yes that means you too Kerry King.

      1. Rainer Weikusat says:

        “Let’s have a revolution! At worst, nothing gets better!” is as un-conservative as it can possibly be.

        1. Interracial Porn and Arghoslent says:

          Fuck off, you kraut-sucking faggot. You morons elected Merkel and now you’re drowning in muslims. You have no room to talk about ANY country and their potential elected leaders.

          1. Rainer Weikusat says:

            What you believe about me has no relation to anything I wrote. But you’ve correctly noted that I feel little sympathy for the “Dangerous Faggots” who pose as right-wing extremists nowadays.

  2. thewaters says:

    I’m astonished that anyone from Slayer is endorsing the “safe” choice……unreal….

  3. Ggallin1776 says:

    Kerry,the idiot.both parties are the same….just slightly different rhetoric.

  4. All of the monster trucks and cocaine has reduced King to mere epiphenomena.

  5. Eyeluvu says:

    What a sensible fellow.

  6. pompous midget says:

    make cocaine great again

  7. fenrir says:

    Well, everyone knows this one’s no Jeff Hanneman. What can you expect?

    1. morbideathscream says:

      True, but I figured Kerry would have some fucking common sense, you’d still think he would know better. I mean, Tom Araya spoke words of wisdom in Switzerland recently and now king has countered that with an incredibly retarded statement.

      1. Ze Zuzz says:

        The universe must find balance somehow. Can`t have too much sanity now, can we?

  8. Slap ’em all says:

    Who would win in a slap fight? Kerry or Phil Anselmo?

    1. pompous midget says:

      Phil. He remembers how to slap from his days in Motley Crue.

      Who would win in a jumping castle bounce-off, Cyco Myco or Billy Milano?

      1. C.M. says:

        Mike stabs the castle with his switchblade and Billy deflates it and shatters both ankles when he strikes the hard unforgiving ground. Mike laughs, even though he couldn’t even smile yesterday.

        1. pompous midget says:

          Milano Mush

  9. Deport All Hipsters says:

    > I’m not even going to apologize to all the Trump followers

    What is that even supposed to mean? Is it an act of courage to oppose Donald Trump?

  10. bigdave says:

    Wait, this cesspool of a site actually supports Trump? Haha, figures.

    1. Ludvig B.B (vOddy) says:

      See past the binary and ascend

    2. Vigilance says:

      Ha ha No. King merely made a dumb comment worthy of mocking. The “safe* choice is a wretched state of affairs. It is “safe” for Americans who earn their living from salaries and can be guaranteed another 4+ years of amenities while the costs are to be carried by wage and welfare castes who are expected to embrace the purifying asceticism of austerity.

      1. Billy Foss says:

        “It is “safe” for Americans who earn their living from salaries and can be guaranteed another 4+ years of amenities while the costs are to be carried by wage and welfare castes who are expected to embrace the purifying asceticism of austerity.”

        What exactly gives you the impression that this would be a probable outcome?

        1. Vigilance says:

          Because Hillary Clinton is George Bush with ovaries. We can expect a continuation of the status quo with her election – which is as I noted, dreadful. Even Kurry Kang recognizes this.

          (Differences on social issues notwithstanding)

          1. Ludvig B.B (vOddy) says:

            Business as usual – now with a vagina.
            Astounding progress.

    3. Interracial Porn and Arghoslent says:

      You should head on back to metalsucks, faggot.

  11. Mael says:

    Because “sideshow attraction” totally hasn’t been Kerry King’s aesthetic for the last 30 years

  12. AK-47 says:

    Well, Trump IS a sideshow attraction and a shallow doofus who feels more like a reality tv celebrity than a leader. Isn’t he in his third marriage right now, to a third model? What a conservative role model. At least Bush carried himself with dignity, even if politically he didn’t fulfill a single promise.

    Hillary is an insidious socialite snake on the other hand. Pick your poison.

    1. pompous midget says:

      Yeah Bush was real fuckin dignified

  13. Alternatives 2 Madness says:

    Prozak, please get this Viggiano idiot out of here.
    You know King is right, even if his last 6 albums sucked dick.

    1. Rainer Weikusat says:

      Maybe he is. But people ought to be able to disagree publically with anything he (or anyone else, fwiw) says on any political subject without being punished for wrongheadedness: One of the most unpleasant properties of people usually referred to as »SJW« is their tendency to try to ‘settle’ actual or preceived political disagreements by inflicting unrelated damage on people with ‘disagreeable’ opinions.

      Eg, if people want to boycott Disma gigs because of Greg Pillard’s “past missteps”, that’s their prerogative. But preventing the band from playing by backroom arm-twisting is bad: It amounts to a (here) privileged minority making a descision on behalf of others who don’t have to be asked because of – well – “Yes, we can get away with that”.

      1. pompous midget says:

        Greg was such a jerk back in the day.

      2. Alternatives 2 Madness says:

        Rainier, I kind of feel you. However, only government is disallowed from censorship; a private website is free to limit speech as it chooses. Right? Recall the last days of the DMU forum when ya boy ‘Crow’ became the enforcer of a ‘posting eugenics policy’.

        I would think that errbody into DMU views Trump as an idiot. (Maybe I’m wrong, and some of you niggas actually crave his presidency…?) So DMU needn’t give this nigga a mic for his views.

        Your point seems anachronistically egalitarian and pro-diversity >> everybody is entitled to their opinion, and deserve to have our audience for it; it would be UNFAIR and INHUMANE not to hear their special ideas!

        The Greg Pilliard example is quite analogous. It would be more like if I went to Chaos in Tejas and said, “Greg Pillerd put out a Nazi martial industrial album, you should cut Disma from the bill.” Instead of saying “I WILL ORGANISE A MASSIVE BOYCOTT OF YOUR SHIT”


        1. Alternatives 2 Madness says:

          I meant to write “The Greg Pilliard example is NOT quite analogous.”
          FUUUUUUUUCK I’m such an ASS

        2. Cuck impaler says:

          I just want The Trump to become president so I could hear him say “You’re deported!” to the masses of hapless fools.

        3. Vigilance says:

          Still waiting on that defense of Kurry Kangs position………

        4. Rainer Weikusat says:

          I didn’t write about »censorship« but about calls for punishing people who expressed (or seemed to express) a standpoint someone strongly disagreed with.

          1. Alternatives 2 Madness says:

            Censorship, punishment, the shit is semantic; I merely said (demanded, lol) that they get Lance Viggiano out of here. Maybe that’s wrong of me.

            1. Rainer Weikusat says:

              »Censorship« (in the literal sense) usually refers to a state of affairs where publications need government approval. That’s simply inapplicable here. I’m also convinced that “shoot the speaker” (hyberbole) is neither a morally justified nor tactically suitable way to deal view opposing viewpoints.

              Going back to the Disma example, I consider Pillard’s recorded statements about Hitler silly as the historical situation wasn’t what he apparently believed it to be and also, because the actual track record of the NSDAP government is pretty dismal: Eg, the so-called »conservatives«, the people who jettisoned the Kaiser so that they could keep The Army intact, had been working on their great revenge war ever since the Entente powers kindly let them return home will all their equipment so that they could crush the Socialist revolution in Germany. They convinced Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Reichskanzler in order to exploit his popularity. The war was originally planned to start around 1945, at least, the pre-war rearmament plannings ran until that date. But in 1939, Germany was essentially bankrupt so something had to happen then. I also wrote that I think they [the statements] were silly in the past, albeit using a different example (and there’s no shortage of them).

              Regardless of this, I pay occasional visits to the Disma web site because I’d definitely want to see them live if I had the chance to and I’m also planning to buy the new album in case it actually materializes itself. A sizable part of my life occurred before 9/11 and I don’y buy into the militarization of everyday things which became fashionable afterwards: A difference of opinion is not a war and people holding opinions I strongly disagree with are not enemys who have to be crushed with whatever means may be at disposal for that. That’s something else I consider silly.

            2. Vigilance says:

              Give me a convincing reason to quit.

    2. Vigilance says:

      Often times, the opposite of a duality is just as bad. Aristotle said it himself that virtue is not the opposite of vice but somewhere in the middle. Setting aside whether or not Trump is going to blow holes in the skills of Americans to bring about a Fourth Reich; presenting the situation in terms of that versus not-that doesn’t allow the question of whether or not Hillary would be better to be asked.

      The strategy doesn’t work anyway.

      1. Billy Foss says:

        I agree, and unfortunately that is the dilemma with a two-party system.

        1. Vigilance says:

          The two party system isn’t that bad as theoretically if captures more of the populaces will than otherwise where you might have 25% (random number).

          The actual problem here is threefold:
          1) Our elite are kleptocratic and senile.
          2) We’ve steadily dismantled the structure of our democracy in favor of an over-centralized Imperial Office.
          3) The general populace has forgotten what democracy is anyway as well as how to manage one.

          mfw plebs think democracy is supposed to pick the “best” rather than having elections serve as a source of negative feedback on bad upper level decisions.

  14. Can you survive the blitzkrieg says:

    I just want to say Slayer are playing a casino gig soon that usually has 80s one hit wonders from the country genre playing to the diapered elderly and their tour rider explicitly states “no moshing”, which well, those seats are screwed to the floor….

  15. Parasite says:

    Kerry looks like he’s about to jack off on some dudes face. Picture it.

    1. Ludvig B.B (vOddy) says:

      Why a dude? And how does this change the facial expression?

    2. Vigilance says:

      The proper caption for the image is:

      “When you nut but Rick Rubin keeps suckin”

      1. Ron Shite says:

        No, the supremely proper caption is:
        “When you rut but Nick Subin keeps ruckin'”


        1. Parasite says:

          That face just screams ” don’t stop sucking til I cum ya fag”

  16. vic snaggletooth says:

    Kerry want safe sex with safe condom. Ridiculous.

  17. I will fuck Kerry king’s asshole,then I will fuck his father’s asshole.

Comments are closed.

Classic reviews: