There is little here to distinguish this author from those on the fringe left that have decided that Scott Walker is "Unelectable White" to smear him and incite racial divide to rile opposition to Scott Walker.
So you've read Sean Scallon piece above. After I finished it , I wanted to learn more about Scallon's beliefs since he only writes periodically for The American Conservative site.
Which led me to this: Ron Paul and Free Republic:
I met Dr. Dan "Red" Phillips at last year's JRC gathering in Rockford and we've corresponding ever since. He's a writer like myself to I'm happy to put his pieces on my blog like this one on Ron Paul and Free Republic: --Sean Scallon
......Rep. Paul’s campaign is really the answer to prayer for many conservatives. Here is a paragraph I wrote from a previous column. This column first appeared 9 Jan 07.
Based on the reaction to the Baker commission and talk of surges, the official Right does not look like it will be abandoning its embrace of neo-con interventionism any time soon. The base is still broadly supportive of the policy. None of the potential GOP presidential candidates in 2008 are anti-war. Senator Hagel (R-NE) could probably be described as a realist, but the base hates him because of it. Both possible paleo-esq candidates, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), are pro-war. Front-runner Senator McCain (R-AZ) is the loudest voice calling for more troops. (Rep. Ron Paul, are you listening?)[emphasis added]
I am not trying to take credit for his decision to run. I just want to demonstrate that Rep. Paul’s potential campaign really is for many of us, the best political news in a long, long time.
So I was eager to share my excitement with my paleo friends, but I was also interested to see how some of the more militantly (no pun intended) pro-intervention sites were dealing with the news. So I went to the “Mother of All” pro-intervention sites, Free Republic..........
Which lead me to look up JRC which took me here:
September 27, 2007 The Defective Right
Last weekend, the John Randolph Club held its annual meeting in Washington, DC. It is a project of the Rockford Institute, a group with which I have been associated for a quarter century. The JRC was founded eighteen years ago to bring together traditional conservatives and right-libertarians for a dialogue on issues of common concern. As Rockford President Thomas Fleming noted in his opening speech, the libertarians don’t much attend the JRC these days. Unfortunately, they have been replaced by left-wingers (libertarian and Marxist) whose mission is not dialogue, but subversion.
This was made painfully evident during the closing debate. The resolution presented was “America should immediately withdraw her armed forces from Iraq.” I was on the negative side, and thought that the extreme phrasing of the resolution guaranteed its defeat. Immediate withdrawal is not what is being debated in the U.S. Congress, or anywhere else among responsible people. It is the stuff of radicals like Moveon.org and International ANSWER, who oppose all policies aimed at defending U.S. interests in the world or advancing American values. .................
...........What was shocking was not what these radicals said, as they have been spewing their anti-American hatred for years. But that when they did so at a gathering of supposedly traditional conservatives, they got applause from a sizeable slice of the audience! And at the end of the debate, the audience seemed evenly split on the resolution. There has always been an isolationist leaning among the JRC crowd, but this is only an imagined conservative principle. The United States did not march across North America and become the world’s leading nation by playing a shrinking violet. Opposition to America’s rise at every stage has always been rooted in the Left, where dissent against one’s own society and its constructive values is a defining trait. Some on the right have been seduced by this self-destructive ideology at times, as in the 1930s, but always with disastrous consequences.
Among this disagreeable lot, there was the usual ignorant bashing of “neoconservatives.” The neocons were liberals who shifted to the right during the Cold War, attracted by the strong foreign and defense policies that were the hallmark of traditional conservatism. The neocons did not pervert American policy, they embraced and reinforced it. It is the defection from the goal of American preeminence by some on the right since the Cold War that marks a change. Those who want to see other powers rise as America retreats, in order to create a “multipolar” world (the term was actually used by several people), are the ones who have defected from the right.
There is no authentic conservative tradition of turning against one’s country in a time of war. Anyone with that shameful inclination has to move to the Left to find arguments and solace– as shown at the JRC. They end up sounding just like Raimondo and Sale, shouting about how patriotism is a dirty word because America is the source of all evil in the world.
In some ways, the Rockford Institute is in the same bind as the Democratic Party. Its leaders know the dangers posed by the fringe elements, but it is reluctant to shut them out for fear of losing members. On my side of the JRC platform was Rockford’s foreign affairs editor, Srdja Trifkovic. A scholar with Serbian roots, he well knows the threat of radical Islam, about which he has written extensively. His objection to an immediate and complete withdrawal was, however, less robust than mine. He wants to cut America’s costs from the war, thus favors a phased redeployment, but in a way that does not lead to disaster. His approach could be called Democratic Plus, as he argued that the U.S. has national interests in the region related to blocking Iranian influence and protecting oil supplies. Neither of these missions is going to end soon. Indeed, the struggle for oil (and other resources) is increasing on a global scale, influencing the policies of all the world’s contending powers.
A debate between Trifkovic and me would have been more legitimate for a real conservative audience, as we would have been arguing over how best to accomplish American objectives, not whether America deserved to lose the war and decline as a civilization. .....
(1) Spell the "dog" in "dogwood."
(2) Spell the "cat" in "catfish."
(3) Spell the "f*uck" in "Reagan."
This guy is obsessed with race. If Wisconsin were as racially polarized as he claims, it wouldn’t vote Democrat for President, or virtually any other office since the state is only 6% Black. Wisconsin unfortunately has a lot of brainwashed, true-believing White Stalinists (produced either by the universities, big labor or government workers), most especially on display in the very ugly city of Madistan (physically beautiful, like San Francisco, but infested with an ideology of ugly and deadly).
I don’t see a problem with the article. It seems like a fair analysis of Scott Walker’s career and reasonably positive.
Not every article that is written about a political candidate is going to be gushingly positive and declaring the candidate the second coming. In fact those sorts of articles come off as propaganda and are usually ignored by readers after the first paragraph. You’re dealing with a public whose BS sensors are set to 100%.
It sounds like a well worked plan to me, but maybe it's just luck.
There is too much white vs black in this author's head.
Or it could be that he was just more politically savvy than John Kasich. Walker's reform has stood, while the Ohio reform has been repealed by a popular referendum.
bfl
Yeah, this article was so race-focused I was surprised to see it on “American Conservative”.
Most egregious was the author describing what we called the “Half Fast Train” in racial terms. As if a train for elites riding from downtown Milwaukee to Madison was going to help Milwaukee’s minorities. Because it was supposed to be a ‘high speed’ train, only one stop was planned for the suburbs and it was in a rather job-free location.
Walker killed it because it was a typical federal expensive boondoggle that benefitted just a microscopic number of Milwaukeeans.
As for the suburban counties and racism, just like Detroit and other major cities, many many people in the counties were driven from the city by the increasing crime and failing schools. As long as Democrats keep corkscrewing cities into bankruptcy (hello Chicago!) there will be solidarity among the surrounding populace decrying terrible policies and exploitation.
This pretty much confirms my neglect to visit American Conservative occasionally.