Posted on 09/07/2015 3:40:14 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Dear Reader (if there are any of you left),
Well, if this is the conservative movement now, I guess youre going to have to count me out.
No, Im not making some mad dash to the center. No, Im not hoping to be the first alternate to Steve Schmidt on Morning Joe, nor am I vying to become my generations Kevin Phillips. I will never be a HillaryCon. And I have no plan to earn strange new respect from the Georgetown cocktail-party set Im always hearing about but never meeting. But even if I have no desire to grow in my beliefs, I have no intention to shrink, either.
The late Bill Rusher, longtime publisher of National Review, often counseled young writers to remember, Politicians will always disappoint you. As Ive often said around here, this isnt because politicians are evil. Its because politicians are politicians. Their interests too often lie in votes, not in principles. Thats why the conservative movement has always recognized that victory lies not simply in electing conservative politicians, but in shaping a conservative electorate that lines up the incentives so that politicians define their self-interest in a conservative way.
But if its true that politicians can disappoint, I think one has to say that the people can, too.
And when I say the people I dont mean those people. I mean my people. I mean many of you, Dear Readers. Normally, when conservatives talk about how the public can be wrong, we mean that public. You know the one. The low-information voters Rush Limbaugh is always talking about. The folks we laughed at when Jay Leno interviewed them on the street. But we dont just mean the unwashed and the ill-informed. We sometimes mean Jews, blacks, college kids, Lena Dunham fans, and countless other partisan slices of the electorate who reflexively vote on strict party lines for emotional or irrational reasons. We laugh at liberals who let know-nothing celebrities do their thinking for them.
Well, many of the same people we laughed at are now laughing at us because we are going ga-ga over our own celebrity.
Behold the Trumpen Proletariat
Yes, I know that there are plenty of decent and honorable people who support Trump. For instance, my friend John Nolte over at Breitbart is one. He constantly celebrates Trump because Trump has all the right enemies and defies the conventional rules governing politics and media:
#GOPSmartSet-ters confused by Trumps appeal need to spend some time in the Real World. You cant help the cause being this out-of-touch. John Nolte (@NolteNC) August 28, 2015
Why Trump resonates. https://t.co/IGgZq6RXdS John Nolte (@NolteNC) August 27, 2015
Trump goes right over the heads of the media to talk to the people. He uses the media like his chew toy. And its glorious. John Nolte (@NolteNC) August 26, 2015
Ive waited 30 years to see the media get treated like Trump just treated that piece of garbage @jorgeramosnews. Oh. Hell. Yes. John Nolte (@NolteNC) August 25, 2015
But this is not an argument for Trump as a serious presidential candidate. It is really no argument at all. It is catharsis masquerading as principle, venting and resentment pretending to be some kind of higher argument. Every principle used to defend Trump is subjective, graded on a curve. Trump is like a cat trained to piss in a human toilet. Its amazing! Its remarkable! Yes, yes, it is: for a cat. But we dont judge humans by the same standard.
The Tempting of Conservatism
Ive written many times how the phrase power corrupts has been misunderstood. Lord Actons original point wasnt that power corrupts those who wield power, it was that it corrupts those who admire it. In a letter to a historian friend who was too forgiving of the Reformation-era popes, Acton wrote:
I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.
Popularity which in democracy is a very important kind of power works the same way. We routinely forgive the rich and famous for sins we would condemn our neighbors for. Trumps popularity apparently trumps all standards we would apply not just to our neighbors, but to our leaders. A small example of what I am talking about can be found in Ted Cruzs vow not to criticize other Republicans if by Republicans you mean Donald Trump. I have a lot of respect for Cruz, but this doesnt pass the laugh test. The Texan has been lambasting the entire Republican party for his entire time in office. Some of his critiques are valid, of course. But he has shown not an iota of reluctance to criticize fellow Republicans when its in his interest. Cruz isnt criticizing Donald Trump because, as a smart politician, he wants to woo Trumps followers when/if Trump eventually falters. Similarly, Im constantly hearing from Trump fans that its disrespectful for me to criticize the Republican front-runner as if these fans would refrain from criticizing Jeb or Rubio or Kasich if they were in the lead.
#share#
The Bonfire of Principles
If I sound dismayed, its only because I am. Conservatives have spent more than 60 years arguing that ideas and character matter. That is the conservative movement I joined and dedicated my professional life to. And now, in a moment of passion, many of my comrades-in-arms are throwing it all away in a fit of pique. Because Trump fights!
How many Republicans have been deemed unfit for the Oval Office because of comparatively minor character flaws or ideological shortcomings? Rick Perry in 2012 saw his candidacy implode when he couldnt remember the third item on his checklist of agencies hed close down. Well, even in that oops moment, Rick Perry comes off as Lincolnesque compared with Donald Trump.
Yes, I know Trump has declared himself pro-life. Good for him and congratulations to the pro-life movement for making that the price of admission. But Im at a total loss to understand why serious pro-lifers take him at his word. Hes been all over the place on Planned Parenthood, and when asked who hed like to put on the Supreme Court, he named his pro-choice-extremist sister.
Ann Coulter wrote of Newt in 2011: If all you want is to lob rhetorical bombs at Obama and then lose, Newt Gingrich like recent favorite Donald Trump is your candidate. But if you want to save the country, Newts not your guy. Now Ann leads a chorus of people claiming that Trump is our only savior. Has Trump changed, or have Ann and her followers? Is there a serious argument behind the new thinking, or is it because he fights!?
RELATED: Have Conservatives Grown Tired of Supporting the Rule of Law?
It is entirely possible that conservatives sweat the details of tax policy too much. Once in office, a president must deal with political realities that render the fine print of a campaign pamphlet as useful as a battle plan after the enemy is met. But in the last month, Trump has contemplated a flat tax, the fair tax, maintaining the current progressive tax system, a carried-interest tax, a wealth tax, and doing nothing. His fans respond, That shows hes a pragmatist!
No. It shows that he has absolutely no ideological guardrails whatsoever. Ronald Reagan once said, Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other. Trump is close to the reverse. Hes a mouth at the wrong end of an alimentary canal spewing crap with no sense of responsibility.
In his embarrassing interview with Hugh Hewitt Thursday night, Trump revealed he knows less than most halfway-decent D.C. interns about foreign policy. Twitter lit up with responses about how it doesnt matter and how it was a gotcha interview. They think that Trumps claim that hell just go find a Douglas MacArthur to fix the problem is brilliant. Well, Im all in favor of finding a Douglas MacArthur, but if you dont know anything about foreign policy, the interview process will be a complete disaster. Yes, Reagan delegated. But he knew enough to know to whom to delegate.
If you want a really good sense of the damage Donald Trump is doing to conservatism, consider the fact that for the last five years no issue has united the Right more than opposition to Obamacare. Opposition to socialized medicine in general has been a core tenet of American conservatism from Day One. Yet, when Republicans were told that Donald Trump favors single-payer health care, support for single-payer health care jumped from 16 percent to 44 percent.
Ive written a lot about my problems with populism. One of my favorite illustrations of why the populist mindset is dangerous and anti-intellectual comes from William Jennings Bryan. The people of Nebraska are for free silver and I am for free silver, Bryan announced. I will look up the arguments later. My view of conservatism holds that if free silver is a bad idea, its still a bad idea even if the people of Nebraska are for it. But Trumpism flips this on its head. The conservatives of Nebraska and elsewhere should be against single-payer health care, even if Donald Trump is for it. What we are seeing is the corrupting of conservatives.
Homework Is for Losers
I agree that presidents dont need to be experts on everything. But they do need to do their homework. This is a standard Ive held for years:
This is my biggest gripe about some of the GOP candidates in recent years. They dont think they have to do their homework, perhaps because they arent so much running for president as running for greater celebrity.
Consider Herman Cain. I love listening to him, and so do a lot of conservatives. Hes smart enough to be president. But he simply didnt do his homework, and he acted like that was something to be proud of, as when he of bragged about not knowing the names of leaders of small, insignificant states like Uzbekistan (which he jokingly pronounced Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan).The one thing you cannot buy in politics is charisma. If you could, Mitt Romney would have bought a pallet of it at Costco and hed probably be president now. Cain and Perry had the charisma, the natural political talent, and they squandered it by thinking all they needed was the sizzle without the steak.
Trump has the charisma, Ill grant him that. But there is no evidence hes thought deeply about the job beyond how much classier it will be once he has it. His whole shtick is an eminence front (Its a put on! The Couch).
When running for president, doing your homework is a question of character and even patriotism. If you love this country and want to be the president, quite literally the least you can do is be prepared.
So lets return to the issue of character.
In 2012, Mark Steyn wrote that a President Gingrich would have twice as many ex-wives as the first 44 presidents combined. If that (quite brilliant) line resonated with you three years ago, why doesnt it for a President Trump?
I understand the Noltean compulsion to celebrate anyone who doesnt take crap from the mainstream media. But when Newt Gingrich brilliantly eviscerated the press in 2012, there was a serious ideological worldview behind it. Trumps assaults on the press have only one standard: whether the journalist in question is favorable to Trump or not. If a journalist praises him, that journalist is terrific. If the journalist is critical of Trump he is a loser (or, in my case, a loser who cant buy pants). Not surprisingly, Hugh Hewitt is now third rate because he made Trump look bad. Im no fan of Arianna Huffington or Gail Collins, but calling them dogs because they criticized you is not a serious ideological or intellectual retort. (Its not even clever.) I think Trump did insinuate that Megyn Kelly was menstruating during the debate. He denies it. Fine. But what in the world about his past would lead someone to give him the benefit of the doubt? This is the same man who said, You know, it doesnt really matter what [the media] write as long as youve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.
Trumps glass-bottom id lets the whole world see his megalomania. He talks about himself in the third person all the time. He explains that Trump is great because Trump is rich and famous. Hes waxed profound on how he doesnt want blacks counting his money (he prefers Jews in yarmulkes). He makes jokes on national TV about women fellating him. He pays famous people to attend his wedding and then brags about it as if he got one over on them. He boasts in his books how he screwed over business associates and creditors because all that mattered was making an extra buck.
If your neighbor talked this way, maybe hed still be your friend, because we all have friends who are characters. But would you want him to be your kids English teacher? Guidance counselor? Would you tell your kids you want them to follow his example? Would you go into business with him?
Would you entrust him with nuclear weapons?
Remnant Here I Come
Karl Marx coined the term lumpenproletariat to describe working-class people who could never relinquish their class consciousness and embrace the idea of a classless socialist society. Hence, they were useless to the revolutionary cause. Im no Marxist, so I dont buy the idea that anybody never mind a whole class of people are beyond persuasion. But I am tempted to believe that Donald Trumps biggest fans are not to be relied upon in the conservative cause. I have hope they will come to their senses. But its possible they wont. And if the conservative movement and the Republican party allow themselves to be corrupted by this flim-flammery, then so be it. My job will be harder, my career will suffer, and Ill be ideologically homeless (though hardly alone). Thats not so scary. Conservatism began in the wilderness and maybe, like the Hebrews, it would return from it stronger and ready to rule. But Im not leaving without a fight. If my side loses that fight, all I ask is you stop calling the Trumpian cargo cult conservative and maybe stop the movement long enough for me to get off.
But Jeb Bush was a solid conservative, right?
Jonah’s saying he would rather lose with losers than win with winners.
Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.
Politicians are like diapers: they must be changed frequently.
The GOPe doesn’t understand that, so they get Trump. Go pound sand Jonah.
Yes, and John McCain. Boehner and McConnell are two conservatives that meet the Jonah Goldberg litmus test.
So who are viable options if not Trump? If mass immigration isn’t shut down, all this will be irrelevant, the U.S. will be transformed into the northernmost nation of Latin America, and American conservatism as we know it will not be viable either. So once again, who is a viable option? It’s a legitimate question. The first principle of conservatism is to conserve the nation.
No movement that continues to back the same old warn out Leftists the GOPe prefers, is a Conservative movement.
SO TIRED OF THIS! This election is going to rend the Republican party into three factions: the GOPe, Trump supporters, and true Conservatives. I've been a solid Cruz/Walker supporter, but at this point, if Trump doesn't completely fly into a mountain, he's going to be the nominee.
I've been praying that he turns out to be another Reagan insomuch as no one really believed an actor had the chops to hack it in DC.
Yep, they are.
National Review is part of the republican establishment. Screw them.
I consider myself a very hardcore conservative and I was given the “choice” to vote for McCain and Romney the past two presidential elections. Any party that will put up RINOs like that can’t “call itself conservative” either. I guess I’m just SOL again.
Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.
That was said by Ronald Reagan.
Time will tell whether this perspective is prophetic, pessimistic or irrelevant.
To some extent, Trump will be forced to become as conservative as his support base. McDonalds would be out of business if they switched to fried chicken from hamburgers.
There is also the apparent angst of a self-appointed conservative aristocrat who fears the common touch (one can tell that from the jibe about the Trumpen proletariat). It’s not just the common touch but the lack of need for guidance from Olympus which has always marked the National Review (and which to some extent was required at some early stages when it was WFB and not mortal men up there on the summit).
But mostly, it is just fear of the unknown. Trump could settle into his new role as voice of the conservative resistance to political correctness. Or he could tire of it and move on to some new task leaving us searching for a better option (Cruz, probably).
Any candidate that would tolerate the continued existence of the GOPe isn’t a conservative. I guess that leaves us with Trump.
What Trump wants to do, and more:
Specific Details:
Secure the border, keep America safe.
Bring back jobs from China and Mexico.
Re-energize America’s entrepreneurial spirit.
Preserve Social Security and Medicare via Strong US growth
(not by raising taxes)
Make America energy independent.
Rebuild our Military and world-standing.
(not slow them down)
Re-establish trust with our allies.
Undo all America-harming Obama policies/deals.
Require countries we protect to contribute financially instead of taxing America.
Rebuild our roads, bridges,electrical grid, airports.
Support our military personnel ad veterans.
Stop corporations from moving jobs out of America.
Restore national pride and the American dream.
Stop countries from stealing our military technology.
Reduce our crushing national debt.
Prohibit countries from manipulating their currencies so US companies can compete.
Trump/Cruz 2016!!! All the way to the White House!!!
The black pot messenger of the GOPe comes to tell us that the Trump kettle is black too.
“Well, if this is the conservative movement now, I guess youre going to have to count me out.”
As a Southern Agrarian paleo-con, I never counted you in, sugar.
Are any true conservatives running? I thought Cruz was one. Now I saw his statement on another thread regarding the so-called “humanitarian crisis” and it was to the left of Trump. I have given up on a true conservative this time. At least Trump recognizes the problem of Mexican invasion and has slowed the left’s PC tyranny.
America would be better off with Jonah and
the stinking, lying, antiAmerican RINOS
eaten by whales.
While a Conservative is the goal...the overarching issue is getting rid of the traitor-to-their-electorate gop-e. Never vote for those fools.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.