Posted on 01/23/2016 3:29:26 AM PST by AdaGray
It’s one thing to publish an editorial denouncing Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump; any news outlet can do that, and plenty have. It’s another to get almost two dozen leading conservative thinkers to write essays arguing against the Manhattan billionaire’s nomination and agree to print them under a single banner: “Against Trump.â€
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Not my idea of conservatives, more like back stabbing b@$%@rds. Where were they thru 7 + years of Obama? Cancel your subscription to this rag, National Review.
But that was the National Review editorial staff, Will and Kraut are not on their staff.
How did Beck get on the list?
NR is out of step.
I believe NR made a mistake. It won't cause me to cancel my subscription.
Buckley once published and article in NR entitled: Does Lowell Weicker Make You Sick?
That year he founded a PAC to help Lieberman(D) beat Weicker(R) running for the Senate.
Trump isn't Weicker. Weicker made Ted Kennedy look conservative.
Disclaimer: I like Cruz. I don't dislike Trump but am clueless as to what to expect. He has some liberal tendencies and has been all over the lot on some issues.
Will he work to gut and repeal Obamacare? I haven't heard but may have missed it.
Will he have a conservative litmus test for Supreme Court denizens? The next eight years may give us 3 or 4 new ones.
Will he really enforce immigration laws? Will he walk across the aisle to make deals or demand that the Democrats are the ones to walk across the aisle from now on, and there are some positions that are not negotiable.
Will he indict Lois Learner and clean house in the Treasury, Justice and State Departments? Will he close useless Federal offices as he would in his own companies? If I have missed his position papers on these, I'm sorry. I wish I knew what all of them are. So far I like what he has said on immigration and taxes.
None of us have an idea what we will get with Trump. He has always gone his own way without consistent political leanings.
I don't dislike him and would surely vote for him precisely because we don't know. We do know with clinton and Sanders and Biden.
I think NR erred. I hope I'm right and Lowry is wrong.
“I consider this list just like the list of the 400 ‘Constitutional Scholars’ who took out a full page ad in the NYT in 1998 effecting declaring that Bill Clinton’s BJ was not an impeachable offense because it was not a high crime or misdemeanor.”
Along the same lines, what I wrote here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3387420/posts?page=163#163
“Glenn Beck, David Boaz, L. Brent Bozell III, Mona Charen, Ben Domenech, Erick Erickson, Steven F. Hayward, Mark Helprin, William Kristol, Yuval Levin, Dana Loesch, Andrew L. McCarthy, Michael Medved, Edwin Meese III, Russell Moore,
Michael B. Mukasey, Katie Pavlich, John Podhoretz, R. R. Reno, Thomas Sowell, Cal Thomas.
National Review’s version of Duke University’s infamous “Group of 88”; same same.”
Excellent analogy!
The NR never created debate nor controversy when RINOs were pushing amnesty.
The new Krauthammer I see on Fox now is nothing like the old-Trump-bashing one. Except for the same wooden features.
“None of us have an idea what we will get with Trump. “
Maybe you don’t, but I have a better feel for what Trump would do than Cruz.
Read ‘The Art of the Deal’ and you will know. He says in it you have to deliver what you promise, and even uses Carter and Reagan as examples (bad and good, respectively). He also says he aims high and usually gets what he wants and rarely needs to compromise. He also kept pushing to get the deals he wanted, never giving up and working relentlessly to convince politicians, banks, investors, that his way was the best - long after others gave up.
The book shows he is a fighter, relentless but able to read people and not alienate them - but willing to if they won’t come around. He doesn’t give up.
He’s exactly what we need.
Krauthammer's opinion is valued now? Usually he is dismissed out of hand around here.
Apparently Trump does. There are several articles today about how the NR article handed Trump the primary.
“All along, there have been principled conservatives opposing him. So we wanted to gather together a group to make that point quite dramatically.”
Since when has the NR backed principled conservatives.
yes, but some of us eschew Free Republic dogma and think for ourselves. We are capable of analysis of what is presented
He already tried to suck up to Palin this week....REALLY NEEDS her endorsement!!!
Hey Sarah, do us a favor and ditch the phone so you can’t take his call.
I am in total agreement with you.
That list of names are what I call “corporate conservatives” (GOP Inc). They’ve staked out their respective turfs, profited from the status-quo, and DON’T like outsiders barging in.
If you’re not part of the clique, you’re either a rube or a gauche in their minds.
Notice how these conservatives said/did nothing when Palin got the bum’s rush out of the governorship. Even worse, how about the Giffords shooting when all these conservatives ducked into the tall grass.
They praised her when it suited them, now some act shocked as though she shot their puppy.
Hypocrites.
Just like they all lined up against the Repub leadership in Wash-DC for the selling out of the people who put them there! /off-dark-dripping-black-sarcasm
He is one of the writers...(contributing editor?)
Poll FReep: If the election were held today, who would be your first choice for President of the United States?
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.