Posted on 01/26/2016 7:10:54 AM PST by Theo
When the publisher of National Review Magazine, Jack Fowler, called and asked me to write 300 words on why I oppose Donald Trump for president of the United States, my first thought was about the derision that was sure to come from Trump supporters.
I was not disappointed, or rather I am disappointed that no one who reacted negatively rebutted any of the arguments I, or the other contributors, made about why we think a President Trump would not pursue conservative goals.
Sounding like Trump, I was called a "loser" and someone for whom one writer said he had "lost all respect." Sure, there were some who called me "brilliant" (I'm filing those away), but the name-callers resembled their political master. Trump also refused to address our arguments. Instead, he mislabeled the magazine a "dying newspaper" and said it had lost circulation and no one reads it. Many are reading this issue.
One friend said he is convinced that Trump is "teachable and we can move him in the right direction." On June 14, Trump will be 70 years old. By then, most people have long been settled in their worldview. Trump likes to cite Ronald Reagan, who was a Roosevelt Democrat before he famously said he didn't leave the Democratic Party, the party left him. But Reagan spent many years honing his conservative principles in speeches, articles, and radio commentaries. He did not have, as some nominees to high office experience, a "confirmation conversion."
Quoting myself would be redundant (read us all at National Review.com), so here is the key paragraph from the lead editorial:
"Trump's politics are those of an averagely well-informed businessman: Washington is full of problems; I am a problem-solver; let me at them. But if you have no familiarity with the relevant details and the levers of power, and no clear principles to guide you, you will, like most tenderfeet, get rolled. Trump has shown no interest in limiting government, in reforming entitlements, or in the Constitution. He floats the idea of massive new taxes on imported goods and threatens to retaliate against companies that do too much manufacturing overseas for his taste. His obsession is with 'winning,' regardless of the means -- a spirit that is anathema to the ordered liberty that conservatives hold dear and that depends for its preservation on limits on government power."
In the February 1 issue of The Weekly Standard, Stephen F. Hayes writes: "The Republican frontrunner is a longtime liberal whose worldview might best be described as an amalgam of pop-culture progressivism and vulgar nationalism. His campaign rallies are orgies of self-absorption, dominated by juvenile insults of those who criticize him and endless boasting about his poll numbers. He's a narcissist and a huckster, an opportunist who not only failed to join conservatives in the big fights about the size and scope of government over the past several decades but, to the extent he was even aware of such battles, was often funding the other side, with a long list of contributions to the liberals most responsible for the dire state of affairs in the country, including likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton."
What is the counter argument to these substantive opinions? Anger against the "Washington establishment" is not one. Those who worship Trump have an obligation to say why he is worthy of their faith. Given his liberal background and poor explanations of why he now believes differently, how do his supporters know he will govern conservatively should he win the White House? He once said his sister, who is pro-abortion, would be an excellent nominee to the Supreme Court. His story of how he supposedly became a pro-life convert lacks credibility.
Electing a president, especially in a dangerous world, is important work. Anger and emotion should not govern the choice. Considered judgment should. Trump appeals to the former, but not the latter.
Irrelevant navel gazing.
The Hysterical bunch is starting to come out of the woodwork. They know if Trump wins Iowa, he will be on a roll. Their Fear = Somebody lobbyists and pundits can’t control = They lose power.
read us all at National Review.com
And Jethro Bush or Mario Rubio would "pursue conservative goals?"
Seriously?
The anti-Trump hit pieces are coming out of the woodwork this week!
Their hope for his destruction is terrifying...
...... He desires to bring back jobs
........strengthen our military
.........honor our vets and wounded warriors
........stop common core
........etc
Just what are THEY afraid of?
Why don’t THEY want America returned to greatness.
THEY truly scare me.
Snark if you must but the man makes good points.
Cal say adios/goodbye.
America is not listening to you and your GOPe NR thugs nor reading your garbage.
When, President Trump is sworn in, you and your NR thugs will be as relevant as the drunk and homeless in DC.
Go Trump! Leader, Fighter, Winner! America First!
What if Trump loses the General just like Romney did?
Who will have been the proud "loser" then, too proud to admit that their favorite candidate was just a little too stinky for too many Republicans and conservatives who nowadays insist on being accountable for what they vote for, instead of pretending to vote "against"?
What if Trump loses for ALL conservatives because the Republican party got mad instead of smart?
I don’t “worship Trump”...but I may vote for him.
The Establishment wants another pro glowbullist candidate flush with corporate money. They have perverted the term “conservative” and it all started when Bush I thew away the Reagan’s legacy, Nationalism and patriotism in favor of the “New World Order”.
Oh boy, love being treated to all 22 NR articles, one by one. You know, if I wanted to hear endless assaholic lectures, I would have voted for AlGore.
The few, the Proud, the deceivers:
NR’s “Against Trump” Issue:
Glenn Beck
David Boaz
Brent Bozell III
Mona Charen
Ben Domenech
Erick Erickson
Steven F. Hayward
Mark Helprin
William Kristol
Yuval Levin
Dana Loesch
Andrew C. McCarthy
David M. McIntosh
Michael Medved
Edwin Meese III
Russell Moore
Michael B. Mukasey
Katie Pavlich
John Podhoretz
R.R. Reno
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
The Trumpster has tapped in to the frustrations of many who no longer see any representation for them. Tools of those who seek to rule not govern, our labor stolen in ever higher taxes, regulations... near every aspect of our lives licensed, permitted and regulated to death. Trump may be a charlatan a fraud (as was Obama)... but the support he receives is real and deep. Tis interesting the “outsiders” are despised by the GOPe as much as they are the Democrats. Tells us much... that the Washington/lobbyist/K-street/BIG MONEY cartel is in charge... and will seek the destruction of any who even question much less oppose... always dismissed as “bigots” of “haters”. The irony of “progressivism” is in spite of its rhetoric, the goal is total rule over the populace by the 1% political rich class. The insurgents are now at the gate!
I imagine they would have nothing to rant about and get paid to pontificate about in paid articles and so many lobbyist perks would go unless the politicians were willing to have them exposed. Trump has said he could buy favors and at least he was open and honest about it. I personally don’t believe it is right. But what is worse are all the secret slight of hands that have long been hidden in DC. Time to shine a light on them!
The National Review issue that attacks Trump will only inspire his supporters. In fact, it may wind up being the final boost in Iowa that gives Donald the nomination.
National Review just handed Donald Trump the Election
Republican Newswatch ^ 1/22/16 DOUG IBENDAHL
Posted on 1/22/2016, 8:39:33 PM by Amntn
National Review’s publication of the collective anti-Donald Trump missives from 22 self-appointed conservative potentates has caused quite a stir in Republican circles.
The nationwide responses range from, “Wait, I thought National Review went out of business years ago,” to “Ed Meese? Seriously?”
The Gang of 22 have officially become parodies of themselves. One would have to reach back to the days of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew to lift an adequate quote to describe them.
“Nattering nabobs of negativism,” “vicars of vacillation,” “pusillanimous pussyfooters,” “the decadent few,” “ideological eunuchs,” “the effete corps of impudent snobs,” or “the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history” - take your pick, because they all apply about equally well to each and every one of them.
So clueless is the Gang of 22 they can’t even see how they’ve stumbled right into the narrative Trump’s been communicating so successfully for months. Just like the elected officials from both parties, the Gang of 22 has been GREAT at complaining about stuff, year, after year, after year.
But getting anything accomplished? Not so much.
Many of the Gang of 22 have been hanging around and chattering for decades, and some are active cogs in the Conservative Entertainment Complex, deriving their income by pandering to conservative anger while offering no real solutions.
Donald Trump represents a threat to these ineffectual poohbahs in the same way he represents a threat to do-nothing public officials.
Jealousy is also seriously at work here. Trump is inspiring and exciting a broad spectrum of the country like no member of the Gang of 22 ever has, or ever will.
In just seven months of campaigning, Trump already has more Americans listening to a Republican message than the entire Gang of 22 could muster over decades.
Trump understands that before you can advance the ball, you have to convince people to take time from their busy lives to listen. No one on the GOP side since Ronald Reagan has accomplished that like Trump.
No one else has come close, and certainly no one from that “effete corps of impudent snobs” to which the National Review thinks we should defer.
The Gang of 22 had their chance. They’ve done a lot of bitching over the years, and it paid well for some.
But Americans care about results. They can plainly see that all of the empty talk from the Gang of 22 got us eight years of Barack Obama, and a loss in pretty much every conservative battle there was to lose.
At the same time when Americans look at Donald Trump’s life they get a lot of assurance that here is finally a man who shares their focus on actually getting results. And Trump returns the respect by recognizing regular hard-working Americans are a lot smarter than any of the “ideological eunuchs” in all of their pontificating glory.
The “pusillanimous pussyfooters” love to nitpick Trump’s words, but what voters are looking for this year is competence and accomplishment. Donald Trump has an actual record of delivering both in spades.
The Gang of 22 is right to be terrified. A President who could get things done would expose them as the irrelevant creatures they truly are.
It can’t happen fast enough.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3387420/posts
Looks like the “rats” aboard this ship are putting on life-jackets. Too bad they will soon be irrelevant....that leads to unemployment, since their media colleagues can no longer save them.
And then pray hard that he won't turn right around and expedite them back in.
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.