Skip to comments.
Hey George Will, Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner? The “Vulgarians”….
The Conservative Treehouse ^
| 8-14-2015
| sundance
Posted on 08/14/2015 7:17:10 PM PDT by smoothsailing
August 14, 2015
Hey George Will, Guess Whos Coming To Dinner? The Vulgarians
.
By sundance
Donald Trump is a counterfeit Republican and “an affront to anyone devoted to the project William F. Buckley began”
(Excerpt from Jeffrey Lord) Back in April of this year, two months before Trump announced his candidacy, Will was on the panel of Bret Baiers Special Report at Fox and said this when the panelists were asked how much money they would place on various candidates in Baiers candidate casino. When he got to Trump he said:
..”One dollar on Donald Trump in the hope that he will be tempted to run, be predictably shellacked, and we will be spared evermore this quadrennial charade of his”…
Suffice to say, Donald Trump not only announced his candidacy, he is as this latest CNN Iowa poll re-affirms yet again the front-runner. Repeatedly. Consistently. One Establishment prognosticator after another, now George Will included, has gotten Trump wrong.
Last week on Fox News Sunday George Will stated the “vulgar” Trump supporters needed to come to the Republican party based on the terms of the Country Club elite:
[
] These are voters the Republicans want, the Republicans want all voters, and particularly these voters, but to say that [Trump’s] tapped into something;
{shaking head}
Henry Wallace tapped into something, with the far left of American Politics in the late 40s; the John Birch society tapped into something, George Wallace tapped into something, and it was up to the grown-ups in the labor movement in the late 1940s, and the grown-ups in the conservative movement in the 1960s to read those elements the riot act, and say: come back in, but come back in on our terms because we are not going down the road you want to go
[Returning to J Lord] It is worth recalling here that once upon a time George Will was as down on Ronald Reagan as he is now on Donald Trump and has been in the past on Texas Senator Ted Cruz.
In a November 12, 1974 column appearing in the Washington Post on a potential 1976 challenge by Reagan to incumbent Establishment GOP President Gerald Ford, (titled Ronald Reagan, the GOP and 76), Will wrote of Reagan:
“But Reagan is 63 and looks it. His hair is still remarkably free of gray. But around the mouth and neck he looks like an old man. Hes never demonstrated substantial national appeal, his hard-core support today consists primarily of the kamikaze conservatives who thought the 1964 Goldwater campaign was jolly fun. And theres a reason to doubt that Reagan is well suited to appeal to the electorate that just produced a Democratic landslide.”
“If a Reagan third party would just lead the Nixon was lynched crowd away from the Republican Party and into outer darkness where there is a wailing and gnashing of teeth, it might be at worst a mixed course for the Republican Party. It would cost the party some support, but it would make the party seem cleansed.”
Four years later, Wills first and second choices for the 1980 GOP nomination were Tennessee Senator Howard Baker and George H. W. Bush, neither seen by conservatives of the day as devoted to the project William F. Buckley began six decades ago with the founding in 1955 of National Review making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable. (continue reading)
Sorry George, the “Vulgarians” are coming, AGAIN:
Link to full Jeffrey Lord article
TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: 2016election; bretbaier; demagogicparty; democide; election2016; georgewill; jeffreylord; memebuilding; newyork; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; purge; showtrials; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
To: smoothsailing
Will is among those I believe Reagan spoke of when he gave his immortal speech before CPAC, “Let them go their way.”
That speech, should anyone choose to read it, rings as true today as it did then.
21
posted on
08/14/2015 8:00:21 PM PDT
by
BlueNgold
(May I suggest a very nice 1788 Article V with your supper...)
To: smoothsailing
22
posted on
08/14/2015 8:02:14 PM PDT
by
Bobalu
(If we live to see 2017 we will be kissing the ground)
To: smoothsailing
Apparently insulting your viewers is a great business model.
Pray America is waking
23
posted on
08/14/2015 8:20:17 PM PDT
by
bray
(Cruz to the White House)
To: smoothsailing
George Will is an Atheist. So he has a huge blind spot and he frequently falls into a ditch.
24
posted on
08/14/2015 8:40:20 PM PDT
by
ecomcon
To: Leaning Right
I did the same thing. About two days after we cut cable my wife was looking at the perfect HD picture and said “Why didn’t we do this a long time ago?”
25
posted on
08/14/2015 10:16:53 PM PDT
by
VerySadAmerican
(Since you're so much smarter than me, don't waste your time insulting me. I won't understand it.)
To: Leaning Right
Can’t figure that out either. He’s such a snob. He, Brit Hume, and Krauthammer are all made from the same mold. They get paid by the Washington elite/news media...and love to sit back and like they know it all. Fact is, they don’t know how the people in this country are struggling to pay their bills...and they don’t care. Hence, the selling of Jeb and the like.
Never have liked George Will. Arrogant a** that he is.
To: Leaning Right
To: smoothsailing
When Bush I was elected, George Will boldly predicted that there would never be another Democrat President. Why does nobody ever remind him of this?
To: smoothsailing
Somebody needs to make a Trumpnado pic.
To: smoothsailing
George Will is a DemocRAT who got so OFFENDED by the DemocRATS, that he couldn't tolerate being associated with al;l those "CRAZIES" .
Now for a deeper understanding of just WHO George Will IS:
The word "neocons" is ONLY used by LIBERALS, trying to insult Conservatives.
The is no such thing as a "NEW" Conservative.
Conservatives ARE Conservative, plain and simple.
But read this"Liberals, Conservatives, and Neocons Learn the Difference!
March 12, 2014
Almost everybody is confused about the word "neoconservative" and its shortened form, "neocon."
I find that liberals/Democrats seem to use it as a sort of disrespectful form of "conservative,"and probably have no idea the the words have distinct meanings.
On the other hand, I know of some conservatives who define it as "new conservatives,"meaning people who were formerly something else, but have converted to conservatism.
Both are wrong.
As near as I can tell, "neo-" doesn't apply to any other word that way formerly not X, but having become X.
No, "neo-" almost always refers to an ideology that is different from the root word in a significant way.Neoconfederates are not people who want to secede and become a separate country.
They want the ideals of the Confederacy to be applied to modern politics, more or less, but not all of them.
Neoliberal is a more vague term,but it specifically applies to people who may have SOME of the attributes of liberals,
but who contradict liberalism in their advocacy of free trade and privatization
and other ideas usually thought of as conservative.
And, finally, neoconservatives are mostly those moderate cold war LIBERALS who defected to the Republican party when the Democrats got totally flaky with McGovern and his ilk.
Their ultimate origin, however, is not the Democratic party but the Trotskyite movement.
Jack Kerwick elaborates.
Read this: Most "Conservatives" Are Secretly Neoconservatives
12 March, 2014, by Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.
A colleague of mine has drawn my attention to a Washington Post blog post Why Most Conservatives Are Secretly Liberals by a Professor John Sides, a political scientist at Georgetown University.
Sides agrees with fellow political scientists Christopher Ellis and James Stimson, co-authors of Ideology in America.
Ellis and Stimson CONTEND thatAmerica is, at bottom, a center-left nation,
for while 30 percent of self-described liberals are consistent in endorsing liberal policy prescriptions,
the same sort of consistency can be ascribed to only 15 percent of conservatives.
And another 30 percent of conservatives actually advance liberal positions.
In short, Americans may TALK the talk of conservatism, but they WALK the walk of liberalism.
That is, they favor Big Government.
Sides, Ellis, and Stimson, it seems clear to me, are liberals.
It doesnt require much reading between the lines to discern this.
That they associate liberals, and liberals ALONE, with such virtues as consistency and such lofty ideals as a cleaner environment and a stronger safety net is enough to bear this out.
Yet in peddling the ridiculous, patently absurd notion thatconservatives see the media as promoting conservatism,
the verdict regarding their liberalism is seen for the no-brainer that it is.
There is, though, another CLUE that unveils Sides, Ellis, and Stimsons ideological PREJUDICES:They equate the term liberalism with a robust affirmation of Big Government.
They treat liberalism synonymously with its modern, Welfare-Statist incarnation.
There is no mention here of the fact that, originally, liberalism referred toa vision that attached supreme value to individual liberty,
a vision in which government played, and had to play, a minimal role in the lives of its citizens.
And there is no mention of the fact that, if liberalism is now an ugly word,
it is because the very same socialists who made socialism an ugly word hijacked liberalism when it enjoyed a favorable reception
and visited upon it the same fate that they secured for socialism.
In other words, if Sides himself wanted to be bluntly honest, hed have to admit that liberals are secretly socialists.
Still, though their premises are bogus, Sides and his colleagues draw the correct conclusion thatmost conservatives are NOTHING OF THE KIND.
The truth of the matter is thatthe vast majority of contemporary conservatives are neoconservatives.
Now, neoconservatism is a term that hasnt the best reputation.
It has ALWAYS BEEN CONTROVERSIAL,
and most of its proponents have DISAVOWED IT to the point of, preposterously, condemning it as an anti-Semitic SLUR.
But George W. Bush and his party inflicted potentially irrevocable damage upon the label.
Conservatism is a more marketable label.
Nevertheless, the reality is that neoconservatism is indeed a distinct school of political thought.
Beyond this, it is fundamentally different in kind from classical conservatism.
Irving Kristol, the so-called Godfather of neoconservatism, an appellation that he readily endorsed, ADMITS this in noting boththat neoconservatism exists
and that conservative can be misleading when used to describe it.
Neoconservatism, you see, is THE INVENTION OF LEFTISTS like Kristol himself.
When the Democratic Party began veering too far to the Left in the 1960s, Kristol and more moderate leftists began turning toward the Republican Party.
So as TO DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES FROM traditional conservatives, they coined the term neoconservatism.
Neoconservatives, Kristol asserts, are not at all hostile to the idea of a welfare state even if they reject the vast and energetic bureaucracies created by the Great Society.
Neoconservatives ENDORSE social security, unemployment insurance, and some kind of family assistance plan, among other measures.
But whats most interesting, particularly at a time when ObamaCare has DIVIDED the country, is that Kristol reminds us thatneoconservatives SUPPORT some form of national health insurance.
In all truthfulness, however, neither a degree in political science nor an IQ above four is required to know thatneoconservatism has always championed Big Government,
for it is its foreign policy vision more than anything else that distinguishes it from its competitors.
For neoconservatives, America is exceptional in being, as Kristol puts it, a creedal nation,the only nation in all of human history to have been founded upon an ideology of equality, of natural rights.
The U.S.A., then, has a responsibility to promote this ideology throughout the world.
And it is by way of a potentially boundless military i.e. Big Government that this ideological patriotism is to be executed.
Had the foregoing political scientists been looking in the right places, they would BE FORCED TOP CONCLUDE that most conservatives are secretly neoconservatives.
So, you see that those WHO THEY CALL
"neoconservatives", are really nothing more than
the old moderate side of the DemocRATS.
It's just THAT SIMPLE .
30
posted on
08/14/2015 10:29:51 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: smoothsailing
I have a brain the size of a small planet, with no apologies to Douglas Adams or his creation, Marvin.
“Intellectually respectable and politically palatable” has exactly nothing to do with being smart. It means nothing more nor less than “Allying with existing money in opposition to clear, Constitutional principle” or in a word, plutocracy.
31
posted on
08/14/2015 10:44:39 PM PDT
by
No.6
To: smoothsailing
This guy is nothing more than a mouth breathing rino.shame he just wont go away.
32
posted on
08/14/2015 10:47:27 PM PDT
by
HANG THE EXPENSE
(Life's tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
To: Diogenesis
Great graphic!
NEEDED: Graphic of George Soros being the Puppet Master of Fox News.
33
posted on
08/14/2015 10:52:59 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: Williams
[I despise elitists.] They all reek of narcissism.
34
posted on
08/14/2015 11:21:55 PM PDT
by
Islander2
(Some of us are here because we are not all there.)
To: Leaning Right
Indeed! Have always thought he was an arrogant ass. He’s now gone on and proved me right.
35
posted on
08/15/2015 2:49:05 AM PDT
by
snuffy smiff
(Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.)
To: snuffy smiff
George Will - the idiot savant of the effeminate journalist crowd. This guy oozes self confidence as he spouts the nonsense he wants everyone else to believe. Much like Peggy Noonan.
36
posted on
08/15/2015 3:04:41 AM PDT
by
doosee
(Captain, we are approaching a new level of Hell.)
To: smoothsailing
Go back to writing vapid editorials.
37
posted on
08/15/2015 3:07:43 AM PDT
by
P.O.E.
(Pray for America)
To: ebshumidors
To: smoothsailing
George Wallace was a Democrat
To: smoothsailing
Reminding all that one of O’Bozo’s first social soirées in DC after being elected was to have dinner at Wills’ house with “ conservatives” like Dr. Kraut et al...
It’s all about who you rub elbows with....
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-51 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson