Jumping the Gun: Why the National Review Editors Need to Chll Out

American Digest ^ | July 22, 2004 | Gerard Van der Leun

[vanderleun]

WHEN YOU ARE INVOLVED IN A DUEL and you know your opponent is going to miss, it might be a good idea to hold your fire until after he's had his shot, and his gun clicks on empty.

This is hard to do when all your supporters are gathered around you chanting, "Kill him, kill him, kill him, kill him...," but an experienced man can manage. A champion dualist turns to the side, watches carefully, gets his enemy to miss, and holds his fire until he knows that he can put one between the eyes.

It seems to me that, with all the hoopla over the last few months, the President's supporters in the midst of the political melee are getting a wee bit over-anxious to have him open fire. A primary example of this appears today in the National Review as an editorial:

Where, meanwhile, is the positive, substantive side of the campaign? People are noticing that the president has not presented an agenda for his second term should he be re-elected. -- Where's the Beef

To which I would say, "Please get your knickers untwisted and your game face on."

I realize that it has to be tough to sit in the NR's offices day after day and watch the Left and the Democrats sling one plague ridden corpse after another over the wall, but you just have to hunker down and take it until the right moment, which is not.... quite.... yet.

Yes, we've had the Wilson Corpse, the Clarke Corpse, the Clinton Corpse, the Moore Corpse, the 9/11 Report Corpse -- all of these disgusting hunks have been lobbed in and now are scattered about the political landscape in various stages of decomposition. It's got to be getting rank in the Republican Fortifications, and there have to be a lot of people wanting to whip out the flamethrowers and start sanitizing the joint.

But patience, patience, patience please. Always remember that "A Drug and Democrat Free America comes first. "

You see, it really doesn't matter what happens in the next couple of weeks. All that matters is what happens in October.

Yes, there's going to be a Democratic Convention next week. Nothing can be done about that, it is our way. And yes, we're going to be getting even greater levels of putrid pablum spewed about by the media as the preening pundits of puce prevarication strut and fret their hours behind the teleprompter. It will be a sickening time as we watch, night after night, the chosen of the party hard at work defining deviancy as Democratic. But that is not a bad thing. It helps people to make a choice.

In time the convention will, like some mistakenly swallowed razor blade, pass. Then the annointed demented will ooze out on the streets to take their platform of taxation, complaint and appeasement to the American people in the form of what is possibly the most boring Democratic candidate since Mortimer Snerd.

Do you really want the President to say anything substantive that would allow these quislings and poltroons to be able to grind it through their lie machine? I think not. Why hand your enemy ammunition when you can watch him use up his own puncturing his clown shoes?

Perhaps a graying and somewhat melted version of John Kennedy catting about the country side with Robin the Boy Wonder as the Stepmoney sips charddonay to the Left of the podium will appeal to America, but I prefer to put my faith in the common sense wisdom of common Americans, rather than the latest chunk of cheese coughed up by Katie Couric. For most of August, the face of the Democratic Party will be Kerry, Ewards and Heinz. I think America will take a long hard look at them.

The next time we see the real face of the Democratic Party en masse will be on the streets of New York during the Republican Convention. That's going to be a fool's festival not seen since the Democratic Convention in Chicago in 1968. Just imagine what they will bring to the news of the day.

We'll have intense and random acts of bizarre behavior, city wide exhibits of advanced tattoos and body piercing, chants bubbling with hate, obscene signage, unattractive displays of nudity, and random violence throughout Manhattan for days, all with the Democratic Party Seal of Approval. I'm sure it will play a major role in swinging a lot of voters into the Republican Camp. Depend upon it.

And then, and only then, will we have the President's acceptance speech.

If Bush and his advisers are savvy politicians, and we have a lot of reasons to believe they are, they will wait until this moment to bring out "the positive, substantive side of the campaign" that the editors of the National Review are so eager to get on the record. Any sooner and you're just playing into the enemy's hands.

The dualist that wins is not the one that gets the first shot, but the one that gets the killing shot.

Polls and poltroons aside, let's just keep our power dry and wait until we see the red of their little bong smudged eyes before letting fly.

There's really no rush, especially now. Just think of the method used by Michael (De Niro) Vronsky in The Deerhunter:

Michael : A deer has to be taken with one shot. I try to tell people that but they don't listen.
Nick : What? One shot?
Michael : Two is pussy.

[sevry]

Butt out! MYOB!

Are you trying to tell me, as a fellow forum member, where to post, and what to post?

[sevry]

The idea that we should allow false premise after false premise to be set (by not responding early) - I just don't understand -

I do. It would correspond with a 'seminar caller' approach, if you ever listen to Rush. They offer advice. Hold off. Take the 'high road'. And he says - don't you believe 'em.

It's bad enough that the GOP slavishly follow the DC and NYC press around. I guess they feel trapped, that there is no escape for them from the reporters. But, for instance, today at the announcement of what seems almost a non-story in this final 911 report, the President congratulated both men (who may be in trouble, in future, over this Sandy 'Pants' stuff, we'll see), didn't take questions, turned and walked away. I thought that's a good way to do it.

[nopardons]

How old are you?

And yes,that is salient and germain to this "discussion".

I am NOLT "baiting" nor making "personal attacks",but you're wasting bandwidth and attempting to engage in a juvenile "fight"; not to mention the fact that you are answering for a poster,with a nic other than sevry .

This is ennui inducing.

[hobson]

I bet she's a lurker.

[nopardons]

neener,neener,neener.........

A moose once bit the sister of a FREEPER.

Brie or Swiss?

[nopardons]

I bet she is too.

And that's a very good thing! :-)

[Billthedrill]

Sage advice, no doubt, but the metaphor's a little thin for my taste. In the first place, no accomplished duellist takes a head shot, however patient, and that should apply to politics as well. In the second, duels only happen when both sides agree to the rules. When the other side says it intends to cheat, cheats, crows about cheating, and then accuses you of cheating in response to your objections, the proper response is, IMHO, to pick up the nearest ballbat and have at it. So much for politesse; politics is, at its worst, described as a blood sport but is merely bloody.

Mind you, it is extremely rich to see party zealots who have been spending four years and considerable sums of money systematically defaming Bush to now make a shocked observation that things are turning strident. They are not; what is happening is that a beating is turning into a fight. Too bad for the bullies.

[Petronski]

I think you missed the point.

On reread: Wow, I sure did.

<ChrisFarley> I hate it when that happens. </ChrisFarley>

[nopardons]

That's okay,we all misread something at least once in our FREEPER lives.

At least it was a friend who told you. :-)

[dasein64]

That is what happened alright. To this day, we have not gotten an explanation for that non-campaign. Our current Pres Bush has come this far without flagging and I know he will continue to fight hard for all of us. The RNC needs to understand that the troops need to see their leaders putting up a good fight. We have reason to be concerned based on past experience with Bush one as well as the Dole candidacy.

[POA2]

But, for instance, today at the announcement of what seems almost a non-story in this final 911 report, the President congratulated both men (who may be in trouble, in future, over this Sandy 'Pants' stuff, we'll see), didn't take questions, turned and walked away. I thought that's a good way to do it.

Well, I agree today GWB handled that fine - but that is in no way what I am talking about - I am talking about not responding from OCT 2003 until March 2004 -

While the DEM's and the media continually lied about the state of the economy - continually spun negative economic news - continually lied about "why" we went to war in Iraq - continually lied about "what GWB said, about why we went to war in Iraq" - Continually lied about the WMD equation of Iraq, etc, etc -

This while the WH sat back and said hardly nothing - just allowed false premise after false premise to find its way into the heads of middle-america (the sheeple part that is).

Also the WH sat back and allowed the DEM's to raise over $100 million for 527's ....while the GOP and WH raised nothing for ours -

[Damagro]

This sounds supisciously like the same game plan used by George Bush, Sr. in '92.


92 was lost inside the Astrodome. The party was split by Buchanan and the convention came accross as quite ugly infighting.The Dims are split this year.I can't wait to see the antics of the Deaniacs

[theophilusscribe]

She is awewsome! Oh yeah, this is about to get way better!!

[NYCVirago]

How will it be reported? "Patriotic Americans gassed by jackbooted Republican thugs."

If anybody is wondering how the protests at the RNC convention can be sanitized and whitewashed by the media, they should take a look at the media coverage of any gay rights parade.

[Mister Baredog]

But the press won't clear much of it up, themselves. Why not . . the GOP? What's wrong with asking for that? I don't see a problem

Strategery at work. IMHO.