Coda: Frum v. Horowitz

David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog ^ | October 3, 2009 | David Horowitz

[HorowitzianConservative]

David Frum has a parting shot for our me in our debate. Before responding let me say that it is gratifying that we could go these three rounds without acrimony, and with a sense that we could engage these issues again down the line in a fraternal manner. That speaks to the health of the conservative coalition, and I am pleased about that. And it also pleases me that we can end on a note of agreement. Sort of.

Here’s what David wrote along with my reply

[sourcery]

The Left—a nice place to be Frum...

[ElayneJ]

Read later.

[Pelham]

“The Left—a nice place to be Frum...”

Ha, well done. Horowitz vs Frum, a former commie versus a phoney ‘conservative’. While it’s fine to welcome the ex-Left to your side, conservatives have been fools to hail them as leaders.

[SuziQ]

Bump for later reading.

[savagesusie]

So the Catholic Church was a fool to allow St. Paul to become one of their leaders? History is replete with examples of people defecting from ideologies and becoming the most valuable assets for the opposition.

[docbnj]

Horowitz is correct. Frum is foolish to confront an authority like Horowitz on the subject of the 1960s left.

But I am not just making a judgment based deference to a superior authority: I was there myself, lived it, and watched what was happening. I remember it all very well.

Unfortunately, the experience of those days is not passed on accurately in either the media, or in our educational institutions.

For a few decades after the 1960s, there was a corrective response. For example, parents tried to make sure that their kids were not becoming hippies — and I think that for a while it worked. But then the inevitable forces of decay took over, until we have the children of the hippies now reaching leadership age.

It was 30 years (roughly) from the 1930s to the 1960s — a generation. Then a somewhat longer interval to now (because people have been having children later).

At the same time, the main ethnic group which makes up much of the liberal base have been reproducing disproportionately, and new imports have arrived (and not exactly by accident).

[y6162]

Frum is an opportunist Canadian. He switched sides when he could no longer making a living off the right.

[Pelham]

I know David. I don’t confuse him with Paul of Tarsus.

[savagesusie]

Ha ha....I was just making a point....Not many can hold a candle to St. Paul, not even dear David.

But my point is: that David has been very instrumental at helping the Conservative cause by getting speech codes eliminated in the colleges, etc., etc..

He has been shining a light on all these filthy communist radicals entrenched in the universities who are brainwashing the future teachers with our own tax money. He knows how the left operates and he is hitting them at exactly the point where they took control over the minds of the masses--in our public schools and the media where the indoctrination of the children and the numbing of the adults is occuring right NOW! If media was doing their job, why would Billy Ayers have a job in education, of all things with his perverted, twisted, sick world view. AND Ward Churchill, or Angela Davis. Most parents trusted the Universities to educate, not to indoctrinate.

David has been warning the public for decades, starting with his book Radical Son, and he was marginalized, etc. for years by the left because he was trying to expose them.

[Pelham]

I agree with all that you say about David’s usefulness in taking on the hard left. I have no problem in welcoming him as an ally. But I don’t believe in taking as leaders those whose instincts were once close to treason. Allies, yes, leaders, no. And actually I had some others in mind more than David.