Posted on 01/22/2016 8:39:33 PM PST 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.
And Trump strongly supported Romney. We should deport both of them.
Wow. I can’t believe Ted would let this loon anywhere near his campaign.
Never seen that before. What a complete fraud.
Chinese Finger Trap
________________________
Perfect
It is true no matter who says it.
noun: hyperbole; plural noun: hyperboles
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
synonyms: exaggeration, overstatement, magnification, embroidery, embellishment, excess, overkill, rhetoric; More
Wait wait - what? I keep hearing from you guys that Trump supported Obama. LoL.
Terrific tag line! Thank you so much! Much of the rest- shaddup!
Trump should have supported Obama? Lol
Nick, sometimes rather than just being a contrarian, it's best just to hit the back button and erase what you think is a clever comment.
In 2008, Trump was supporting Obama, not 2012. But he actually got mad at Obama for not picking Hillary.
“from 22 self-appointed conservative potentates”
Bwahahahahaha. That is so true. Glen Beck, Michael Medved, hehehehehehe.
I think you are right there Grandpa Dave. Trump, for many of us represents “Our Bastard”...In other words, he has his faults and taint perfect, but he is “our” pick. For good or ill, we will ride across the Plains, walk on broken glass and toss the rattle snakes out of the way to vote for Donald. Whether he will fix the country or fail at trying—he is “our” candidate. No pundit, political talking head, purity monitor or elite is going to shake our vote loose.
Really? That national Review issue is going to win the Presidency for Trump? Actually that’s false enough to be called a lie no matter who says it.
If he wins I hope he still continues to tweet.
Wouldn’t it be great to have a president that talks straight to the people without having to go through the media?
The funny thing is he attacked Romney a lot in the fall, for being "too tough" on immigration.
Including Glenn Beck was a YUGE mistake!
Beck along with cowardly, two faced others, like Mark Halprin, made the whole damn thing totally laughable, seriously flawed and maliciously warped.
Oh Reaallly? RINO National Review endorsed Romney in 2008.
Doug Ibendahl is a Chicago Attorney and a former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party.
Why wouldn’t he? I think he will.
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.