Posted on 01/28/2016 3:24:45 PM PST by Kaslin
WASHINGTON -- In reading Paul Johnson's masterful "Art: A New History," I came across a startling number of art masters who did bodies sublimely, hands and even landscapes brilliantly, but who could not plausibly paint a human face. Some of the artists recognized this and had their subjects look over their shoulder or off to the horizon, or were painted behind a floppy hat. Nonetheless the artists are esteemed as great, though limited.
That thought ran through my mind when I first encountered National Review's manifesto on Donald Trump. Some of these accomplished writers have a knack for political ideology, for political culture, for journalism. But few have any talent for politics. Several have supported John McCain's and Mitt Romney's candidacies. Several have denounced Newt Gingrich's presidential ambitions along with me. But not many have served as political advisors, which might be a mark in their favor. Still, that does not give them a credential in politics.
In appraising this year's Republican field, we are not appraising a lineup that includes the Founding Fathers or A. Lincoln or E. Burke. We are reviewing a very good field of Republican candidates, any one of whom would be preferable to the Democrats' field of two undersized adversaries and an indictable potential felon, to say nothing of Adolf Hitler and various other unsavory figures who have been mentioned in the controversy created by the aforementioned participants, many of whom I know and some of whom have participated in The American Spectator over its long history.
We American conservatives have for years been confronted by an atmosphere polluted by the values of the left. Apparently, it has made some of us excitable. Those who take strength from the America that exists beyond the Manhattan-Washington corridor long for limited government, a balanced budget, economies in government, the rule of law, traditional American values, orderly immigration and an end to political correctness. We have become impatient with the oppression of political correctness and its absurd pretensions. We do not see anything wrong with making America great again. We know that "leading from behind" is an impossibility, plausible only to a fantasist who uses the power of the state to chloroform its citizenry.
Some of us have favored easy immigration or other reforms. Yet times have changed, and they have been changing for many years. Frankly, I see the wisdom in John Maynard Keynes' riposte: "When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do, sir?" At The American Spectator, we have always been a big tent magazine. We have writers who favor Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Marco Rubio, Governor Chris Christie, Governor Jeb Bush -- the whole lot of them. We run criticism of Donald Trump by the likes of Ross Kaminsky, Aaron Goldstein, Larry Thornberry and others. We have run the pro-Trump writing of Jeff Lord, Esther Goldberg, and Frank Buckley, and, of course, me. It is a big tent at The Spectator, as big and wide-open as this race for the presidency.
As for me, I am for the candidate who has come forward and in a matter of months opened up the race and attracted still more voters. I am for Donald Trump. In mere days, Trump has illuminated an issue that the Clintons have continued to thrust behind the arras for 23 years: Bill Clinton's abuse of women and Hillary Clinton's enablement of him through her servitors and her use of private investigators. The Clintons' corruption of government in the White House during the 1990s and more recently in fundraising for themselves, their foundation and her campaign, often from her office in the State Department, is now a matter of record. Trump has been instrumental in exposing them. Her computer server will prove to be for 2016 what Monica Lewinsky's blue dress was for Bill's presidency, irrefutable proof of Hillary Clinton's lying and obstruction of justice. The FBI is putting the finishing touches on the case.
I am for the candidate with a sense of humor, of showmanship, and a proven record for getting things done. Now on "The Today Show" this week, Donald Rumsfeld, a veteran conservative, has come forward and said that Trump has "caused people to respond in a way that most politicians have not been able to do." Rumsfeld is no vulgarian.
I agree with him. Trump is a new and promising participant in American politics, and he is on the conservatives' side. Here is history in the making.
What. A great. Post.
Thank you.
PS if there is a sense of humor hiding out somewhere in the Obama administration or the Democrat party, I’ve yet to see it.
I love our field. And I love what DT has done and have been wishing for weeks I could express it as well as Mr. Tyrell.
Hmmmm. Did I misspell Tyrrell? Sorry.
Me thinks they will tone it down a bit with their TDS.
Nope. Sorry.
BTW - you call it derangement - I call it my brain still functioning.
read
PFL
Ping
That’s pretty astonishing. I find it encouraging to see this from the pen of Tyrrell. This sort of selection process tends to polarize the followers more than the candidates themselves, several of whom are likely to find themselves harnessed together no matter who wins. For all the vituperation I have had more fun this time around than for many, many moons.
Tom Wolfe’s `U.R. Here’ comes to mind too, from his collection of essays in `Hooking Up.’
A sculptor completed a marble masterpiece, so critics and other artists and similar types crowded around it. It was if the subject was turned to stone.
They asked him how he did it: some sort of jig or optical device? By what trick do he do this piece?
They were astonished to hear him say (as Michaelangleo ? said) “I just removed what wasn’t needed.”
Keep in mind, this was when painters were making a lot of money silkscreening cans of tomato soup and dripping paint on canvas and welding stuff together they found behind lawnmower repair shops.
[Btw, `Ambush At Fort Bragg’ is one of the essays and worth reading if you want to understand why the MSM stinks like **** on ice.]
Anyway, it’s driving the chattering class crazy (along with their candidates) but we know what he’s doing: Trump is simply removing what isn’t needed.
Oh my. I have read two pro-conservative articles out of American Spectator in a row. Tucker Carlson and now this! I fear the Rino’s put tent, erected on the Capital Hill golf course, is about to collapse.
(They have McBackstabber and his girlfriend, Ms. Lindsay, stationed at the opening of the pup tent armed with golf clubs to beat off anyone who tries to get in. I fear they are meeting up with an uncouth enemy hoard, armed with rocks! Lord, have mercy!)
I have several of Emmett’s books, and I love to read his stuff. So, as usual, I find this writing helpful .. in that, while I’m not totally sold on Trump, Emmett’s analysis is worth considering.
Thanks for posting this Kaslin.
bkmk
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.