Posted on 09/19/2015 5:43:19 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Last week, National Review’s Jim Geraghty published what may be the most insightful essay yet [1] on the difference between the conservative movement and Donald Trump and his followers. Geraghty has noticed a telling reticence on Trump’s part to utter such words as “freedom” or “liberty.” By contrast, Geraghty notes that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker used the word “freedom” six times in the 179-word announcement of his plan to replace ObamaCare, and Ted Cruz used “freedom” twice and “liberty” eleven times in his announcement speech at Liberty University, not counting references to the university itself.
The reason for this lack of keywords is that Trump’s principles are very different from those who are inspired by the likes of the late William F. Buckley; he is indifferent to the size and scope of big government and quite indifferent to Constitutional guarantees of citizens’ rights. For instance, Robert VerBruggen pointed out several months ago [2] that Trump has not only been a serial abuser of the eminent domain provision of the Constitution but, having lost a case in which the state of New Jersey tried and failed to dispossess an elderly widow of her property on his behalf, even welcomed the disastrous Supreme Court decision in the Kelo case in 2005.
All of Trump’s campaign rhetoric centers on power politics — strength, American greatness — often in terms which would not look out of place in a speech by some nationalistic autocrat. And this doesn’t appear to bother his followers one bit, or at least no more than they are bothered by his disgusting boorishness concerning women (ask Megyn Kelly and Carly Fiorina) or his schoolyard-bully taunts of any Republicans who criticize him (as Bobby Jindal and, most recently, Rick Perry and Ben Carson can testify).
But what I find truly shocking is not Trump’s behavior, which has been on display for decades, nor his ability to attract a certain type of follower. What I find shocking is Rush Limbaugh’s defense of Trump in the face of Geraghty’s analysis.
On September 11th, Limbaugh read Geraghty’s piece on air, and then responded by alleging that Trump doesn’t need to use those keywords because he embodies freedom and liberty in his actions, and is indeed the object of envy for those who don’t innately exhibit those qualities.
The reason I’m shocked comes from Limbaugh’s assertion that he hasn’t endorsed any of the candidates. Yet he and several other talk-show hosts have been instrumental in empowering Trump. They imply consent of his boorishness, effectively egging him on to say ever more outrageous things while Limbaugh and company blow on the glowing coals of rage at the perceived Washington establishment, regardless of party. What Limbaugh has done here is to conflate license and libertinism with freedom and liberty, and he’s surely sophisticated and intelligent enough to know the difference.
I am not suggesting that the frustration may not be justified; I’m suggesting that the rage buoying up Trump’s campaign is a very dangerous and ultimately counter-productive political emotion, one which threatens to trump (pun intended) the principles on which the movement has been based on for the last 60-odd years.
Far from being a champion of liberty in any rational sense, Trump is the embodiment of crony capitalism. In the first Republican debate, and several times subsequently, he has openly boasted of borderline, if not actual, political corruption, quid-pro-quo contributions and payments he has made to politicians at all levels in order to secure favors for his projects. He is (as I mentioned above) wholeheartedly in favor of government misuse of eminent domain and the disastrous Kelo decision of SCOTUS.
Trump represents, as Leon Wolf has eloquently written in Red State, not any sort of conservatism, but a right-wing mob similar to the left-wing mobs evident in such phenomena as Sanders rallies and BlackLivesMatter. About a month ago, I suggested on this site that this was a worrying phenomenon on the Republican fringe. Now, I’m not so sure. As I’m sure Victor Davis Hanson would agree, this was precisely the Achilles’ heel of Greek democracy which made our founding fathers so wary of direct democracy. When any issue passionately polarizes a society with no chance of compromise (e.g., abortion is either the termination of a human life or potential human life, or it is the excision of a group of cells, no more significant than paring your fingernails, two positions between which there can be no compromise), two mobs will materialize and think with their glands rather than their brains, resulting in what the Greeks termed stasis, in effect, civil war. Inevitably, both mobs end up baying for the restoration of order, and usually a tyrant rides to the rescue.
As poet and playwright Zoë Akins first said in the title of a long-forgotten play, the Greeks had a word for it.
Is Trump, together with the American left in general, right? Has the carefully constructed, politically balanced and fine-tuned system created by our founding fathers deteriorated to the point where two angry, unprincipled gangs interested only in crushing the other side and exercising naked power confront each other like schoolboys shouting taunts at each other over a line drawn in the sand?
That, my friends, depends upon us.
Does voting for TPA and the corker amendment pass you little test?
Rush has a helluva lot better insight and perspective into who Trump is than most people do. He has known Trump personally for years and I am absolutely certain he would not be saying the things he is about Trump if he did not trust The Donald.
The same people who hurl at the thought of socialism when advocated by "people of color" or the Left think it's a great idea when advocated by populist white farmers of the 1890s or Huey P. Long or Father Coughlin. The Lefties are "them;" we're "us." And the reverse is true as well (Leftists can't stand the socialist Father Coughlin).
We're becoming like animals. Religion as the supreme loyalty was obviously never true. It always gives way to blood and genes and chromosomes. And while Donald Trump may not be a committed chrstian, he's something obviously much more important to many people: he's ethno-culturally "one of us."
Black and Hispanic chrstians hate this country and want to destroy it in tandem with atheists and moslems and homosexuals. White chrstians are ready to join hand with white atheist racialists and "civilizationists" to defend it. White chrstians accept non-white chrstians only if the latter identify with white "culture;" Black and Hispanic chrstians fellowship self-hating white chrstians who support "gay rights" and abortion (and islam).
We may very well be at That Time of History.
Trump phenomena circa 2015 is actually quite simple to understand. We do not need long essay’s to understand it.
Career politicians who use words such as “liberty” and “freedom” and “constitution” generously, have been in charge for 3 decades. Simple truth is they have delivered fewer jobs for the middle class.
People are angry and frustrated over the lies from career politicians, again and again. Trump is for the middle class, and not in the pockets of rich donors controlling his actions and votes in congress. Any wonder why Trump is leading the polls?
Damnit! He's a Republican, not a conservative.
The media sides with Gope errr I mean the GOPe sides with the media on Trump! Voters not allowing GOPe to pick another looser to run for the rainbow hut formerly the white house.
I think Rush honestly feels the same way that most of us do. Lately you can tell that he is holding his tongue as he flirts with coming right out and saying the kind of things we all say and think about the GOPe. His comments about the Iran nuke deal have been right on the edge of accusing Corker, McConnell and Boner of treason. You can tell he’s as fed up as we are and is only walking the fine line because of his position and concerns about losing sponsors if he gets embroiled in another controversy.
I agree. Trump will not bow and scrape to the PC Lords in the media.
The media is biased and 70% agree. Pre-TV media was biased but there competition. Most towns had a conservative newspaper and a liberal newspaper.
In the age of TV, media pretended to be objective while biased toward liberal.
They get away with it because there is not enough competition in media. It operates more like a cartel. Yes, they compete for eyeballs but with same pablum.
The entry price is pretty steep to start a national network. Rupert succeeded because there was a vaccuum but it seems they are moving left as well.
To open up the media marketplace of ideas, we should move to a more competitive market for our entertainment, news.
In other words, customers should cut their cable tv and move to the internet for their tv needs. If the customers move, the networks will follow.
There are plenty of devices out there that show the internet on your tv, roku, etc.
I watched the debates livestreaming on cnn.com. I really do not miss much not having cable tv and I am saving money.
If enough people switch, there will be more competition in the media marketplace.
Where can I get a job writing cr@p like this?
What are the conservative principles he believe animates the likes of The Man With No Name (Jeb) McConnell or Boehner?
If Buckley were alive today he'd be roasting them.
Avner Zarmi is a bed-wetting, femi-Nazi castrated poodle.
Avner Zarmi
Is that a Neocon name?
If there is ONE thing Rush Limbaugh ISN’T .. it’s a phony.
Rush has been pointing out the GOPe for as long as I can remember. And, he often relates how he was asked to speak before the open of Congress one year - the year we had so many NEW congressmen.
If Rush likes you, or doesn’t like you .. he doesn’t pretend about it. I don’t know how anybody can listen to him and believe “it’s just a business decision”. It’s never been that way with Rush .. NEVER .. EVER.
He means RELUCTANCE, not RETICENCE. This is a bit of illiteracy that really needs stamping out.
They are absolutely manic when it comes to Trump.
The GOPe and NRO say "yes" to Liberty, then do nothing. Trump does not use "Liberty speak," but does the things we want our leaders to do. Which is more "conservative?"
Walker didn’t have a hellacious,y good immigration and gun plan. Not a fan of subsidies for anyone, but that’s like throwing a wild pitch after six straight strike outs.
Yes "shalom," you've certainly swerved right into the truth!!! Keep doing the Lord's work!!! (not one iota of sarcasm in this reply!!!)
They will tell us who get fear-—he says that a lot!
I am hearing Rush say the same too, and it behoves the establishment in the GOP to get thei heads straighgt and understand that Rush is saying stuff we are all thinking. Levin is even closer to the T word than Rush. He has already called Obama Treasonous and the GOPe congressional leadership accessories.
Oh noes. Trump doesn’t use the right words. To sound good.
These GOP elites just love to talk and write. But are too chicken sh*t to actually do anything they talk or write about.
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.