Out of respect for our civil discussion, and in hopes of understanding how another perceives, would you please copy and paste insults from the article? I want to understand.
I appreciate the rational discussion, as well.
I object to the false equivalence of Trump to Islam. The premise is that a politician cannot defend himself, and to do so rises to the level of a political system antithetical to our representative republic. The article does not “actively” insult readers (pardon my previous hyperbole), but specifically requires the reader to believe that passive acceptance of insult, innuendo, and lies (such as what GWB did) is required of a republican politician.
NRO is actively opposing a major segment of the republican base, in concert with the party leadership itself.
In the end, it is possible they actually DO know better than Trump supporters. But to use that as their lead?
Four years ago, there were big flame wars on this site about whether or not Romney was an “acceptable” candidate. The answer came down that he had to be - he was the only alternative. There was a LOT of this discussion prior to Romney locking up the nomination.
Now we are seeing the obverse of that coin. The establishment doesn’t like the peoples’ collective wisdom, so they are in full beat-down mode trying to change it. 2012 has direct impact on 2016 - and it limits the authority of the establishment in swaying the base.
The GOPe has become the proverbial abusive husband, and the conservatives who make up the abused “wife” have reached a breaking point.
I, personally, have come to evaluate any information coming from a source which has a vested interest in light of the forces at play. The tactics employed tell me a lot about the quality and trustworthiness of the information conveyed.
Sorry for the rambling post.