Category Archives: Conservatism

Some Highlights Of ABC GOP Debate (Other Than Megyn Kelly’s Absence)

China, Conservatism, Constitution, Donald Trump, Media, Politics, Private Property, Republicans

The ABC Republican debate in New Hampshire was not an exciting evening. Other than that Marcobot malfunctioned magnificently—and with it the folly of the Rubio press was exposed. The best part of the evening was Megyn Kelly’s absence on the panel.

Lines to remember, in sequence:

Marcobot # 1:

And let’s dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world.

That’s why he passed Obamacare and the stimulus and Dodd-Frank and the deal with Iran. It is a systematic effort to change America. When I’m president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.

Marcobot # 2:

But I would add this. Let’s dispel with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing. He is trying to change this country. He wants America to become more like the rest of the world. We don’t want to be like the rest of the world, we want to be the United States of America. And when I’m elected president, this will become once again, the single greatest nation in the history of the world, not the disaster Barack Obama has imposed upon us.

CHRISTIE about Marcobot:

I think he mentioned me and my record in there, so I think I get a chance to respond. You see, everybody, I want the people at home to think about this. That’s what Washington, D.C. Does. The drive-by shot at the beginning with incorrect and incomplete information and then the memorized 25-second speech that is exactly what his advisers gave him. … [Marco] gets very unruly when he gets off his talking points. …

TRUMP: [Waffles a lot before he spits out a reasonable position on North Korea.] The Chinese … They tell me. They have total, absolute control, practically, of North Korea. [L]et China solve that problem.

BUSH: More sanctions on Iran and North Korea [so that more of the people may die or fall into poverty. What’s new in Republican “thinking”?]

Kasich: “It is completely ridiculous to think we are going to go into neighborhoods, grab people out of their homes and ship people back to Mexico. That’s not where the party is. The party is not for departing 11.5 million people.”

CRUZ:[About that wall] I’ve got somebody in mind to build it.

we’re going to build a wall. We’re going to triple the border patrol. We’re going to increase — and actually, since Donald enjoyed that, I will simply say, I’ve got somebody in mind to build it.

We’re going to increase four-fold, the fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft, so that you have technology monitoring an attempted incursion to direct the boots on the ground where they’re occurring. We’re going to put in place a strong e-verify system in the workplace, so you can’t get a job without proving you are here legally.

We’ll put in place a biometric exit-entry system on visas, because 40 percent of illegal immigration comes not over the border illegally, but people coming on visas and overstaying.

We will end sanctuary cities by cutting off taxpayer dollars to any jurisdiction that defies federal immigration law.

MARCOBOT: Like Kasich, he supports what his large donors call “a very reasonable, but responsible approach to people that have been here a long time, who are not dangerous criminals, who pay taxes and pay fines for what they did.”

TRUMP ON HEALTHCARE: “The insurance companies are getting rich on Obamacare. The insurance companies are getting rich on health care and health services and everything having to do with health. We are going to end that. … We’re going to take out the artificial boundaries, the artificial lines. We’re going to get a plan where people compete, free enterprise. They compete. So much better.

As for Trump on eminent domain. His only reasonable defense (which he doesn’t put forward because he’s not surrounding himself with the smartest people) is that “the Con-stitution” gives government the power to confiscate. It’s wrong. And the Con-stitution is wrong to do it:

The Constitution gives authorities the right to seize private property for the “common good—that catch-all constitutional concept. READ “The Con-stitution And The Power To Confiscate.”

Why we’re glad circus girl was not on stage:

(Thanks, Washington Post, for providing a transcript of the GOP debate, Feb. 6, for those of us who still favor the written word.)

like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

A Rehearsed Rubio Goes Into Robot Mode

Conservatism, Politics, Propaganda, Republicans

The Rubio robot constructed by establishmentarians to succeed to the throne has revealed its robot circuitry. The Marco Rubio news channel, Fox News, so riddled with Rubio operatives, can’t be happy that the Rubio robot broke down.

Rubio said he would “dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing.” But once became four times, setting Chris Christie up for a zinger.
“There it is. There it is,” Christie said. “The memorized 25-second speech.”

“Consistency may be a virtue—except when you’re being criticized for going rote in a field where others go rogue.”

Rubio repetitiveness:

Rubio Sponsors:

Rubio on immigration:

(Thanks, Washington Post, for providing a transcript of the GOP debate, Feb. 6, to those of us who still favor the written word.)

like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

Dumbness Might Explain National Review Mediocrities’ Missteps

Conservatism, Intelligence, Neoconservatism, Republicans

Question: Where is Chucky Krauthammer in the “Conservatives Against Trump” production? He is one self-important, neoconservative, who’s not mad about Trump. Why is Chucky nowhere to be found among the NRO Peanut Gallery standing “bravely” against the Republican base rising?

My working hypothesis: Chucky Krauthammer is smarter than the mediocrities on the “Conservatives against Trump” list.

It’s a super-duper dumb thing to come out as a collective against a candidate—Trump—who’s so wildly popular with the Republican base and beyond, and who could very well be the GOP’s nominee.

Dumbness—overall G-factor deficit—might explain the National Review mediocrities’ missteps.

Have you checked the names on the National Review list Against Trump? They’ve been anointed “prominent conservatives,” or “leading conservatives” in the Moron Media. But most are conservatives in name only—as Jack Kerwick has argued, with reference to the absence in their “work” of a hint of Edmund Burke, “the patron saint” of conservatism,” his “20th century’s American reincarnation, Russell Kirk,” or Michael Oakeshott.

And they constantly yack it up for a global, ideological American Manifest Destiny.

One might say these National Reviewnicks stand athwart historic, Old Right conservatism.

As to “thinkers. Kenneth Minogue was a “thinker.” Roger Scruton is a thinker. John O’Sullivan, boy, can he think (which is probably why he was nudged out as editor of NR, in favor of intellectual pygmy, Rich Lowery).

But these people?

Mona Charen (mediocre scribbler), Dana Loesch (gorgeous gun-totting broadcaster), Katey Pavlich (youthful nullity), Glenn Beck (irrational mystic), Michael Mukasey (government functionary/attorney and Jeb Bush cheer leader), on and on. (Thomas Sowell is an economist, that’s about it. He’s nothing like Murray Rothbard or other Austrian-school thinkers.) As for Rich Lowery; he needs your pity.

like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint

National Review Stands Athwart Historic Conservatism Of Burke, Kirk

Classical Liberalism, Conservatism, Donald Trump, History, Neoconservatism

Most of the National Review recruits who’ve enlisted Against Trump are conservatives in name only, as Jack Kerwick’s learned allusion to conservatism’s founding philosophers concludes. NRO’s promotion of “‘American Exceptionalism,’ the radically ahistorical doctrine that America is not a historically and culturally-specific country but an ‘idea,’ an abstract ‘proposition,'” makes this lot unconservative.

One might say National Review stands athwart historic conservatism (to borrow from founder William F. Buckley’s famous mission statement to stand athwart history).

“National Review vs. Trump?” by Jack Kerwick (published, surprisingly, by

… NR’s contributors are indeed correct that Trump is not any sort of conservative in the classical or traditional sense of the word. But neither are Trump’s “conservative” critics conservative in the classical or traditional sense of the word.

Undoubtedly, Trump has never read, if he’s even heard of, Edmund Burke, “the patron saint” of conservatism. I would be surprised if he’s even heard of, let alone read, the work of the 20th century’s American reincarnation of Burke, Russell Kirk. Chances are even slimmer yet that he’s familiar with Michael Oakeshott’s classic essay, “On Being Conservative,” or George Nash’s and Paul Gottfried’s seminal studies of the conservative movement in America.

The one contemporary nationally-renown figure who is more philosophically approximate to Burke and Kirk than anyone else—Pat Buchanan—Trump at one time ridiculed. Nor has Trump been any more generous to either Ron or Rand Paul, both of whom, though widely regarded as “libertarian,” are nevertheless conservative just insofar as they are (or at least seem to be) committed to federalism, our Constitution.

Yet here’s the rub: What’s true of Trump in all of these respects is at least as true of many of his critics in the NR symposium.

Granted, I’m sure that there are many among the latter who have heard of Burke. Since Kirk’s name was at one time on NR’s masthead, some of them have probably heard of him as well. However, Kirk’s name is scarcely ever, if at all, mentioned by any contemporary “conservatives.” And on those rare occasions when Burke’s name is dropped, it is almost always in connection with a single line of his: “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

For Buchanan and the Pauls (especially the Elder), many of the Trump critics at NR have reserved nothing but contempt. …



like tweet google+ recommend Print Friendlyprint