Not that there aren't wince-inducing developments on the con side of the ledger.
Rich Galen gets into that in his Townhall column today:
That was some opening act for the 45th President's term.The most frequent question I got on Friday was: "What did you think of the speech?"My answer was the same to all:
"It wasn't the speech I would have written, but it was the speech President Trump wanted to give. That's why I didn't vote for him."
If his speech had been one of soaring Sorensonian rhetoric or Noonanesque oratory, no one would have believed that Donald Trump had believed a single word he had uttered.He goes on to talk about the following day's speech, at CIA headquarters, which I posted about yesterday. He makes basically the same point: that it once again squandered the profundity of the moment.
Here's how the first commenter in the thread underneath the column responded:
You still don't seem to get it, Galen. The p**ssies like YOU, who refused to FIGHT the Marxist enemy WITHIN by anything other than the "Queensbury Rules" are the ones who brought us candidate McCain,
candidate Romney - and two terms of ideological Marxist Barack Hussein Obama.
So - step aside and let men who are not afraid to get their hands dirty finish the job that Reagan started.
For if it had been up to those emasculated specimens like YOU, we would now be genuflecting before "She-who-cannot-be-named" instead of reclaiming our nation.
(If you still don't get it Galen, here's a historical anecdote you might recall - in another time and place, your ilk were the supporters of the "civilized" Prime Minister Chamberlain - until events showed that
Winston Churchill was the one who needed to be "called back from the wilderness" to save his nation. This is now a different time and place - but history repeats itself, doesn't it? Always, because of the FOOLS like
YOU who forget it. So step aside and let Sir Winston's American spiritual successor do the job your ilk was incapable of doing).Five instances of all caps. Ad hominem attacks ("fools" . . . "pussies").
The accusation that Galen would have cheered Chamberlain.
The view that anything less than Trump's modus operandi constitutes fighting the Left by "Marquess of Queensbury rules."
This is the tone of all such chimings-in by the MAGA brigade since July 2015.
It is no less shrill, and no less lacking consistency than what we saw from the Pussy Hat people on Saturday.
This is why my delight in the encouraging signs I cite above is tempered.
Two main dangers: One, that Leftists have the opportunity to paint Squirrel-Hair's antics as emblematic of conservatism, which they decidedly are not. Two, that, due to the vociferousness of the Leftists and the populists, conservatism gets drowned out.
Actually, make that three dangers. The vociferousness of the two currently most prominent players is the stuff of ever-ratcheting tension, tension that inevitably goes kaboom at some point.
Its could have been so different.
You conservatives have hitched your hopes onto Trump's star and will rise or fall in the sky thereby.
ReplyDeleteWhere are you getting that? This post is the antithesis of what you're saying
ReplyDeleteOh, you'll rise if Trump falls? I don't think so. There is a load of your ilk on board with him.
ReplyDeleteI see it differently. If he falls and it's due to say, protectionist policies, or taking a leftist stance on health care ("We've got to cover everybody") or continues to maintain that NATO is obsolete, that won't be on actual conservatives.
ReplyDeleteOf course, if he were to pursue conservative policies consistently (an admittedly big if), he won't fall, because conservatism is the right path to take and leads to national well-being.
I see it differently. If he falls and it's due to say, protectionist policies, or taking a leftist stance on health care ("We've got to cover everybody") or continues to maintain that NATO is obsolete, that won't be on actual conservatives.
ReplyDeleteOf course, if he were to pursue conservative policies consistently (an admittedly big if), he won't fall, because conservatism is the right path to take and leads to national well-being.
I'll go with the evolution of the law. To devolve it, you have to repeal laws and perhaps encounter opposition. One thing for sure is: if you shove your majority legislation up our posteriors, the result for your ilk will be the same result as for the Democrats, and real fast. Mandates don't call 3 plus million women out into the streets. The largest protest ever.
ReplyDeleteI doubt it. It's starting to look like most Americans like freedom, life, decency and dignity.
ReplyDeleteYep! And they don't dig war and police states.
ReplyDeleteOf course not. Who does besides Kim Jog-un?
ReplyDeleteThere is no decency and dignity in war which should never be waged with shock and awe, especially awe, but that was then and this is now somehow
ReplyDeleteHow should war be waged, then? Is there some gentle way to do it?
ReplyDeleteSee Lao Tse, cited in a recent thread you took me to task for silliness. See some sayings of Jesus the Christ, unless you have replaced him with the real Messiah awaited in Israel. And, according to some profundits, coming soon to a planet near you.
ReplyDeleteHow I see it, smack between your ilk's eyes is that you are aiding and abetting a pompous, authoritarian, transiently borderline psychotic, stubborn vindictive luciferian madman of a man. Therefore you are perpetuating evil and I will have none of you.
ReplyDeleteWhat would you have us do, remain silent - about either what he is doing that's laudable or that which is bad - or maybe join the ranks of the pussy hat / #notmypresident crowd? Sorry, he now goes to work in the Oval Office and those of us who have been #NeverTrump are stuck with that reality like everyone else.
ReplyDeleteTrumps no more worse than we ourselves. He is just a mirror of what we are. It might be that the founding fathers did not completely for see the IPhone. "Oh right", they put that electoral college in there to protect us from our populace ineffectual nature?
ReplyDelete