Conservatism Recovered

Excellent article by Julie Kelly about understanding what has really happened to Conservatism:

The realignment of the political Right has prompted a public confessional of sorts, a raw acknowledgement that millions of us were led astray by Republiican leaders we trusted, we voted for, and we defended during times of war. We only have ourselves to blame, of course, because we did it with our eyes wide open. But the Trump era is forcing many Republicans to reexamine what we once believed and reassess what actually is true.

In a fiery speech earlier this month at the National Conservatism conference in Washington, D.C., Fox News host Tucker Carlson talked about purging his “mental attic” to dust off the ideas that he had accepted as legitimate over past few decades.

“The Trump election was so shocking . . . that it did cause some significant percentage of people to say ‘wait a second, if that can happen, what else is true?’” Carlson said. “Just look around . . . who are the good guys and who are the bad guys? A lot of the people we’ve been told are good guys are not. Some of them are the worst guys. I’ll let you figure out who.”

One of the crucial things to understand about politics is that it draws layabouts like s*** draws flies. That is, it draws rent-seeking nincompoops who are determined to live well without having to actually produce anything. No political ideology is free from this. Heck, even the most productive companies in the world aren’t entirely free of it. There are always – always – people trying to get a free ride.

Modern Conservatism got its start in reaction to the changes in American governance introduced during the Roosevelt Administration in the 1930s. It was correctly understood that the ultimate result of Roosevelt policies would be the end of the America founded in 1776. It was a movement to roll back the government; stand firm for American defense and defend the family and our social institutions from the remorseless attack of the Left. This movement reached its peak in the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980…and I think we all thought that we really had won. That is, we thought that our ideas had proven correct and that going forward it would just be the increasing implementation of the ideas of Conservatism. We now know that it didn’t work out that way…and it didn’t work out that way because in the wake of Reagan, we got a host of political barnacles who spoke the words of Conservatism, but didn’t really have an interest in carrying out Conservatism. We were consumed by rent-seekers when we needed committed fighters.

But for the longest time, most of us went along with them – they were our leaders, after all. They wrote for prestige magazines. They had best-selling books. TV shows. And they did, indeed, speak the words of Conservatism…but always with a caveat which we ignored or didn’t understand. Now was always not the exact, perfect time to really press for Conservatism. We always had to do something else first, and getting that done invariably meant not fighting a particular battle for a Conservative principle. We were kept on the hook by endless promises that the New Dawn would come, and we’d finally be in the right moment where we could fight the left tooth and nail. But, it never came. Of course, it was never meant to come. The grifters running the Conservative show didn’t want that – because they weren’t really Conservative. They liked their swank gigs and they knew that to keep them they needed to keep talking right, but they weren’t about to go to their liberal friends and explain that they had to actually fight to defend the family, or even to defend the concepts of “male” and “female”.

Those of you reading me here have known that I had my doubts for many years – even stretching back to the Bush the Younger years…and, truth be told, some doubts even in the Clinton years. A gnawing feeling that we were being sold down the river and that not everything we were taught to revere was worthy. But I did keep to being a loyal foot soldier. Partly, of course, because no matter how bad the GOPe squish being foisted upon me, he or she was still miles better than the Democrat. But that was still folly on my part, and I see that now with blinding clarity. It has always been better to suffer even crushing defeat while fighting for what we believe in than to “win” with someone who will merely slow down our defeat. Douglas MacArthur was once asked his formula for defensive war and he gave a one word answer: “defeat”. You can’t win unless you attack – and attacking requires a ruthless willingness to take and inflict pain.

Trump isn’t a Conservative; not remotely. Except in one, crucial aspect: Conservatism is really just common sense, and Trump has bags of that. He’s not someone, I think, who has delved deeply into Adam Smith, Edmund Burke and F.A. Hayek. He’s not, that is, an intellectual of the Right. But, then again, who is? Bill Kristol? Max Boot? David French? If these are our intellectuals, then we’re doomed. Trump isn’t advancing Conservatism in a conscious sense – but by doing what makes sense, he’s advancing it all the same. It is common sense that the judges merely enforce the laws; to do otherwise means there is no law, and thus no chance for justice or mercy or even sanity. The only judges out there who will simply enforce the laws are Conservative judges…and, so, common sense dictates the appointment only of Conservative judges. It’d be stupid to waste even a single life time appointment on a non-Conservative judge because that means you’re just giving the anti-law, insane Left side of the aisle an unearned win and making life harder for yourself going forward.

So it is with act after act. True, it’d be nice if Trump would take on the national debt, but that is something that only concerns a small number of people. Yes, the debt is a looming national catastrophe and if we don’t get a handle on it, we’re going to pay a high price for our profligacy. But Trump isn’t particularly concerned about it and never has been. Can’t ask a man to be what he isn’t. And at the end of the day, the pretend-Conservatives who ran our movement since Reagan also didn’t do a damn thing about the debt. Perhaps Trump’s successor can be made to do what is necessary (it won’t really be hard: at it takes is a good economy and a really very small reduction in overall government spending over a period of 10 years to get to balance and debt reduction). But the bottom line is that outside of the debt, Trump is moving the Conservative ball forward even more effectively than Reagan (who also didn’t tackle the debt). And by doing this – by actually implementing Conservatism – Trump is doing the best thing anyone has ever done for us: exposing the traitors in our ranks.

Remember, these are grifters who merely want to live well without doing anything. They are best friends with their Leftist counterparts, who are also grifting (but who also do advance Leftism…so while the liberal foot soldiers are getting robbed just as blind as we were, at least Leftism is being advanced; this makes the Leftwing grifters the moral superior of the Conservative grifters). It was all fine as long as nothing actually happened in a Conservative sense. Along comes Trump and he starts doing Conservative things and they all had a choice to make: some choose to actually join the side they said they were on…others have decided to join the Left, which they always in fact were part of. For us, it means we have been able to recover Conservatism. We’ve taken it out of the hands of the thieves who stole it in the aftermath of Ronald Reagan…and no longer bound to anything that happened in the past, we are able to jettison even the mistakes that Reagan made, most notably the 1986 Amnesty. But we’ve also given up on nation building and endless war. We no longer desire to defend large corporations. We no longer defend “free trade” which merely meant middle class jobs being sent to Chinese sweated labor. We are able to start counterattacking the advances of the Left.

In my view, it is time to forget 1989 to 2009. It was a wasted 20 years, as far as Conservatism was concerned. Anyone – even the most dyed in the wool Never Trump – is free to join or reject us; we don’t care what anyone chooses and no hard feelings against anyone who repents and gets on board. But we’re now going to fight. We still may lose, but we’re not going to roll over for the Left.

38 thoughts on “Conservatism Recovered

    • jdge1 August 2, 2019 / 9:50 pm

      Wow. I wondered how a long term Democrat could loose to a new comer like AOC, especially after listening or reading some of the mindless crap what she talked about. This is certainly an eye opener.

    • Amazona August 3, 2019 / 9:11 am

      I never doubted that AOC had been chosen, groomed, supported and controlled by a group of political activists. The very idea that some bouncy little bartender suddenly decided to be a politician and put together a political campaign and funded it and took it to victory was simply ridiculous.

      I even imagined the scenario, of scouts looking for stalking horses to run in vulnerable districts to shift the balance farther and farther left.

      Scout: I think I found a good one. She is basically an ego with a pony tail. She’s a Participation Trophy Barbie who has never done anything but is convinced she is special, just because.

      Minder: Is she smart enough to carry this off?

      Scout: As far as common sense and knowledge, she is as smart as a box of hair. But she has some social skills and the basic ability to parrot ideas and make them sound like they might be hers.

      Minder: What boxes does she check?

      Scout: She is female and cute, looks white but has an ethnic name and family background, has some old history in the Bronx that can be played up–the only one we are missing is gay, but we can overcome that by having her be a strident LGBT advocate.

      Minder: Would she be a good puppet?

      Scout: Handled correctly, yes. Convince her that what we feed her is really her own ideas, and that they will make her a star, and give her a taste of power, and she will do whatever we want her to do. If we just keep telling her she is special she will eat it up.

      And so, we have AOC in Congress.

      • Cluster August 3, 2019 / 11:10 am

        And Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. This is the new face of the regressive Democrat party; weaponized ethnic Barbies.

  1. Amazona August 1, 2019 / 6:09 pm

    Mark, you started off so well. And then…well, you didn’t. When you wrote “Trump isn’t a Conservative; not remotely. Except in one, crucial aspect: Conservatism is really just common sense, and Trump has bags of that.” I thought well, he started off OK, before that nasty old Identity Politics/strange definition of “conservative” bit him in the bee-hind.

    You clearly have your own definition of “Conservative”. And it clearly doesn’t have much to do with dedication to Constitutional governance, not if you define it, as you did, as just plain old basic common sense.

    I have my own definition, which is basically a commitment to Constitutional governance, without any of the superficial froth like “common sense” and “values” and all the other geegaws people insist on slapping onto what is, or at least should be, a POLITICAL philosophy about a POLITICAL model.

    Trump has been running his presidency very close to the strict Constitutional model of Executive Powers. He has been telling Congress to do its job and legislate. He has stood up for national security and international relations in which the United States is respected.

    You say “He’s not, that is, an intellectual of the Right. “ To which I say, GOOD! I agree with Thomas Sowell, that an “intellectual” is just someone who has ideas. They don’t have to be good, they don’t have to be right, they just have to exist so he can call himself an “intellectual”.

    “Trump isn’t advancing Conservatism in a conscious sense..” Oh? His decisions to act according to the Constitution aren’t CONSCIOUS decisions? He’s just kind of bumbling into acting like a conservative without really knowing why? You admit “Along comes Trump and he starts doing Conservative things” but also say he isn’t doing it CONSCIOUSLY?

    Overall, I think it is a good post, and makes some good points, but it really needed to sit on a shelf for a few days and then be reviewed with parts reconsidered. Maybe a little less reading of Trump tea leaves and more focus on what he is actually doing instead of the style in which he does it…..

    • M. Noonan August 1, 2019 / 7:45 pm

      All these years and I still disappoint! One of these days I’ll write something that you’ll have framed!

      What I was trying to impart is that Conservatism is the default position of all sane people, even if they don’t know any theory. Of course you don’t want boys using the girl’s bathroom…its takes a liberal and a Never Trumper to screw that up. Trump isn’t ideological – for instance, he donated to Harris’ campaign as recently as 2014 – but he’s normal and sane and so Conservative by instinct, but I don’t think he is ideologically committed to it.

      • M. Noonan August 1, 2019 / 7:46 pm

        And perhaps if my non-fiction is coming up short, my fiction is better? Have you picked up your copy of “Mirrors”, yet?

      • Amazona August 2, 2019 / 10:18 am

        I read very few books in any format but Nook. I have some eye issues and Nook, with its ability to change font size and alter lighting and contrast, makes reading a lot easier for me. Having said that, I do want to read your book and will. But beware! I will note Rogue Apostrophes when I find them!

      • Amazona August 2, 2019 / 10:16 am

        Mark, I agree with most of what you write (though you are sooooooo wrong about Lee Harvey Oswald, but that’s for another day….) I was tweaking you for your straying back into the weeds of conflating personality with politics. As you know, that is a big thing with me, and I know I harp on it. But I only do so because I think it is vitally important, to be aware of and to avoid.

        If we insist on analyzing Trump’s inner, mental, political leanings then I have to say I think he has undergone a change in the past few years, as the insanity and counter-productivity of the Left has become more and more evident. It appears that he, too, was guided to a certain extent by Identity Politics, and I suspect by a more cynical motive, which was to appear to support the politicians he would need to have on his side for business reasons.

        Looking at his ACTIONS since becoming president, I do see an ideological shift to Conservatism. His decisions to push Congress to legislate instead of using the “pen and phone” Obama bragged about had to come from an ideological understanding and commitment to Constitutional governance. He has gotten legal advice on all of his Executive Orders, seeking to be sure that they comply with the Constitutional limits on presidential powers—very ideological, very Conservative.

        I thought your biggest mistake was in saying that a failure to be openly, publicly, specifically guided by Conservative writings and writers means he is not ideologically Conservative. You say he acts the way he does because it is common sense, but we might be talking about a distinction without much of a difference. You seem to be linking ideology with formal study of writers, while I link it simply to understanding of and commitment to the Constitution. You have a blog, you read a lot, and you either base a lot of your political beliefs on the writings of others or you use them to support those beliefs. That is fine. But I sensed a little condescension in the attitude that if one believes in following the Constitution, and acts according to that belief, he is not “ideological” because he doesn’t do the reading, he just kind of happens to, almost accidentally, act like a Conservative but without acceptable (to you) thought processes.

        Think of it as a compliment that I expect so much of you, and notice little things like this.

        (As for “framing”—–I always laugh when some fiction detective announces that so-and-so clearly does not really live in a house or apartment, proved by the lack of photos on shelves or the walls. I don’t have a single photo exhibited in my house. I have some artwork, but nothing personal, though I have decided to dig out some photos and frame them for display. When I do that, I might put up some of your work, at least the cover of your book on Obama.)

        I am happy with walking the walk even without talking the talk.

    • Retired Spook August 2, 2019 / 6:50 am

      To me Donald Trump is a bit of an enigma. I thought it was all an act to get elected when he made promises during the campaign that sounded Conservative. It would be hard to argue that he was a Conservative prior to 2016. Then it appears he had an epiphany. Amazona can explain how that works. I don’t know if it was the influence of Pence and other Conservatives around him or what, but at some point, he discovered that Conservative policies work, and Liberal policies don’t. I don’t really care if he considers himself a Conservative as long as he continues to advance a conservative agenda and do things that make the Left’s heads explode.

      • Amazona August 2, 2019 / 10:47 am

        Spook, you got it!

        You all may remember how energetically I fought against a Trump nomination. Not because I thought he would be a bad president, because I thought anything would be better than Obama followed by another Clinton, but because I thought he would be such a bad candidate he would turn the election over to Hillary. And I still admit, I don’t understand the folk hero adulation he still gets from so many, as a person. But then, I am not a hero-worshiping kind of person.

        I was what I call an “unexamined Liberal” which is why I identify, or at least understand, most Liberals. My so-called political stance had absolutely NOTHNG to do with politics. It was all about the self-gratification of feeling smugly morally superior because I was FOR the “right” things, like not letting children starve and not hating people for the color of their skin (that last used to be a Liberal thing) and wanting people to not be poor. And, being totally without analytic thought, I bought into the rhetoric about how bad Republicans were. But mostly it was easy, it was mindless, it was undemanding, and it allowed me to FEEL relevant without actually doing any of the work to BE relevant.

        I guess intellectually it was the equivalent of free stuff.

        I was attracted by the established attitude of Dems about women—don’t exclude them from jobs they are capable of doing just because they are women, and believe them when they say they have been attacked, raped or otherwise injured because they are women. I repeat, there was little or no thought associated with this, just a vague concept of fairness. What kicked me off the path was the attitude of the women of the Left when the accusers of Bill Clinton were treated so viciously by the same women who claimed to support all women. The hypocrisy hit me upside the head with such force, it literally knocked me sideways intellectually. When the mask was ripped off, and I saw the vile vicious hatred seething underneath, saw the hypocrisy and selective outrage, it didn’t make me a Conservative, but it did make me think I needed to be a little more analytical and discerning instead of just accepting what I was told. And it made me want to not be a Democrat.

        For me, this coincided with a developing interest in Leftism from a historical perspective. My late husband was an amateur war historian, and when he and his fellow history buffs talked about the wars, mostly WW II and Viet Nam, I realized they were talking about what went boom, while I was curious about WHY it went boom. That was my introduction to politics—to REAL politics, not the emotional manipulation of people to harvest votes. That is when the patterns of Leftist governance started to become clear to me, and the outcomes of Leftism, and the strategies of the Left. That is when I abandoned labels —Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Progressivism—-and started to look at the underlying political structures and realized the names were irrelevant, it was the goal that mattered, and the structure of the government that led to achieving the goal. And at the bottom there was only one, no matter what name had been slapped onto it. And when, at the same time, I could see the same patterns and strategies being used in American politics it galvanized me, and scared the daylights out of me.

        This is why I am so obsessed with educating people, with pointing out the patterns and strategies and tactics of the Left. I don’t know where I would have ended up, politically, once I got so disgusted with the Dems. I might have become one of those aimless “independents” drifting around without a clue, without a direction, unable to commit to anything. I like to think I would have ended up a committed Conservative, but I know that awareness of the agendas of the Left and the various ways the Left works to achieve those agendas was a big factor for me.

        Hey, I’ll take a vote without fretting over why it was cast. It can be Identity Politics all the way, cast for any of a million silly superficial reasons. But I think the key to establishing a serious, strong, lasting foundation for Constitutional governance lies in educating people—about the realities and dangers of Leftism and the fact that the time when the United States was strongest and most flourishing was the time we were governed according to our Constitution.

        But I was an ideological conservative before I ever heard of any of the writers Mark used as signposts for “true” ideological conservatism.

  2. Cluster August 2, 2019 / 8:06 am

    Excellent post Mark. To me conservatism is common sense and Trump has an abundance of that. I thought the article was excellent and it’s a topic of which all of us have discussed on numerous occasions. We were sold out by establishment republicans beginning with Bush 1 and I still thank God that Mitt Romney lost. I was a big Romney supporter but after seeing his and Paul Ryan’s true colors, I am ashamed. Romney, Ryan, McCain and all the establishment Republicans were propped up by the likes of Kristol, Goldberg, and Hayes who assured us that these “conservatives” were our best bet to combat the Democrats. Little did we realize that they were all in bed with each other.

    I loved Trump’s line last night – “I don’t want to be controversial” …. he is hilarious and progressives just can’t figure him out. Like Spook said, he makes their heads explode and it is fun to watch.

  3. Cluster August 2, 2019 / 8:11 am

    Re: the debate, which I didn’t watch. But after reading about it and listening to some out takes, I assure you there is not one Democrat in the field that has a chance against Trump and Democrats are starting to realize that. The question is, who do they lead to slaughter? If they are smart they will protect their young, up and coming stars like Kamala and Mayor Pete and let Sanders, Warren or Biden take the fall.

  4. Cluster August 2, 2019 / 9:09 am

    Good article:

    President Trump is boldly providing much-needed relief to the American people. He is untying us from the bonds of political correctness that have, in un-American fashion, forced Americans to accept liberal myths and farces. He is telling it like it is, showing Americans that their freedom of speech cannot be muzzled by liberal censors or taken away by the left-wing speech and thought police.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/president_trump_shatters_leftwing_myths.html

  5. Cluster August 2, 2019 / 1:46 pm

    I think we should all donate to Marianne Williamson’s campaign

  6. Amazona August 3, 2019 / 8:56 am

    “…we got a host of political barnacles who spoke the words of Conservatism, but didn’t really have an interest in carrying out Conservatism.”

    I think what happened was that we redefined “Conservatism” so the word we spoke didn’t address the core, POLITICAL, meaning.

    Because so many who believe in Constitutional (that is, Conservative) governance also believe in traditional cultural and religious values, those values got shifted over to define the movement. Suddenly, to be a Conservative meant to take a stand on cultural and religious and even moral issues. The GOP planks even did this, abandoning objective commitments to things like Constitutional governance in favor of being pro-life, against gay marriage, etc. The GOP stopped trying to appeal to people on an intellectual level and just went with the emotional.

    Don’t get me wrong. I also believe in those issues. But they are ISSUES, and the only way they can be part of a political platform is if the platform advocates doing what the Left does, and stretching the Constitution to allow a party to force those issues on the nation from the federal level. They are not and should not be part of a purely POLITICAL consideration.

    I remember arguing here that a person could be in favor of abortion and gay marriage and still be a conservative if he also believed that those issues had to be resolved at the state or local level, and having a couple of people who used to post here absolutely go bonkers: WE DON’T WANT PEOPLE LIKE THAT IN OUR PARTY !!!!!

    We started to make cultural issues litmus tests for Conservative politicians, and of course that meant that soon the entire Conservative movement was defined by those issues. And that excluded a lot, probably millions, of people who could have been won over by the argument that they would be voting for a political structure that was based on the Constitution and personal liberty and restricted federal power, because the voices of the Right were telling them they would also have to agree on all sorts of issues that had nothing to do with Constitutional governance.

    I was still in my “unexamined Liberal” stage when Reagan was president, so I don’t know if he appealed on the grounds of limited federal powers and other Constitutional basics. But I do know that in the decades since I became politically aware the first person I ever heard addressing that was Ted Cruz. I think that is alarming, and depressing.

    So when you say “we got a host of political barnacles who spoke the words of Conservatism, but didn’t really have an interest in carrying out Conservatism” I think what you are saying is that we got a host of political creatures who spoke the new language of Conservatism without any thought given to, or commitment to, the actual precepts of Conservatism. They talked a lot about FAMILY VALUES and preened in their imagined and projected morality, but at the same time they GOVERNED like Liberals, because they were at heart just Liberals whose cultural and moral values were just at odds with the libertine aspects of Leftism.

    In other words, the movement became superficial. And as such, it became easier for politicians to mouth off about the superficial, or cultural, issues without ever saying a word about the need to limit the size and scope of the federal government. I think a lot of politicians THOUGHT of themselves as Conservatives because they were for “family values” without ever getting very deeply into the idea that to be a Conservative means to keep the 10th Amendment as not the First Commandment of religion but of politics.

    I still hear the vague and undefined term “smaller government” touted as the height of political wisdom on the Right, but I never hear it defined. And that term bothers a lot of people who understand that in this day and age we NEED more government than we used to. But because the Right is cluttered with people who are politically illiterate and tangled up in the conflation of moral, cultural and kinda-political ideas no one can explain that the goal is not just SMALLER government, but shifting the responsibilities of government to the states and local governments and away from the federal.

  7. Cluster August 3, 2019 / 9:02 am

    This is a HUGE story:

    The truth is that the city itself cannot account for the millions of dollars in grants that have poured into its coffers, according to Baltimore’s most recent audit analyzed by DailyMail.com. According to the 2018 city audit, millions of the dollars supposedly invested here are unaccounted for. The audit notes numerous ‘significant deficiencies’ and ‘material weaknesses’ across almost every department and found a consistent lack of any internal tracking of funds. The accounting for some departments was found to be so lacking that the sum of questioned funds is simply labeled ‘Unknown.’ City Auditor Audrey Askew resigned from her post in February of this year amid rumors that she had been pressured to ‘write off’ sums of money that were otherwise unaccounted for.

    When we use to have journalists in this country, this would be a story that could launch a career and win a pulitzer prize. How many MSM “journalists” do you suppose are working on this story??? ZERO … in my opinion. They are all busy chasing down the cameras to be the next person to call Trump a racist. .

    It’s a little odd to me now since inner city decay has been brought to the national attention, Democrats couldn’t care less. I have not seen one Democrat address the situation honestly and Elijah even refused to tour the neighborhoods this last week with HUD Sec Ben Carson. Democrat indifference is on full display but really why should they care? Their constituents are dumb enough to believe their lies every election cycle and keep voting Democrat. There is no incentive to resolve the problem so it will persist as long as these people keep voting Democrat.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7315563/Baltimore-account-millions-drugs-danger-yes-rats-lurk-corner.html.

    • Amazona August 3, 2019 / 9:20 am

      Yet no Republican will have the backbone to post billboards in the neighborhoods listing the different grants and fundings that have been poured into the city and asking “What would this neighborhood be like if this money had been spent the way it was supposed to?” and “Are you going to keep electing people who had the chance to spend this much money on your neighborhoods, but didn’t? and “WHERE DID THIS MONEY GO?”

      To do so would be racist, and might hurt some feelings.

      • Cluster August 3, 2019 / 9:36 am

        Exactly, because anyone that points out the reality of extorted money and corrupt Democrats will have the full force of the media, DNC and the Regressive movement fall upon them, and most people just aren’t willing to put up with that.

        I agree with you that we have to educate everyone on looking more at the type of governance vs. issue based politics, but we also have to have the backbone to withstand the onslaught of abuse that follows when the corruption and incompetence is exposed. Look at how differently people like Roger Stone is treated vs that of Jim Comey. Roger Stone is facing life in prison for a process crime whereas Jim Comey (and Hillary for that matter) was given a pass when he admitted to leaking confidential information to the media for purely partisan reasons. This example of Roger Stone shows exactly how far the left immersed themselves into our federal bureaucracies and weaponized them. We were very close to losing our Republic and had Hillary been elected, it would have been gone. The left knows that hence their anger and desperation to remove Trump.

      • Amazona August 3, 2019 / 11:42 am

        We can fuss and fret about being cut out of main media outlets, but that just means we have to do an end run around them and seek out different media. Billboards are good, if the companies will rent to us. Bumper stickers are good, if they can carry pithy messages and not just fanboi “I’m For (blank)” messages. The RNC could drop a few million dollars a few times a year for mailings of big glossy postcards to Indies with easy to understand information. Conservatives invited on TV talk shows could have organized messages they can deliver in quick sound bites before being shouted down, and a coordinated response to being shouted down of something like “You seem very threatened by what I have to say, otherwise you wouldn’t be so rude.” I am pretty sure Republicans who won’t send money into the impotent black hole of the RNC would support a media blitz of cleverly written 30-second bits addressing Dem lies and nonsense to pop up every time some Dem says something remarkable stupid.

        (OK, just rethought that and realize that would be 24/7 coverage, but you get the idea…)

        So when, for example, a claim is made that the border detention facilities are “concentration camps” we should immediately run a spot showing a couple of real concentration camps with the heading “REAL CONCENTRATION CAMPS” and the subheadings of “starved, beaten and used as slave labor” and then one or two of clean detention centers filled with clean, well-clothed and obviously healthy people who are not forced to work at all—and the kicker, which is that in THESE alleged “concentration camps” the people are free to go home any time they want to.

        To the comment the Left has excised from Trump’s tweet about going back where they came from, a 30-second spot would highlight the important part, which is to come back and tell us what they learned.

        Every time the Left takes something out of context we should hit the airways with the rest of the story, to borrow a phrase, and point out that the omission of the important words is always an effort to deceive—what we call “lying”.

        As for being able to withstand the reactions to having Leftist schemes and crimes outed, it will be a lot easier if the defense is based on hard cold facts and not just on defending Trump. WE ARE ALWAYS ON DEFENSE.

        It is not impossible to score while on defense, but it is harder. The problem with Trump is, when he goes on offense he tends to make it personal, which makes me want to just shut him up.

      • Amazona August 3, 2019 / 12:05 pm

        I think we should do a major, organized blitz in every medium where we have a voice, pointing out the alarming comparisons of the Obama DOJ (and its lingering powers into the Trump years when he was threatened with legal action and impeachment if he tried to get rid of the corruption) and the USSR under Stalin.

        We have the theme of “show me the man and I will find you a crime” being acted out, over and over again, starting with the attacks on the president and filtering down to people associated with him

        We have the dreaded knocks on the door in the middle of the night to have people hauled off by militarized police, for the crime of association

        We have the justice system turned upside down, where people are targeted for their politics or associations and then an investigation is launched to try to find crimes to pin on them, a reversal of our traditional search for a suspect and evidence only after a crime has been committed and identified.

        We have weaponized federal agencies used to advance the policies and agendas of the ruling class, used against the citizens, such as spying on them, using tax laws and enforcement to punish them, etc.

        We have people being targeted, physically attacked and threatened not for what they have done but for what they believe.

        I would pick one of these and make it the focal point of every talk show and every blog and every guest commentary, identifying it and then explaining it and building on it. I would saturate every medium we have access to with detailed discussions and examples of the first theme. Then, when that has been thoroughly examined and explained, I would go on to the next one, and do the same thing.

        The Left would howl and squeal at each indictment of a Leftist tactic, which would just open the door to providing more and more examples, and call more attention to it. And as soon as a topic appeared to be losing steam, I would follow up with another and start the process over again.

        I wouldn’t just use a word like “elite” or “political elite” but would link it to the political elites of the USSR, who had limos and dachas in the country while the proles stood in lines not even knowing what they might be able to buy if they got to the head of the line, just knowing it would be something they needed.

        The Left has been howling “PUTIN !!” Well, we should start howling “STALIN !!”

        And I would have a thoroughly researched and organized response locker full of detailed, accurate responses to the inevitable retaliatory attacks. When a response is basically “Oh, yeah? Well Trump is a NAZI!!” it should open a door to a discussion about how deceptive labels are, and how various Leftist governments have flown different flags, using different names, but when the core political structures are examined (and here do a quick overview—powerful Central Authority, collectivist, little individual liberty) they are basically all the same.

        Want to see Lib heads explode? Wait till one screeches “The Nazis were right-wing because they supported and were supported by industry” and the response is “Clearly you don’t understand the difference between an economic model and a political structure. The political structure of the Nazis was nearly identical to the one being promoted here, but it tolerated to some extent cooperation with the economic model of capitalism.”

        But it would all come back to having an organized and coherent strategy, which the Right has not had since the Founders.

  8. Cluster August 3, 2019 / 12:12 pm

    Here’s an interesting article on climate that should cause regressives to rethink their position on man made climate change:

    The stalagmites have the additional advantage that they can be dated very precisely using uranium-thorium chronology. Combining these methods, our new study provides a detailed history of dustiness in the area, and identifies two major drought periods which started 4,510 and 4,260 years ago, and lasted 110 and 290 years respectively. The latter event occurs precisely at the time of the Akkadian Empire’s collapse and provides a strong argument that climate change was at least in part responsible.

    The collapse was followed by mass migration from north to south which was met with resistance by the local populations. A 180km wall – the “Repeller of the Amorites” – was even built between the Tigris and Euphrates in an effort to control immigration, not unlike some strategies proposed today. The stories of abrupt climate change in the Middle East therefore echo over millennia to the present day.

    Our planet is an amazing living organism that changes every hour of every day from the beginning of time and our contribution to that change is infinitesimal. Sure we can seed clouds to generate moisture and have some short term atmospheric affects, but we have zero ability to alter long time climate. Case in point, the Gulf oil spill caused by BP a few years back. It was an enormous amount of oil that escaped and scientists were sounding the alarms of catastrophic environmental consequences. What happened? We learned that the ocean has it’s own microbes that ate the oil and within a few years, ecosystems were pretty much back to normal. Why? Nothing that man produces is foreign to this planet. Carbon is a natural element. Crude oil is a natural element. The earth knows exactly what to do with them.

    Climate change is a scam by establishment elites to frighten the populace, levy taxes, and exert control. Nothing more. Nothing less.

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/01/how-climate-change-caused-the-world-s-first-ever-empire-to-collapse?fbclid=IwAR0HytyKaHZIyybHRoYb9jwsnNW1Ej6UEwVVTJUxPJS3RC_ziQtN9FkaV8k

  9. JeremiahTMM August 3, 2019 / 5:40 pm

    Have you all noticed these mass shootings are happening about every weekend on Saturdays? It just seems like there is a pattern developing here.

  10. Cluster August 4, 2019 / 10:04 am

    We will all be subject to the over heated rhetoric now for the next few days because that’s what Regressives do … like little children they will yell, stomp their feet, blame inanimate objects and distort reality. Case in point – anyone promoting the agenda will be telling you what a special relationship El Paso has with Ciudad Juarez and a rich tradition of two cultures living side by side in harmony. That’s a false narrative. I know some folks in El Paso, and they don’t dare cross the border:

    Last year, Juárez’s murders again began to rise: Juárez police recorded 1,259 homicides in 2018, including a murderous spasm of 182 deaths in August, according to the NMSU stats.

    The pundits will try a convince you that America is the violent nation without any mention of the people found in vats of acid just on the other side of the border.

    And so it goes … the media telling half the story to promote a narrative, career politicians who are never held accountable for their failures will be telling us that they have the answer to our problems and most of them will be blaming the inanimate object, and a lot of Americans will be bobbing their heads in agreement … because it’s easy. No one wants to address the underlying problems because that would require judgment. There are truly evil people of all colors and all nationalities and we have to stop with the childish notion that all life is intrinsically valuable. It is not and our criminal justice system needs to reflect that.

    In my world of justice, the El Paso shooter would be given a 10 minute court hearing to determine his guilt which is unquestioned, and then he would marched outside the court house to the public square and executed. His family would then be billed for the burial and the bullet. He would not live one day with tax payer money, he is not worth it. In my world of justice, anyone who uses a gun in the commission of a crime is automatically sentenced to 10 years of hard labor on top of the sentencing for the original crime. Any use of a gun in the commission of a crime will result in a 10 year mandatory prison sentence. In my world of justice, I would eliminate plea bargains for anyone who used a gun.

    To think that a politician can solve the violent nature of some human beings through legislation is absurd. Even a much tougher criminal justice system will not stop all of it, but by executing evil perpetrators and strengthening our criminal codes we can at least start addressing the problem realistically. We have to take off our rose colored glasses and start looking at the world as it is, not through some political lens.

    • JeremiahTMM August 4, 2019 / 6:59 pm

      You are absolutely, 100% spot on, my friend.

      We live in a world where most of the people around us are hostile to us, not all, but most. They don’t care about anyone’s success or failure but their own. Just like today, I had to go to Lowe’s to get some keys made, and I spot a lady lifting cinder blocks off of a pile outside the store. She kept shaking her hands every time she would reach for one, so I just thought that I would offer her a helping hand. I walk up to her and ask her “Ma’am, would you like some help?” And she said, “Nope! Byyyee! Byyyee! Byyyee!” All while waving both hands in the air. So I just turned around and walked off.

      You know, we think that, if we just think positive, that good things are going to happen. No, they’re not going to get better. Because, the truth is, we are humans, and because of sin, we are not able to do anything that is going to fix or prevent the world from sliding into chaos and eventual destruction. But while we as humans beings, are not able, God is able, He just wants people to believe, trust and follow Him.

      On the face of things, we see someone in office who we think is America’s saving grace, maybe to a very small extent, and for a very short time, we are going to face unimaginable difficulty in the future. The likes of which America has never known.

      As Americans we’ve placed our hopes in the materialistic things I,e… science, philosophy, inventions, politics, and all the other things that we have done with our hands. These are all futile attempts to cure what ails our society.

      We must return to God, and His eternal Word.

      As regards to the latest shootings, I will say this, I do believe that they are politically motivated attacks, because a majority of this country does not understand the depths of evil they are dealing with when dealing with the Democrats. We will never see the truth about these shootings because they have already been well glossed over with pre-planned narratives, and have rehearsed the scripts to them so that the truth will never see the light of day. Just like the Las Vegas shootings, it’s been several years now, and we’re still waiting for the truth. We will never see, it will go into the dustbin hidden forevermore.

      In order to make a difference we must return to God! In family, in school, in government, in every aspect of humanity.

      • Cluster August 5, 2019 / 9:43 am

        I agree Jeremiah – more people need a Higher purpose. We have forgotten His stability and grace.

  11. Cluster August 4, 2019 / 10:39 am

    Predictably, I am watching NBC and I am told by Chuck Todd that we have a serious “white nationalist” violence epidemic in this country. All the panelists including racist Eddie Glaude is of course blaming Trump. Meanwhile, have you heard any liberal media talk about this from Chicago?

    So far this year, there have been more than 1200 shootings citywide. Nearly 1600 people have been victims of gunshots. Despite this, police are calling this sustained progress in reducing violent crime. In June 2019, there were 43 murders and a total of 282 murders so far this year.

    You won’t hear about this because that would require addressing the reality of broken homes and failed politicians. Don’t want to go there. And not to diminish the horror of yesterday, but 9 people were killed last weekend in Chicago … was there any media covering that? I can’t recall one media pundit anguishing over those lives who are predominately young black kids.

    https://wgntv.com/2019/08/01/chicago-july-crime-numbers-show-decrease-in-murders-and-shootings/

  12. Cluster August 5, 2019 / 9:06 am

    My understanding is that part of the El Paso manifesto left behind spoke to climate change and how the planet was ending because of man’s neglect. The other part was aimed at Hispanic illegal immigration and that is of course what the media is focusing on and not much coverage at all on the Dayton shooting because that doesn’t fit the agenda. I wonder if the climate change hysteria had much to do with the shooters motive? Unfortunately with our current media we will never know.

    Robert Francis O’Rourke just said illegal immigration makes his community stronger …. and in fact stronger than most communities because these folks “define America”. Got that? So people living and raising families in say Bloomington, Indiana are not nearly as American as the illegal immigrants in El paso according to O’Rourke.

    “We can’t stay silent any longer. Democrats delusion and rhetoric is dangerous. How many inner city kids need to die before they are held accountable? We are seeing happen before our eyes and I wonder if the Democrats in Congress will have the courage to stand up and do something.”

    The statement above was lifted from Mika. It was of course directed at Trump – simply replace “inner city kids” with illegal immigrants” and “Democrats” with “Republicans” and you have her statement. All I did was turn it around on her and that’s what we all need to do. Democrats are in full shaming mode …. don’t let it happen. Expose them.

  13. Cluster August 5, 2019 / 9:11 am

    If only there were warning signs !!! Good grief

    Former classmates of Dayton gunman Connor Betts, 24, said he had caused a panic at Bellbrook High School in Ohio after a kill list was found scrawled in a school bathroom during his earlier year. The nasty incident sparked a lockdown and saw him suspended for a second time after he had earlier been disciplined for coming to school with a list of female students he wanted to sexually assault. One former Bellbrook student said they had immediately thought of Betts when they heard about a Dayton shooting, reminded of him by the sinister lists he made at school. Betts opened fire in a popular nightlife area, killing nine and injuring at least 26 others in the early hours of Sunday before he was shot dead by police officers

    And this is beyond belief:

    Mexico threatens to sue America for failing to protect its citizens against ‘act of terrorism’ after El Paso mass shooting left 20 dead, including seven Mexican nationals

    • Retired Spook August 5, 2019 / 9:23 am

      That’s funny given Mexico’s homicide rate is 5 times higher than ours.

  14. Retired Spook August 5, 2019 / 3:43 pm

    There are some facts that apply to mass shooters that are well established and undeniable. The vast majority of mass shooters are young males who were the product of a single parent home, were taking or had recently stopped taking psychotropic drugs and exhibited all sorts of warning signs. I suspect if an unbiased, comprehensive study were to be done of such individuals the number that engage in mass shootings would not only be a microscopic percentage of young men in general by a tiny percentage of young men within the demographic I just described. I don’t know what the solution is, or if there even is a solution, but I do know the solution is not to disarm the general public.

    • Cluster August 5, 2019 / 3:53 pm

      Or to blame one individual. This is a societal problem. Just like the hundreds of people killed by handguns every week in Chicago. For the life of me, I don’t know why the shooting sprees in inner cities are ignored. Well wait a minute, yes I do, but it’s a shame.

      I think whatever the Dems want to do on gun reforms needs to be matched by inner city and immigration reforms. Tit for tat

  15. Cluster August 5, 2019 / 4:01 pm

    I saw this yesterday and most of you may not have, but Mick Mulvaney was on Meet The dePressed yesterday and his opening comment to Chuck Todd was brilliant. When Todd asked him if he blamed the President’s rhetoric, Mick lit him up. We need more fighters like Mick.

    Chuck, before I answer that, let me say this because I’ve been sitting here listening to this show. I heard the tail end of [Senator Cory] Booker’s thing, I heard most of the panel and I, I know this is a political show, but the level of rhetoric in the last twenty minutes, I hope someone else is bothered by it other than me. I mean, we’ve moved straight past any sympathy at all for the victims, straight past going into what caused this and trying to figure out who’s to blame.

    • Retired Spook August 5, 2019 / 4:05 pm

      Victims are simply a means to an end for the Left. the Left actually CREATES victims just so they can be used to score political points.

  16. Cluster August 6, 2019 / 8:38 am

    So I have to share this. Despite the El Paso manifesto saying specifically that the gunman held racist views long before Trump and that Trump had really no influence on him, as well as repeating the left wing narrative that climate change will destroy the earth, the panel on Morning Joe is 100% laser focused on Trump.

    It’s nothing but Trump, Trump, Trump. Disturbingly focused on one individual

    I don’t think guns are the problem folks. It’s people like the Morning Joe panelists who have a limited capacity to understand reality.

    • Retired Spook August 6, 2019 / 9:23 am

      In spite of the few inner cities like Baltimore, Detroit and Chicago and the occasional mass shooting, gun violence in this country has decreased substantially since its peak in the early 90’s. At the same time the number of guns has increased dramatically. I wouldn’t be so naive to say that guns are not a factor, but they are certainly not the primary factor. Most of the significant factors are societal and cultural and will take generations to solve, even longer if one side continues to use the problem for political leverage. If guns were the only means of killing someone, then banning all legal guns and gradually getting the ones from criminals through attrition would solve the problem. Great Britain has tried that, for all practical purposes, banning guns, and criminals just use knives instead. Now knives are highly restricted in the UK.

      • Cluster August 6, 2019 / 11:30 am

        Reality has no relationship with Democrats. Just think about what Democrats have tried to convince us of in the last couple of years:

        1. There is a serial rapist on the Supreme Court
        2. The POTUS is an agent of Russia and works towards Russia’s interests
        3. Russia changed the results of the election
        4. The POTUS is a white supremacist
        5. America is systemically racist
        6. White supremacy is our biggest problem
        7. Men can compete as women in sports
        8. There are more than 2 genders
        9. Illegal immigrants are more American than native born Americans
        10. The world will end in 12 years
        11. Americans are primarily responsible for the negative impacts of climate change

        And this is just a partial list.

        UPDATE: The detachment from reality just went to another level:

        On today’s Morning Joe, Brzezinski actually accused the President of wanting such mass murders to happen: “Isn’t it okay to deduce that at this point this is what he wants? . . . I mean, this is a President who seems to want these things to happen. How else can this be explained?”

        So #12 is that the POTUS encourages and delights in mass, racial based shootings.

  17. jdge1 August 7, 2019 / 8:40 am

    It’s sick what the left pushes for. They excel at pulling the emotional strings of the sheeple and playing with words and their meaning to twist logic into pretzels so the masses will buy it. The problem they face now is, their message(s) have gone so far left and at a pace much faster than ever have before that people are starting to question if what they say has “any” truth and if this is the direction they want for themselves and their future generations. Guess we’ll see in the next several elections… if we get that far.

Comments are closed.