A Twitter friend (@KenGardner11) asserts that “traditional conservatism” has been largely abandoned by the GOP – especially by the MAGA crowd. And what is traditional conservatism? Here’s how Ken describes it:
Traditional conservatism — limited constitutional government, fiscal responsibility, free markets, free trade, a strong military, a proactive force for freedom in the world — might today be the minority position even within the GOP, much less the country at large.
I think that most of us here are ok with that sort of definition. It is what we by and large considered Conservatism to be. But were we correct? That is, for those of us, say, 45 and older, is what we called Conservatism for our adult lives really Conservatism?
Limited constitutional government is a great ideal. Love it! But is it something we can have while we also have a strong military and are being a proactive force for freedom in the world? If we have that strong military and we are being proactive out there, that means we’re under permanent threat of counter-attack from the pro-active forces of tyranny. This means we need a national security apparatus to protect ourselves from a Pearl Harbor. A national security apparatus will necessarily have to spy to some extent on Americans because we can’t be sure if any of us won’t turn traitor. And so our rights are curtailed by the government in order to maintain the strong military so we can be a proactive force for freedom in the world. See how it goes?
I’m pretty sure readers here know my opinions on free markets and free trade (so called): it is a blind. A false ideal. You can’t have a totally free market and you can’t engage in free trade. Human nature prohibits either thing. Because some people will try to cheat and grind the faces of the poor, there must be some controls on the market. Because some nations will cheat and seek to destroy economic competitors, you must have some controls on trade. But in addition to these concerns, there is the fact that free markets and free trade are not Conservative. They are Liberal. Traditional, 19th century Manchester School Liberalism. Even if an argument can be made that they are, on balance, better ideas than their alternatives, the fact remains they are Liberal ideals…if we Conserve them, then all we’ve done is Conserve Liberalism.
I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ve never tried Conservatism. Even someone like the great Ronald Reagan wasn’t so much trying to Conserve Conservative things but was, instead, trying to restore a Liberal status quo from, say, 1925. No fault to Reagan! He did great things and we can never repay the debt we owe him. But if we want to be Conservatives Conserving things, I think we’re going to have to rethink things a bit.
In my view, what needs to be done is to first define our ideal and then go about obtaining it. And while this ideal is Conservative, we will have to accept the fact that given what we live under now – a Liberal oligarchy – some revolution may be necessary to achieve the ideal. My ideal is a society of faith, family and property. I believe that such a society meets an actual definition of Conservatism because all experience shows that only a society of faith, family and property is sane, stable and free. In other words, whatever you might say you have, you have nothing good if the primary purpose of your society isn’t the fostering of faith, family and property.
Faith because while we can all argue endlessly about the nature of God and what our duties to Him are, we Conservatives know from human experience that a moral code which is not handed down from God cannot work. We also know that without hope of ultimate justice and peace the human species loses sanity and becomes narcissistic, greedy and slothful.
Family because the primary unit of society is the family. We know from human experience that the purpose of the family is the creation and rearing of children and that if this task is not properly carried out absolute disaster results. Such as we have now when we can see videos showing packs of feral young people looting stores and engaging in street brawls over nothing.
Property because, call it what you will, humanity only works to benefit itself. All of us wish others well, but our primary concern is that we and our families are taken care of. I very much want that family down the block to prosper in love and peace…but my main concern in life is to ensure my granddaughter prospers in love and peace. My best means of doing this is to build up sufficient property to ensure that she can have her material needs met…that she can strive and thrive without having to work for someone else just to obtain her daily bread.
All three of my ideals have been ruthlessly and maliciously destroyed by the Liberal oligarchy which has come to govern the whole planet to one degree or another. This oligarchy hates faith because it believes it can create heaven on Earth. It hates family because it believes that the primary human loyalty must be given to the group, led by the oligarchs. It hates property because property makes people independent of the ministrations of the oligarchy. To get them back – to even start to get my ideals back – I must overthrow the Liberal oligarchy. I cannot content myself with just trying to stop the Latest Thing…I must proactively overthrow what has been imposed.
Do keep in mind that such an effort does not preclude working within the current American system. Our Founders did create a very clever system which even now gives me leverage. I pray earnestly that I can effect the necessary changes by using the system. But at the end of the day, if I want what I believe in to survive, I must accept that I’ll have to do it by any means necessary. And if this means I’ll have to abolish corporations on one hand and confiscate oligarchic wealth on the other, then that is what will have to happen…and by so doing I will not be doing other than Conservatism.
It is time, the first time, to try Conservatism. To actually honor our knowledge and traditions by seeking to implement them on society. In my view, it is this way, or death. If all we ever try to do is support what Liberals imposed 40, 80 or 100 years ago, then we’re just helping cement a social order which we can see is leading us to total destruction. Perhaps most on the Right cannot see the line going from, say, Wilsonian Progressives and San Francisco Maoists…but I see it. The latter is the direct descendant of the former. And if we’re still trying to make the world safe for Democracy, I think we’ll find that all we’ve done is make the world safe for more Maoists. I’ll go back to Wilson and discard it; I’ll pick up the mantle of McKinley and Cleveland and reject the Liberal project. I’ll be Conservative…even if I’m burning the system to the ground.
Blogs For Victory 
In my view, what needs to be done is to first define our ideal and then go about obtaining it. And while this ideal is Conservative, we will have to accept the fact that given what we live under now – a Liberal oligarchy – some revolution may be necessary to achieve the ideal.
I think pretty much everyone on the Right except the most radical militia types is hoping it will be a peaceful revolution, but our adversary has repeatedly stated “their way by any means necessary,” and there’s an increasing realization, at least among my circle of friends, that we may have to adopt the same strategy. As I’ve said before, I can’t imagine a cause more worth dying for than Liberty.
We owe that to those who came before us. Remember, George Washington was 42 years old and living a very comfortable life when he was chartered to lead the revolution, which he accepted. That’s courage. And remember too, Washington was a former British officer himself.
We never define our ideal, always getting mired in ISSUES and Identity Politics.
What could be dumber than basing a campaign on issues? Issues are fiercely held emotion-based feelings, and arguing them seldom turns out well. I have been saying for years to just accept the issues presented and then do a subtle lateral shift not to whether they are good or bad but how they have to be approached within a true Constitutional framework.
I’ve got some pretty strong opinions (break here for a Jim Nabors “surprise, surprise…”) but I still don’t argue about issues because there is nothing to be gained by it. And issues are kissing cousins to Identity Politics. Both generate strong emotional resistance. I have said that to me, if a woman is a high priestess of Wicca married to her girlfriend and believing in abortion she is still a conservative if she also thinks these are all ISSUES to be decided at state or local levels, outside the limited scope of federal authority.
Ideals, abstract political philosophy, lack the emotional content of issues and identity. People who enable and support Leftism simply can’t defend the structure of that political system because they don’t understand it. Most don’t even know it exists. Even the most ardent Trump haters, if engaged in unemotional discourse, tend to say they prefer a government with more input from the citizens, to states making their own decisions instead of top-down One Size Fits All government from a Central Authority.
The thing is, the addiction to Identity Politics is so strong, so overpowering, that it never takes long to snap from a rational talk about the advantages of state sovereignty to “But……Trump!” I still think we would be ahead of the game if we were to campaign on structure and not identity. We only have to shift ten percent of Dem voters away from the collectivist tyranny of the Left. It will be a gradual shift and we are well behind the curve as we still haven’t tried it.
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.iYSfcpZE6imkML29iMNzxgEsEs%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=01a04177393bb55e9685fd5c294ae16c717db1b6884bb55f0413ea9309a6a283&ipo=images
Just another example of the upside down country we live in. Speaking with a colleague the other day, both of us commented on how messed up everything is since 2020. That year was a game changer for this country and it had nothing to do with a virus, and everything to do with an infected Oligarchy.
Tucker nails it again
Coffee & Covid has an upbeat post today as well.
As you know, I’ve always been a pretty easy-going, roll-with-the-punches kind of guy. Not much really sets me off. Probably a combination of where and how I was brought up, where I live, and the people I associate with. I’m not sure how far off they are, but I’m convinced that America’s brightest days are still ahead. The yearning for freedom, earned with the blood of our ancestors, is just too ingrained into the American psyche to allow it to be flushed down the toilet.
That’s kind of how I feel. I’ve talked here about the pendulum swinging, and in my mind’s eye I see a cartoon pendulum, with a big boxing glove on it, swinging back and knocking out the silliness and toxicity that are poisoning this country. Sadly, I think it will take a catastrophe to do this, and I am not talking about an internal catastrophe like a shooting war but something done to us to galvanize us, much like 9/11 did–to put us in what Glenn Beck called a 9/12 mentality. I’m not clear on what kind of event could slap the clueless Lefties upside the head and convince them that they are on the wrong path, though. We warned about tyranny, yet they meekly bowed their heads and let the State tell them they had to inject themselves with an experimental drug or lose their jobs. Of course, they did not realize it was experimental, and given the panic generated by the State about Covid they were convinced this was the right thing to do.
I always come back to communication, and the death grip the Left has on this in this country. I am still convinced that if we could find a voice, we could win over a lot of people who are acting out of ignorance.
If Elon Musk can buy Twitter he can buy a network, and that is what it will take. If not CBS or NBC or ABC, then a cable channel like Fox did. And who knows, this Tucker Carlson thing might be what it will take to get something rolling. Fox, with its message of “fair and balanced”, was an instant target for the Left, but with Twitter no longer under Leftist control it might be possible to mount a whole new cable empire based on freedom of speech.
Imagine, if you will, an Elon Musk cable channel featuring Tucker Carlson, immediately sucking the top talent and most of the advertisers away from Fox and surging to the top of the ratings, because even the haters would want to see what was happening and without the years of incessant drumbeats of “FAUX NEWS” and howling about Fox a new brand would not be hampered by that history. The Left would have to start over with a whole new smear campaign.
This is all just so bad, I don;t even know what to say anymore.
THE BIDEN LEGACY: HHS Whistleblower Tara Lee Rodas Tells Congress Biden Administration Is “Middleman” in Multi-Billion Dollar Migrant Child Trafficking Operation
Hunter Biden was involved in trafficking Ukrainian and Russian prostitutes and his Dad is allowing cartels to rape women and exploit children. And we are still arguing with them that MAGA is not extreme.
These people are evil, they have no souls, and their quick demise will be welcome news to the majority of Americans. Remember, extremism in the pursuit of freedom, truth, and justice …. is no vice.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/04/the-biden-legacy-hhs-whistleblower-tara-lee-rodas-tells-congress-biden-administration-is-middleman-in-multi-billion-dollar-migrant-child-trafficking-operation/
If we do, indeed, end up shooting at each other, stuff like this is going to make it a lot easier to pull the trigger.
I keep wondering what it will take for the middle-of-the road Legacy Dems to snap out of it and realize their political model is evil. Perhaps the boldness of the Left in finally coming out in favor of pedophilia will have an effect, but publicizing the human trafficking aspect of the Biden administration policies, even without this new information on the Biden family actually participating in it, will have an effect.
If we can get the message out there, that is, and history says we won’t be able to do that. So far all we have is the House of Representatives calling people in to testify, but without massive media coverage that is mostly unheard.
Vivek is a contender. Love this guy
I also like Ramaswamy. I’ve seen numerous interviews and haven’t heard him say anything that I vehemently disagreed with. Like Amazona, I just wish the Supreme Court would weigh in on the Natural Born Citizen issue. We’ve never had someone elected president who was born in this country but whose parents were not citizens at the time of his birth, and most Constitutional scholars agree that at least one parent must have been a citizen to satisfy the Natural-Born-Citizen requirement.
Some of the anti-DeSantis ads, particularly from Trump surrogates, bend the truth, but as Vivek points out, it’s pretty hard to find anyone in politics who doesn’t have a a few warts. Personally, I’d like to see DeSantis announce that, after careful consideration and discussions with family and friends he’s decided not to run. He’s young and has plenty of time to further pad his already impressive resume and distance himself from questionable decisions he’s made in the past.
I agree with you on all of this, Spook. And I have felt all along that DeSantis should declare that he is not running, that his contract with the voters of Florida is that he will be their governor for his full term, and let the Jerry Springer chair-throwing insult-hurling Trump campaign play out without him.
As for “questionable decisions” I would like to know what they are. A decision made in one context can be totally appropriate, but looked at through a different lens seem “questionable”. I’ll say the same thing I said about Romney when he was excoriated for his Massachusetts support of the state’s health care legislations—he was elected to serve the citizens and if this is what they want it is his job to honor that, unless there is a serious overriding element that he feels in good conscience means he has to object. Not agreeing is not enough. So I want to know just what DeSantis said or did that is “questionable”.
We have several resident trolls who seem to have made it their life’s work to uncover EVERY questionable decision made by every Republican who ever lived (OK, maybe a bit of hyperbole). I’ll bet one of them could tell you every sordid thing DeSantis has ever done, right down to ripping the tag off a mattress. I realize this may unleash an avalanche of verbal excrement, but it could save you a lot of wasted research time. The downside is that you’ll have to factcheck everything. Oh, never mind.
I don’t read what they post so would want some reliable sources instead.
I also don’t demand that a candidate and I always agree 100% on every issue.
Like this? A terrorist at Gitmo now claims that young DeSantis, as a JAG officer did or participated in …..something bad.
…at a recent press conference, a reporter asked DeSantis to comment on Adafyi’s allegations as well as discuss accusations that he was present during forced feedings of detainees. DeSantis was only too happy to oblige —
I think what DeSantis did here was “seize” the moment to respond, as conservatives are now tired of merely “pouncing” on lies told by the Left and its lapdog Agenda Media and have moved on from cute kitty-cat moves to the more serious forceful grasping, or “seizing”.
“How would they know me? OK, think about that. Do you honestly believe that’s credible? So this is 20— 2006, I’m a junior officer. Do you honestly think that they would’ve remembered me from Adam? Of course not. They’re just trying to get into the news because they know people like you will consume it because it fits your preordained narrative that you’re trying to spin. Focus on the facts, and stop worrying about narrative.”
Focus on the facts, and stop worrying about narrative Helluva concept, clearly new to the Agenda Media
And BTW, nice volley back onto their side of the net. This is how you handle the Agenda Media. Not just by retreating and defending, but taking the offensive.
I’m curious about what DeSantis “signed into law” that qualify as Disney special privileges and in what contexts. Because the Reedy Creek Improvement District was approved by the Florida legislature in 1967. After that, whatever the legislature did had to be based on that, and if the legislature voted to do something in the context of that established law and DeSantis signed what they approved I don’t see that as an indictment of him as a hypocrite.
I’m not so in love with him if he’s just taking shots at DeSantis without context or explanation. WHICH “crony privileges” did DeSantis support/approve?
Also, how can he be a “contender” if we don’t even know if his parents were citizens when he was born? They are carefully described as “immigrants” but never as naturalized citizens. Ramaswamy is a very smart guy, and it seems to me that if his parents had become US citizens this little nugget of information would have been provided.
I keep seeing all this “rah-rah hooray we’ve got a CONTENDER” excitement every time a new face pops up, with no concern whatsoever about this new flavor’s actual legal qualification to be president. I saw it with Rubio, I saw it with Haley, and now Ramaswamy. All good people, all people with a lot to offer this country. But not necessarily legally qualified to be president.
I’m not saying I don’t like his message. I’m not saying he isn’t a force to be reckoned with. I’m not saying we don’t need him and people like him. What I AM saying is we need to rein it in a little when talking about being “contenders” until we know some really important information about them.
The problem with the decisions that politicians often have to make is that, even if they’re not entirely bad, political opponents will always try to take them out of context, shade the truth, or just out and out lie in order to make them look as bad as possible. In the last 7 or 8 years we’ve seen lying about one’s opponent taken to heights I would have never thought possible.
I know. The purposeful distortions are shameful, or would be if the people were capable of shame.
Because I have no idea what “crony privileges” this guy is talking about, I can only suggest one possibility—that the legislature passed some law based on the legally established entity of Reedy Creek and then DeSantis signed it because it complied with the law. I listened to his book and it was clear that while he sees the role of the executive as one of being “active” it is not a dictatorship.
Just to be clear, I like Ron DeSantis. I think he has the right stuff to be not just President some day, but a great President, but then I thought that about Scott Walker in 2016, so my opinion and $7 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
I think Walker’s rep was based on a couple of good decisions he made, while I think DeSantis has a deeper record of doing the right thing. And I don’t remember a negative about Walker other than that he just couldn’t stand up to the mob in the bigger arena.
Mark Lewis of Townhall wonders if Only Trumpers will vote for someone else if Trump is not the candidate. I’ve wondered the same thing. I’ve even wondered if Trump himself would support a different candidate, or take the country down out of spite.
But a few more words about Donald Trump. All my readers know I’ve bent over backwards on Townhall defending him, giving him every chance, but, frankly, my patience is wearing thin. Trump’s brutal, utterly reprehensible attacks on Ron DeSantis (which one, really, is “sanctimonious”?) are nauseating, offensive, and rapidly depleting my reserves. The dog named “Insult” is getting old and won’t hunt any more, Mr. Trump. Thus far, DeSantis has demonstrated a far superior character than the abrasive, abusive Trump. And America needs solid character in the White House. I’ve tried to be patient with Trump, but if he continues to be a horse’s backside, he will continue to lose support among Republicans. He seems incapable of realizing that.
I know Trump is not going to change. But I can hope. He was a great President. But he isn’t the only good possibility. And if he affronts too many people, he won’t win, and I intend to support someone who can.
Eye-OPENING #2A thread exposes how much Democrats really don’t trust or even LIKE their own supporters
“Democrats don’t think much of their constituents” is the understatement of the year. Democrats despise women … they want to kill their unborn children and want men to dominate them in sports, and Lord knows that anyone living in Chicago, Seattle, Portland etc. experiences the hellscape of Democrat governance every day
I don’t think they’re that crazy about men, either, as they seem to prefer them weak and feminized
This is mass psychosis
Record one in FOUR high school students say they are gay, bisexual or ‘questioning’ their sexuality, official CDC data shows – double the 2015 figure
I’d guess it’s a lot more than four times as much, because back in 2015 the fad was not about gender. And “questioning” is a pretty vague term.
I do agree that the rise in this demographic is due to social contagion a lot more than to serious sexual identity issues. “High school students” have an age range of 13-18, an age group that is pretty much defined as confused.
I stumbled upon this take-no-prisoners article superficially about the Bobby Kennedy announcement that he is running for the presidency but really more about the messages in Kennedy’s speech. Setting aside his obvious fandom regarding Kennedy, his comments and examples of journalistic malpractice are savagely accurate, as are his observations such as this, talking about Kennedy’s war on fascism:
“..a fascism exterminating millions upon millions not by force, but by inducing them to kill themselves, along with their own children, with toxins developed, inescapably promoted, sweepingly mandated and efficiently administered by the very agencies established to protect the people’s health, in league with corporations, state and city governments, schools and universities worldwide.”
And this dissection of the NYT:
This shocking slander by the New York Times, and variously echoed by the rest of “our free press,” is not just an outrageous pack of lies, but—worse yet—also an uncanny throwback to the darkest propaganda drives of yesteryear; but let me preface my elaboration on that point by noting how consistently the Times has always led the “journalistic” pack in trumpeting state propaganda, while never doubting the official line until too late (if ever). Thus it was (to note just a few examples) with the campaign against “the Hun” before and during World War I, and the brief, explosive Red Scare afterward, and the denial of Stalin’s terror-famine in Ukraine, and the “news” that Poland was attacking Nazi Germany (the Times also suppressing the extermination of the Jews), and with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and all throughout the epoch of (what we still call, mistakenly) “McCarthyism,” and with the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and 9/11—and, it is now apt to note, the murders of John Kennedy, and Malcom X, and Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King, and all the other killings ordered from on high—of Patrice Lumumba, Dag Hammarskjöld, Fred Hampton, Thomas Merton, Allard Lowenstein, Paul Wellstone and so many more—but misreported, by the Times et al., as the work of random “misfits,” or accidental, or otherwise “acceptable.”
Worth a read…
Funny thing is, that could be an actual quote from Kamala lol
This is eerily similar in philosophy if not content to the link and quotation I posted last night,
” remarks were made by US counter-terror expert Scott Bennett.
Carlson and Fox News “parted ways” on Monday with speculation still raging as to the specific reason why the network canned its highest rated and most popular host.
According to Bennett, Carlson posed too much of a threat to institutional power because he turned Americans into proper “researchers and thinkers”.
Carlson offered an “intellectualism, truthfulness, and an analytical depth that no other news personality has ever done in the history of the United States as far back as I can remember,” said Bennett.
Tucker needed to be “silenced” because he represented too big a threat to the “powers and principalities, institutions and agendas that seek an unenlightened uninformed semi lobotomized quasi retarded population that do not question, do not research, do not analyze but simply digest and follow instructions,” according to Bennett.
“Tucker Carlson also exposed the fraud and money laundering racketeering crimes of FTX and the Democrat Party in Ukraine involving the United States government. He exposed the US biochemical labs in Ukraine and their connection to the Democrat Party, President Barack Obama, Vice President Biden, Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Bill Gates, and other US government agencies and pharmaceutical companies,” Bennett told Sputnik.
The ex-host’s anti-regime rhetoric “could no longer be tolerated by the corrupt American media and political establishment,” said Bennett, adding that his exit signals “the death of American media”.
Tucker pushed the envelope every night so it’s not surprise that Corporate Fox let him go. I have even read where Gen. Lilley, or I mean Milley, was saying that Tucker was a “threat to democracy” and just think about that for a minute. An American Military Officer is saying that an American media reporter is a “threat to democracy”, and all the other news outlets remain silent.
We are in a new era of America. This is the “precipice” we have all spoke about for years. Let’s fight.
Observation time …. I live in a “very diverse” community as Democrats would describe it. Lots of brown and black people and fewer white people. I’ve noticed over the last couple years that community Facebook posts are getting more and more … how shall we say it? Racist. And this all comes from the black and brown people. The Mexicans are posting about what “Messicans” do and like and how no one can understand unless you were a “Messican”. Additionally, the black community is doing much of the same (although the Messicans are more visible). The black community now have their black hair salons, “soul activities”, and many have now gone to wearing African garb around town, and I guarantee you not one of them has ever been to Africa. Now I am one who loves different cultures but this feels like it’s a bit exclusionary. I can only imagine if a white group of people started posting about what white people like, and how other people wouldn’t understand it unless they were white. Can you imagine the backlash on that? The thing is though, white people can’t not erase their heritage simply because it offends other people. It’s time to stand up and be bold. We have suffered from battered spouse syndrome long enough.
Boy oh boy I knew inflation was bad but I had no idea …
ROFL