Pre-Trump, Conservatism Was a Grift

Back in March of 2017, I was of the opinion that the Never Trumpers were mostly just dismayed by Trump’s personality and that most of them would eventually realize that Conservative victory was more important than hurt feelings. As Trump’s policies have been vigorously Conservative, it would only make sense that anyone who wants Conservative victory would sign on with Trump.

And, man, I hate finding out that I was a sucker.

Today, it was announced that Jonah Goldberg is leaving National Review to found a new outfit with former Weekly Standard Editor-in-Chief Steve Hayes. They say they’ll be Trump-skeptical and opposed to partisan boosterism. So, yeah, they’ll be out there vigorously tearing down anyone who can help Conservatism while helping Democrats in any way they can. They’ll likely still shill for “free trade” agreements and low corporate taxes, but that’s because most liberals are in favor of such things. You can rely on it that over the first six months or so in business, these “Conservatives” will “evolve” on issues like abortion and gun control.

Let’s pause for a moment here and review a bit of what Trump is doing:

1. Remaking the Courts in a solidly conservative manner.
2. Reducing onerous regulations.
3. Tax cuts.
4. Working to de-fund Planned Parenthood.
5. Pushing back against the emerging Trans agenda.
6. Rebuilding our military might.
7. Standing by Israel in deed as well as word.
8. Destroying one after another of the Progressive heroes of our era.
9. Exposing the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the MSM like no one ever has.
10. Reviving the Rule of Law.

As far as I can tell, there’s not much missing there from what Conservatism has said it wants. Now, to be sure, Conservatism is still largely in favor of so-called “free trade” and Trump is obviously against it, but that’s just one thing…and it’s not like he’s trying to erect permanent barriers to trade. His whole thing is using tariffs as a weapon to force our trade partners to be fair: in the end, Trump wants free trade, as well…though he clearly recognizes the national security aspect of the matter: if we could get 100% of our steel cheaper in foreign markets, we’d still want a very large steel industry here at home. But, still, that is just one thing – and we Conservatives are getting so much else, what is there to complain about? Apparently enough to convince Goldberg and Hayes to found a new media outfit to fight Trump…but fight him on what?

That’s the thing: they want to fight Trump and that means they want to fight Conservative victory. I’m not buying some bullsh** story about how Trump is so immoral that we have to stop him. I doubt that Hayes and Goldberg are stupid enough to believe the Trump-Russia drivel (but, hey, maybe they do?). They are fighting Trump while Trump pushes through a Conservative agenda more comprehensive than even Reagan attempted. If you’re fighting Trump, then you simply must not want Conservatism to prevail. And that’s what I think is at the root here: they don’t want Conservatism to prevail. They are revealing themselves as grifters…people who merely said what they figured we wanted to hear as a means to make a buck or two. They never actually wanted Conservatism to win, and that must be because they don’t actually like Conservatism. I’m open to other explanations if anyone has them – but from where I’m sitting, I can only figure that when Goldberg and Hayes and the rest of the Never Trump regiment finished their articles advocating for Conservatism in the past, they smiled and thought to themselves, “that’ll keep the suckers donating for another month”.

For fifty years they’ve been at this. In hindsight, it was probably Nixon who injected the poison into the Conservative movement Buckley founded in the 1950’s. Nixon was not remotely Conservative – he started the EPA, after all – but he knew that he needed Conservative votes to prevail…and he got them. He hired a few high powered Conservative voices, and that was that. Conservative leaders found that there was money and prestige to be had…as long as you sold yourself off to whatever non-Conservative guy was out there willing to pass out the jobs. Reagan, then, was an anomaly: someone who only slipped in because the base loved him so, and Carter collapsed. I think back now on the Reagan years and all the things that didn’t happen. All the things which could have been done to roll back liberalism, and yet none of them were. Reagan, after all, kept Nixon’s EPA, and Carter’s Department of Education. There’s some old video, I think, of Trump ripping into Reagan back in the day – I think I see why he might have done that: Reagan was great and he’ll never be forgotten, but he had a lot of opportunities which slipped by unused. And now I wonder who in the “Conservative” movement helped those opportunities to be lost?

The old movie line goes, “once is an accident; twice is coincidence; three times is enemy action”. Conservatism has blown potential victory many more than three times. We’re not that stupid nor are we that incompetent. The only thing we’ve won on is the gun control issue – but, please note, that wasn’t won by Conservatism, as such, but by gun owners, themselves, fighting it out tooth and nail against the same liberal Establishment which Conservatism gets beaten by day in and day out. We can’t even muster up the grit to keep boys out of the girls’ bathroom. Or, at least, we couldn’t until Trump came along. Prior to Trump, we just kept losing – and looking back on it in hindsight, I can only assume that our defeat was the result of sabotage. This is not to say that we were destined to win, but it is to say that in conflict after conflict with the left, we just kept throwing in the towel. Why? Why give up? Why did we quit?

I think we all should have woke up a bit when National Review fired John Derbyshire. To be sure, the offending article by Derbyshire was a bit out there, and I thought so as soon as I read it. But, still, it was just an opinion. It could be countered with other opinions – but no one on the right did that. He was just fired, defined as a racist and never spoken of again. But, we all could be forgiven for not catching on at that point because, as I said, Derbyshire’s article was way outside the norm. But a couple years later, Mark Steyn was also out at National Review and, while the issues were varied, the final trigger was Steyn repeating a couple old jokes from Bob Hope and Dean Martin about homosexuality (Hope: “California just legalized homosexuality; I got out of there before they make it mandatory”; Martin: “How you make a fruit cordial? Be nice to him”). We were shown, right then, that Conservatism was entirely in line with the left when it came to proclaiming certain subjects forbidden territory…and, what, then is the difference between Conservatism and Liberalism? None that I can see.

Well, it is all exposed, now: no one is so blind that they cannot see the truth that the pre-Trump Conservatism was useless, if not deliberately baleful. The grifters are leaving us – well, more accurately, they are packing their bags and getting out as we show them the door. None of us know what will happen going forward – Trump may win or lose in 2020. But we’re done with the Never Trump losers. They are free to break out the kneepads for whomever is paying them to shill for the Establishment. We’re now busy with other things – that whole tearing down the Establishment and winning Conservative victory. It is a relief, actually. At least, now, we know that if we lose, we lose because we got beaten…not because our “leaders” waved a white flag.

End Stage Trump-Russia

So, we had Cohen at the House today – where someone convicted of lying to Congress got to testify…which just shows how stupid this whole thing has become. I was working a bit of over time today, and so missed the hearings. When I got home to check on how it went, this stood out:

Cohen testified that he went over “topics” that Democrats would raise at today’s hearing with lead anti-Trump attack dog, Adam Schiff (D-CA), chairman of the House intelligence committee. So the substance of his testimony was coordinated with the Democratic leadership.

And that is that – he’s coordinating with the people supposedly just trying to elicit the facts of the case. That isn’t fact-finding and oversight: that is prosecution. But the House doesn’t prosecute – not even in impeachment; the House just gathers facts and, depending, refers them to trial before the Senate or to Justice for prosecution. The fact that Cohen was getting coached from the Democrat side of the aisle means that all he was doing was feeding the partisan, Democrat Narrative. Not a word of what he said can be trusted, even if he hadn’t previously lied to Congress.

I have noticed – and so have plenty of others – that the Trump-Russia thing is rapidly morphing into “Trump violated campaign finance laws by paying off women”. Lawyers would have to really decide, before a judge, if such payments were campaign finance violations. But even if they are, such things are invariably handled by fines. Personally, I don’t see them as such – even if Trump dipped into actually donated money to pay the ladies off. From what I can gather, Trump has had a lot of women shake him down for money post-interaction. What isn’t completely certain is whether he had sex with any of these claimants. Such things are difficult to prove unless there’s a third witness or forensic evidence (like a blue dress, ya dig?). Normally, people aren’t having sex a trois; so, its “he said/she said”. But if you’re a billionaire, maybe you just make the calculation that its better to pay for it to go away than to fuss about a sordid scandal in public? The ultimate outcome of the Stormy Saga indicates that Trump may be the put-upon person in all this (though it is enormously funny, still, that Stormy will be the first prostitute to ever pay a politician). If a lot of ladies, justifiably or not, were coming out of the woodwork demanding cash for silence in 2016, then in my view that would be a campaign expenditure…after all, Trump has never hid his social life; none of us were shocked to find out he might have had a dalliance with a lady of interesting background. He wasn’t paying to hide; he was paying to get rid of so he could get on with the campaign. So, campaign expenditure. Of an odd sort, to be sure; but, still.

I don’t know the Democrats’ end game here. Clearly, the large majority of the Democrat base wants Trump impeached. They are convinced that he colluded with Russia to switch votes from Hillary to himself in 2016. So, too, do a large number of Democrat House members want him impeached. Its not a matter in the House of “can they get to 2018?”. If Nancy holds a vote, I can’t see any Democrats voting against. The only question at that point would be if any GOPers would vote along with them. But I don’t see Nancy wanting to hold a vote – such an action is fraught with peril for the Democrats. I think that Nancy would only go along with it if she were assured that at least 5 Republicans in the Senate would vote to convict (this wouldn’t be enough to remove: but it would be enough to say that a bipartisan Senate majority voted to convict, and that would be enough for political purposes). If they impeach via a party-line vote and then Trump is acquitted in the Senate, that would be a disaster for the Democrats heading in to 2020. Trump would be vindicated – and the Democrats very publicly exposed as mean-spirited, hyper-partisans. OTOH, Nancy might be forced to it: the base gets more extreme every day. They might start talking up primary challenges in 2020 for House members who don’t vote to impeach.

Do keep in mind that there is a part of the GOP – rapidly shrinking but still there – which would love to go along with the Democrats in getting rid of Trump. Flake and McCain are gone…but Romney is there along with Murkowski. Cocaine Mitch, though, can probably keep his caucus in line: remember, if the House impeaches, there has to be a trial in the Senate. It isn’t up for debate: the Chief Justice comes over to preside and the Democrats make their case, then the Senate votes. And if it comes to that, absent some really solid evidence against Trump, I think McConnell will be able keep the GOP majority in line…and even a Murkowski would tread carefully, knowing that a vote to convict would make her toxic with GOP voters unless there was clear evidence of criminal behavior to justify the vote.

And so we go on with our insane times – the most law-abiding President we’ve had in ages being dragged by people who probably violate federal laws a dozen times a week…and all of it being done in service to a stupid theory cooked up by Team Hillary to explain away their loss. Just incredible.

To Wall or Not to Wall?

Trump says he’ll sign the budget bill, even though it has a lot in it his base despises. This is clearly a deal worked out between Democrats and Chamber of Commerce GOPers. Remember, at least half the GOP Congressional membership is as much open borders as the Democrats are.

So, what does it mean? The end of MAGA? I don’t think so. Trump says he’ll just go on and build the wall, anyway (and I would if I were him – and I’d calmly ignore any judicial injunction against it, using Andy Jackson’s old mot, “the Court has ruled; now, let the Court enforce”). We really need to re-work the GOP. A lot of real progress has been made getting rid of the Flakes and Ryans, but plenty remain. And even solid people, if they stay there long enough, will get captured by the system. At the end of the day, Trump is working hard to carry out his promises, and I’m with him through 2020.

Former FBI director McCabe said he pondered carrying out a coup d’etat against Trump after Comey was fired. He doesn’t use those words, but that is what he ultimately was on about. Now, a lot of people are very angry over this – I’m less so. I’m sure he would have liked to do it, but I don’t think it ever amounted to much: just some fools having a bull session (possibly following a good cry after Hillary lost).

Governor Gavin Newsom (D-North Mexico) wants to shovel $25 million of California taxpayer’s money at the illegal immigrants.

Someone do the math: CA taxpayers are exiting the State at X rate, illegals are arriving at Y rate. When does CA run out of money to shell out to the illegals?

Legal Insurrection notes that Newsom is clearly gearing up for a Presidential run. Not clear of which country at the moment.

Rumors abound at this time regarding the Jussie Smollet case. Some are saying that Chicago PD figures it was a hoax, but I’ve also read statements from Chicago PD denying this. What seems clear to me is that we don’t have what was originally told: racist, Trumpster white guys attacking a man because he was gay/black. Bottom line: treat all race- and gender-based attack stories as false until proven otherwise.

Never Trump Never was Conservative

Ace takes Jonah Goldberg to task over an article Goldberg wrote in 2013 – an article arguing that GOP voters should ignore Mark Sanford’s adultery and vote for him, anyway, because the Democrat candidate was so liberal that it wasn’t worth, in 2013, standing by an absolute condemnation of adultery to the detriment of the overall political cause. There are, of course, strengths and weaknesses to such an argument, but Ace’s main point is that for some, weird reason in the middle of 2015, Goldberg (and the rest of Never Trump) suddenly decided adultery was such a hideous sin that it’d be better if Hillary were elected President. Because the lady who helped cover up her husband’s adultery is morally superior to a guy who committed adultery, or something.

And the “or something” is this, in my view: the people who make up Never Trump never wanted Conservatism to win. What such people wanted was the entirely of liberal social policy combined with low taxes (especially on corporations, and especially in the form of so-called “free trade” agreements). Oh, and drop a few bombs every now and again on poor foreigners and send Flyover Americans out to fight from time to time – always on the understanding they’d never be allowed to win and they could face criminal charges if their actions upset some DoD lawyer.

What we have to do here is to realize we were suckers. Conned. Yokels who were taken in by city slickers. No shame in it, because the con artist is still the bad guy. But, we were stupid: we paid and we voted and we waited and waited and waited for decades for the Great Conservative Victory…and even when we had power (including total power under Bush from 2003 to 2007) nothing Conservative ever happened. Even after that, we still didn’t put two and two together. It wasn’t until Trump came along that the mask was ripped off – and it was ripped off because Trump not only said he’d do conservative things, but he actually started doing them.

Now, to be sure, the original Never Trump objections to Trump had some validity. I know people who were Trumpsters from Day One (my brother is one of them) but there were a lot – a lot – of people, like me, who went for Anybody But Trump until there was no one left but Trump. I even know some people who, faced with the choice between Hillary and Trump, decided to not vote for President, or vote for some Third Party candidate as a protest. The bottom line is that in 2016, there were plenty of solid reasons to not want Trump – not least of which was what I feared the most: that if he got in, he’d strike a deal with the left and leave us high and dry. But, still, I voted for Trump – because I saw clearly that there was a moral issue at stake here and no matter what Trump had done, it wasn’t remotely as bad as Hillary had done and in policy, with Trump, I might at least get something I wanted from time to time. But then Trump won and started to govern. Lo and behold, within months of taking office, he was accomplishing more solid, conservative things than even Reagan had done. In short, by about July of 2017, if you were conservative, you made your peace with Trump because, as it turns out, his victory was a good thing.

Now it became crunch time, as it were. I wrote, I think shortly after the election, that anyone who remained Never Trump for a long period of time would eventually become left. I was a bit wrong about that. They didn’t become, they already were. There is plenty of evidence of this – most notably in how so many Never Trump people have jettisoned their beliefs nearly entirely. They no longer offer conservative criticism of Trump because you can’t conservatively oppose the conservative policies of Trump’s Administration (small exception is on trade: you can be a conservative free trader…I’ll disagree with you on that, but because you want Free Trade and I want Protection doesn’t mean either of us are liberal). To me, this just isn’t really possible, outside of a religious conversion. And while liberalism is like a religion (more like a cult, these days), it isn’t exactly like that. But we do have people who are becoming liberal and just baldly asserting things as truth which yesterday they said were lies.

I can only work from the assumption that they never believed a word of what they said before. I don’t know (and don’t care) if they believe what they are saying, now. But that rapid a 180 by such a large number of people – supposedly educated people – is just too unlikely except as a result of cynical dishonesty. They were dishonestly and cynically parroting Conservatism when it punched the ticket (and had no chance of winning and thus no chance of forcing them to do something they didn’t want to do) and are now parroting Liberalism because that is now punching the ticket. I wish the liberals a lot of luck with them (and some liberals are on to the scam and are disgusted by the embrace of these people by the left…no decent person likes a traitor. Ever.). As for me, I’m just glad we are rid of them – we still might lose, but at least now we’ll lose after a fight, and that allows you to rest easy, no matter what the outcome.

Stalinism Comes to America

I’m sure you’ve all heard by now of the Covington Catholic blow up so I won’t go over the specific details. Suffice it to say that it was clearly a planned operation designed to elicit a specific result: Catholics are bad. Outside of the general hatred of Christianity on the left, I think it is all part of a plan (the attacks on Mrs. Pence being part of this) to so denigrate Christianity that when RBG’s replacement is named, the left will feel safe in attacking the nominee on purely religious grounds. But there is more to it than that.

Carried along by their conviction that they are on “the right side of history”, the left has decided to go full Stalinist. They are identifying certain segments of our society as the enemy solely responsible for all of the ills of society – and they are suggesting ever more violent remedies to remove these malefactors from society. That is Stalinism in a nutshell. Unable to provide the Socialist utopia promised – and not particularly interested in providing it in the first place – Stalin hit upon the clever scheme of finding someone to blame for all problems, and then mercilessly going after them. That is what the American left is now engaged in.

In America, the “wreckers and Kulaks” of Stalin’s Russia are now the straight, white Christians – mostly male, but they’ll lump in any woman who doesn’t pledge allegiance to feminism: they are the source of all ills. They have made every problem, on purpose, because they are simply bad and wish to do evil at every opportunity. And we can’t make a prosperous, safe and just society as long as these straight, white Christians are in power. And, furthermore, all they are doing is upholding White Supremacy…so, getting rid of them by any means, fair of foul, is legitimate.

Those Catholic school kids could have been anybody – it doesn’t really matter. All that matters is that they can be identified as the enemy. In this case, the identity was created by putting out a short clip of a video which was claimed to show certain, bad actions. That the alleged bad actions didn’t happen – and the larger video clearly shows they didn’t happen – was irrelevant. They only needed their small video clip as proof…and what appears to have been a well-coordinated series of social media sock puppet accounts and previously prepared MSM coverage, immediately took over. In an instant, the boys were evil Catholic racists worthy of having their lives destroyed. That it is all proven false, now, is actually quite irrelevant. The footsoldiers of the left believe 100% in the original Narrative (they won’t even look at the evidence showing it false) while a thrill of fear went through all non-left hearts: if they can do this in an instant to a random group of kids, they can do it to anyone.

We’re going to see more and more of this – a blatant, naked attempt to rile up their troops while at the same time frightening us into silence. They will get their troops riled up – but I’m not sure that they are going to get the silence they expected. When it first came up, I pretty much ignored it – figuring it was just another race hoax of the sort we’ve seen so often lately. But as it unfolded, it became clear that it was more than that. And, at first, most right voices remained silent (while the Never Trump immediately took the left’s side in the fight). It was only after the proof came out that right voices started to rise…and as the monstrosity became fully revealed, people got ever more angry.

Get ready for the most intense, hate-filled political period in American history since the Civil War. This is going to get very ugly, very fast. At stake is all the marbles: either they win, and we’re done for, or we win.

Trump the Good

After the latest WE GOT HIM, NOW!!! in the MSM about Trump failed, it started to occur to me that the problem our Liberals and Never Trump have is that they are working from the assumption that Trump is just like them. Meaning, that Trump is as much a garbage person as they are, or at least as much garbage as those they prefer to have in power.

Think about it: all of these people who really go after Trump, can you name anything constructive they’ve ever done in their lives? They are pundits and activists and consultants and think tank denizens…but have they, in any real sense, ever had a real job? Lived the real life?

Now, to be sure, Trump is rich, and he was born rich. I think and wonder what I might have been like at 30 with an essentially unlimited supply of money. Unlimited supply of money and also famous. All that money and fame and beautiful women always circling around. I don’t know what I would have been like – but the temptation to at least take advantage of certain things offered would have been mighty hard to resist. And, it seems, that at times Trump didn’t resist the temptation. But, that he sinned merely means he’s human. And there’s a huge difference between a good man who sins (the Bible says that even the righteous man falls seven times a day, after all), and a bad person who positively enjoys sinning.

The reason we’ve got things like the Mafia is because some people simply like to do bad. They consider it fun. They also consider it far more worthwhile to get via screwing over someone else than it is to get by work. It is just part of the run of humanity. Most people resign themselves – in joy or sorrow – to merely doing what needs to be done and assuming that the proper reward will come of that. But some, and it isn’t a small number, are forever seeking the angle – the con which will get them what they want without all that tedious necessity of earning it. Some of the people like that – the more “successful” ones – are rich. But not all of them are; and not all people who are rich are like that. Some rich people are actually quite decent. And I think Trump is one of them.

Trump, from what I can see, doesn’t seek ill for anyone. He’ll punish anyone who crosses him (though he should, at times, turn the other cheek), but he doesn’t seek the destruction of others. He’s one of those people – my grandfather was another – who are entirely ok with other people doing well. My grandfather’s mot was “better to have 10% of something than 100% of nothing”. Meaning, if you can help others win while you’re winning, it is all to the good. Trump seems to be like that. But think about the people who essentially run things in America: it is a gigantic, vicious competition to see who gets on top and the way you get to the top is by crawling over the lives of those you destroyed. Matt and I experienced this when we were blogging and trying to break into writing for money: outside a few gems, no one would help us. They were fearful that if we got, they’d lose. They didn’t see it as something where if we all teamed up, all of us would do well. They didn’t want that – they all wanted themselves to be Number One…and in their minds, that meant keeping people like me out and down.

But, as I said, Trump doesn’t seem to be like that. The Democrats and Never Trump are going to keep on tripping over themselves because they keep looking for the evidence that Trump is just like they are, and he’s not. They’ve found out he’s not perfect – but that didn’t take much effort as it was in the news all along. But they will not, I suspect, ever find the kind of evidence to prove he’s like the Clintons, or Pelosi or any one of a hundred Establishment grifters. He’s not on the take. He hasn’t destroyed anyone. He hasn’t abused anyone. He’s just a normal man – meaning, he’s a good man (who sins).

Open Thread

Robert Stacy McCain offers some sage advice for any young men out there seeking female companionship.

I’ll add a small note: I definitely fall into the bottom 15% (read it, you’ll understand), but if there are any youngsters out there reading this, I’ll double down on McCain’s advice about having a self-deprecating sense of humor. It is very useful! When you really do it right, a lady will think you’re charming. That goes a long way.

Seal the deal by learning how to cook.

Democrats are already lining up to run against Trump. Illustrative of how this will go is Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI). She’s as liberal as the day is long but deep in her background was a time when she wasn’t full-blown liberal. Because of these past heresies, she’s being mercilessly savaged in the liberal world. Mark my words: for 2020, the left – which controls who gets the Democrat nomination – will not settle for anything less than an Absolute Not Trump. Their nominee will have to sign off on the very latest iteration of whatever it is the left is hating Trump about, no matter how obscure or silly it is. If someone on the left makes an accusation against Trump, everyone who wants to be the Democrat nominee will have to subscribe to it. It’ll get really interesting.

In re the Wall and Shutdown, Don Surber notes that Trump Hatred has trapped the Democrats – they hate him so much they are fighting over an amount of money that is so small, it works out to a rounding error. Earlier, I happened to overhear someone conversing with another about the mess – the person doing most of the talking was apparently married to a furloughed worker and went on and on and on about what a bad man Trump was, how stupid the wall was, blah, blah, blah. What was remarkable, to me, was that the other party – while clearly having no love for Trump – kept pushing back and insisting that the wall was necessary because the border does have to be controlled. I think we’re seeing that dynamic play out nationwide: the Democrats just keep repeating their talking points, but it is blowing right past non-Democrats because everyone can see the fight is about nearly nothing and, what the heck, why not build the wall? I think Trump will win this – only a craven surrender by the Senate GOP could derail us, and I don’t think Cocaine Mitch is in the mood to surrender.

It’s a poll from a Libertarian outfit (and, so, probably skewed anti-war), but it shows that the American people largely back Trump’s withdrawal from Syria. I’d have to look it up for how long ago I wanted us to withdraw from the Middle East, entirely: but it was a while back ago. Long before Trump. I did, of course, back the war in Iraq but I thought at the time – given Bush’s “axis of evil” bit – that it was a mere precursor to war with the actual source of the Middle East problem: Iran. I would have had it – Iraq, then Syria/Lebanon…and, then, if Iran hadn’t collapse, on to Tehran to finish the job. A swift moving series of military actions, with no fussing about nation building (I’d prefer we just find local strongmen and let them rule the locals, backed by our force), would have rocked the enemy on his heels and, also, prevented an anti-war left from really coalescing. Bush decided to do it differently, likely on the advice of people at State and Defense. I don’t think the American people are anti-war, as such, but they are anti-war-forever. They are anti-no-victory. They are anti-wasting-time-and-lives. If we go to war, we should go all the way. And if we can’t see our way to that, we should just stay home.