And they said WE were bitter.
By Paul J Cella Posted in 2008 | Conservatives | primaries | Republicans — Comments (40) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
According to Noemie Emery, in a brief but muddled piece over at The Weekly Standard, it seems that “the ideological right is filled with a vast, free-floating fury that can't find a target upon which to dump all this ire,” because . . . well, basically because some of us are still suspicious of McCain.
It is a bizarre polemic which, in order to appeal for unity behind a shaky candidate, calls upon hackneyed Leftist smears to disparage whole chunks of that candidate’s party. Thanks for that. Thanks, also, for the rehearsal of exactly the same tissue of mendacities and ill will that greeted Reagan and the 1994 Revolution from our beloved Liberals. Angry irrational bigots, those Reagan and Gingrich voters: cretins and fire-eaters and coddlers of fascists — how many times have we heard this innuendo from the Left?
Well it rings even more hollow and false from someone on the Right.
As my friend Leon noted, Ms. Emery once announced that she would sooner vote for Joe Lieberman than Sam Brownback; now she presumes to lecture Conservatives on what Republican unity should look like — and even hauls poor Sam Brownback into the train of her shoddy argument!
The answer to this is really quite simple: This is the primary season; McCain has a commanding lead, but he is not yet the assured nominee; there is no inherent dishonor or disloyalty in still opposing him, voting against him, even working for his defeat. I repeat: we are talking about the GOP primary race. This is precisely the time to hash this stuff out.
Most of this pack of bigots possessed by “vast, free-floating fury,” looking for a sensitive soul like Johnny Mac upon which to “dump all [its] ire” — a group which those of us less agitated and embittered call “Conservatives” — will certainly come around and support McCain in November. You know that. I know that. Even Ms. Emery probably knows that.
There is no question but that the air is filled with hyperbole. Tension, excitement and genuine uncertainty tend to invite that. But few things are more dispiriting, and more suggestive of a fundamental pettiness, than the spectacle of right-wingers opportunistically embracing some of the worst rhetorical conceits of the Left.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Obama: The Democratic Front-runner — Comments (143) »
And they said WE were bitter. 40 Comments (0 topical, 40 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
The bottom's long since fallen out of NR.
where else can I go for a decent periodical?
View my blog at http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
You know, the one who endorsed the conservative. Actually, they are a great and interesting read - my favorite, among others, is the inside front page, full of short blurbs. I thoroughly recommend HE, and they are unapologetically conservative in the best sense.
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
The ever-inscrutable Neil.....
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
And in spite of the seemingly relentless McCain shilling that goes on here at times, and God bless TBone but I plan on staying around, RedState is and will remain prominent among conservative abodes for study, debate, and acrimony.
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
I will have to look at them in depth...
View my blog at http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/
Is not a conservative - at least, in any sense that I can discern - she appears to be a mostly Republican voter based entirely upon the war in Iraq.
That is fine, as far as it goes, but I have no idea why she is continually given column space in ostensibly conservative publications.
------------
The Red Sox Republican: Burkeanism, Baseball, and Sundries.
I have serious problems with a lot of the overwrought anti-McCain rhetoric, but I would be the last person to suggest that it is free-floating unfocused rage. Other than the folks who are super-invested in Romney, people hate John McCain either because they personally hate him or because they have specific policy grievances with the man.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
I will be surprised if he doesn't explode at some point during the general. Then again, he hasn't during this heated primary so there is some hope at least on that front.
And I also have some issues with his personality because I sometimes doubt that he'll be able to reconstruct the "big tent" that he is going to need in order to win. But if I could support Romney because I truly beleived he was sincere when he said he had been wrong on abortion, I can believe in the possibility that McCain can prove me wrong on those doubts. None of these people are monoliths or caricatures, despite how much the instigators want us to think that way. All of them are experienced, seasoned adults with complex personalities and I believe all of them are capable of adapting and changing.
In McCain's case, Change is Good. He needs to stand by his high-minded intentions to reunite the Party, because the fact is that he needs us, too.
And I do, and I do. It was never *unfocused* rage.
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
The past 24 hours here at RedState and elsewhere in Conservativedom have shown me precisly why this Republic needs laws, Federalism and the individual right to bear arms, sadly. I don't know how these wounds are going to heal, but I wish people on all sides of this internal debate would cease and desist from imputing the worse possible motives and character traits to candidates they don't prefer and their supporters + dogs. Words are being said here that can never be forgotten and tend to persist in the memory for a generation or more.
You know, if I had wanted to, three years ago I could have started kicking The Weekly Standard on the basis of things Jack Abramoff told me in private email conversations just prior to his convictions. I held my tongue at the time -- even though those things had a certain ring of truth -- because I didn't want to lend any credibility to a man whose actions and character were profoundly damaging to the Republican Party. Nevertheless, when a man is taking his long march to the gallows there's very little reason for him to lie, and I can fairly say that he predicted Bill Kristol and The Weekly Standard's support of John McCain, with quite a bit of fidelity. How's that for knowing your "enemy?"
All of our candidates have moral fiber and integrity, and decency, and so do their supporters. We differ on many things but we need to stop referring to each other with words that can never be retracted and are seldom forgotten.
There is a prevailing idea out there that conservatives need McCain more than he needs conservatives.
Maybe in 1976 and 1996 but not this time.
-----------------------------------------------
"It is the American sound. It is hopeful, big-hearted, idealistic, daring, decent, and fair. That's our heritage; that is our song. We sing it still."
-RWR January 21, 1985
I think that's imputing some kind of dark and dank motive to the McCain campaign that I just don't think it has in any larger measure than the other campaigns in this race. I would have much preferred if Romney had done better in the southern states yesterday and made this into a closer contest, and I wish that Fred Thompson had stayed in the race and was ahead of both of them at this point, but these are wishes not results.
On the other hand it is a mistake of the first order to look at the results and reflexively claim that they happened because of the worst possible motives, some dark and dank conspiracy. This is liberal thinking. We need to stop it. Romney didn't win in a lot of places despite having a big advantage in media buys, and there's real merit to the argument that a lot of the blame rests with his campaign for its own failures. At least, that's the way Conservatives are supposed to think. We need to stop attributing our situation to the Hobbesian machinations of others. It's a disease of the mind.
John McCain will, if he wins the nomination, assuredly be a much better President than either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. At the same time, given last night's results, there is no clear reason for Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee to drop out of the race given the investment they have in it. So either we're going to have to get used to the fact that this is going to go on for quite a while longer and find the means to become civil with each other again, or we really will fly apart as a Party.
Which is a terrible shame, because if you boil it down without name tags attached we share so much in common against our actual adversaries in this contest.
"We differ on many things but we need to stop referring to each other with words that can never be retracted and are seldom forgotten."
"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
There's too much at stake for this country for us not to work to build bridges again instead of burning them down. Right now we look like a bunch of petty tribalists. Well, the British Empire wrote the book on what happens to tribalists when they get divided -- they get conquered. Let's not do it to ourselves.
In a sense, what's currently happening at least in the blogosphere reminds me of what goes on when business partners who start companies together begin to squabble. It begins with a difference on some key issue that starts a little crack in the fuselage, so to speak, and unless it's recognized for what it is, the crack propogates because nobody will repair it, and pretty soon the monocoque is coming apart at 35,000 feet and everybody is in the air with no oxygen and no parachutes. [CRATER]
Dispensing with the aviation metaphor, I've seen it happen in businesses with people who had been lifelong friends, who at one time relied on their differences as strengths and complements to each other, as sounding boards and because it was a good division of labor, and as partners. Then, some beef gets started over what is in the scheme of things a relatively minor disagreement, each starts holding grudges and imputing evil motives to the other, and that thinking snowballs and becomes increasingly self-fulfilling until the differences are actually irreconcilable, actually serious and catastrophic. Then the company flies apart, or someone embezzles all the Accounts Receivable, or defects to a competitor, or -- in extreme cases -- someone winds up dead or in the hospital. I'm from New Jersey. I've seen it happen.
Well, we can't let it happen to this Party. The Republican Partnership *must* be a strong coalition in this election cycle. And so we're going to have to stop the cracks from spreading before they get any larger.
There's a lot of hype surrounding this allegorical "free-floating rage" and a lot of it is imagined and is a result of a lot of sloppy thinking -- screaming and yelling, not argument and persuasion, thanks absentee (!).
My father woke up this morning and red the returns from last night and he's not in a fit of "free-floating rage" although he's sad that Romney didn't do better in the South. He's also not the kind of person who throws in the towel easily, and so it's quite appropriate for him to insist that Romney continue his campaign if he thinks he should. That's how the Democratic process works, it's how *everything* works when determined people are involved in a process where there can only be one winner: if you have an iota of character, and if you respect all of your supporters (and Romney has many) -- you don't just fold up your tent and go home unless and until it is perfectly clear that there is nothing whatsoever to be achieved by continuing. And I expect that Romney will continue until he reaches that decision himself.
In the meantime, we are better than this, my friends. Some of the posting that I saw last night was so out-of-bounds that it made me really question the value of this medium -- yet again.
If the general goes badly and if Clinton (let alone Obama) pulls off a huge win, we will be able to point to a number of factors. Some were beyond our control, others were not. The Weekly Standard has not been helpful as far as party unity and would make a fine focal point of some post-election, pre-purge rage.
I strongly hope conservatives turn out to vote in November, and also expect they will. If they need any incentive, it is this one: someone will be blamed if things go badly. Don't let it be you. The way to regain party control is to remain active. If we manage to win, you still have a seat at the table. If we lose, you can force introspection and reform on your terms.
As for Emery...well, this site has rules.
Gave up WS after a one year subscription because of this 'elitist' 'conservative' attitude.
I remain a proud 29 year subscriber to Human Events.
"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Could not have been better (or more eloquently) spoken.
GB
De Opresso Liber
But you gotta love Matt Labash! His piece, "Canada: A Great White Waste of Time" was brilliant! I keep that magazine for the simple reason that he writes for them. He is a great talent and very entertaining. I also find Fred Barnes insightful and thoughtful. It is still a good magazine.
I can do without Matthew Continetti as well.
At least at the WS they still want to win it, and they feel morally invested. Buckley came out against the war early on with Buchanan and the others.
Our troops have been completely forgotten by the Republicans.
These are sad times in deed. We can go ahead with these ideologica purges until nothing is left. The statists are laughing.
What about the wars?
"The most dangerous form in which oppression can overshadow a community is that of popular sway" -James Fenimore Cooper
If McCain wishes to be elected, he might want to read something other than the Weekly Standard, as flattering as it may be to his ego.
For the record, though, I have no grudge against The Weekly Standard. It was the first conservative magazine I subscribed to, and has made plenty of solid contributions to Conservative thought.
____________
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
I don't have a particular grudge against them either. It is their right as an independent publication to endorse and promote a candidate, and that's what they've done with McCain. I just think that based on this article, if McCain uses the Standard as his main source of information on what the right is thinking, he will be doing himself a huge disservice. But it will be a hard choice to make given the prestige of the magazine, and how attractive he must find their opinions.
Of course, the solution is to read Redstate!
I'm not sure how you conclude this (unless you're thinking that Buchanan represents a large portion of the GOP)
I think Republican concern about Iraq is one of 2 or 3 factors which has propelled McCain to the front of the pack, and is one of two reasons (the other being SCOTUS) which would cause disaffected conservatives to hold their nose and vote for McCain anyway.
"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
stay at home in the general. Noone talks about it here, on talk radio, or on FOX.
You can't seriously say people have been talking about the effect the conservative base's rejection of McCain will have on the future of Afghanistan and Iraq.
C'mon.
"The most dangerous form in which oppression can overshadow a community is that of popular sway" -James Fenimore Cooper
and not just from passionate McCain supporters who almost always list that as their #1 reason for voting for John. And if you go back through all the posts from those who have a long list of issues with McCain's penchant for linking up with Liberal Democrats, the biggest two reasons given over and over again as to why they'll hold their noses and vote for him come November are Iraq & the SCOTUS.
In fact, I've seen many, posts from passionate McCain supporters who say that without us being at war, they would be OK with sitting this one out. So, from my view, Republicans, as usual, are very much supporting the troops.
"All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Samo, samo. Both parties are wedded to IOU's and backroom political deals. The guys in charge, and the vast majority of the voters, are not smart enough to recognize that a new paradigm is needed. We actually need to elect a competent, intelligent visionary. However, we can't get him nominated.
For 20 years, McCain has been making backroom deals and getting snookered. All in the name of politics, not patriotism,. Huckabee is a good ole boy with an abysmal understanding of what really ails this country. McCain doesn't care, as long as he can make deals.
Talk about turning points. If this country doesn't hand the reins to someone who understands trade deals, loss of national wealth, China, Russia and the Middle East oil game, we can't reverse the damage that has been done by idiots in the pocket of crooks.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
that when one of McCain's backroom deals ("I can work with Democrats to Get Things Done) results in the imposition of liberal policies, or blocks conservative policies -- that it wasn't McCain's goal all along.
It wasn't McCain that got snookered.
Comparing apples to apples, and MA to the United States. McCain Feingold may put Obama in the White House. An untested, vapid, ideologue who can be pushed in any direction.
I am saying that McCain has had an opportunity to exercise national leadership. Show me how he has advanced the issues that are critical to our national survival. Petraeus was the author of the surge.
surge a reality. McCain was an early and important voice in advancing this plan. Let's not take even that away from the man.
"The most dangerous form in which oppression can overshadow a community is that of popular sway" -James Fenimore Cooper
I have a subscription to WS, but after all this pro-McCain crap they've been shoveling lately i don;t think a renewal will be in order. I think the National Review will get my business.
View my blog at http://preacherskid.blogdrive.com/