Monday, January 14, 2008

Clinton Conservatives, Go Home.

Writes Vox Day:
Now, it is true that some individuals are very liberal in their youth and become more conservative as they get older. But if one examines the "conservative" media, one notices a surprising number of individuals who were liberals and claim to be conservatives now, but still continue to advocate the same powerful and intrusive central government that they advocated in their liberal youth. And like young cuckoos and cowbirds, these parasites attempt to push the genuine intellectual heirs out of the nest, hence National Review founder William F. Buckley's attacks on Murray Rothbard and Joe Sobran, FrontPage's Ben Johnson's call for "modern conservatives" to repudiate Paul Craig Roberts, National Review's David Frum's call for "a conservatism of the future" to turn its back on Patrick Buchanan, Robert Novak, Llewellyn Rockwell, Samuel Francis, Thomas Fleming, Scott McConnell, Justin Raimondo, Joe Sobran, Charley Reese, Jude Wanniski, Eric Margolis and Taki Theodoracopulos.

And just last week, National Review's Kathryn Lopez demanded "Ron Paul, Go Home" in bold-face type, which is a very strange thing for a supposed conservative to say about the man who is indisputably the only genuinely conservative Republican candidate for president.

This is not conservative behavior; it is the language and the controlling tactics of the left. These supposedly "conservative" individuals are not advocating anything that is even remotely recognizable as historical conservatism, but, nevertheless, claim that advocating big government policies, strong government actions, heroic government measures and imperialist government interventions are a new, shiny and better conservatism for the future. If this all sounds very familiar, it should, because it is nothing less than Clinton conservatism.

It is not the real conservatives, but the word thieves who need to go home; go home to the statist, authoritarian, big-government left where they rightly and truly belong.

Fascist Mitt

Think it's hyperbole?

Marc Ambinder quotes Romney:
"First, we have to tackle the problems head on. If I am your President, in my first 100 days, I will roll up my sleeves, and I will personally bring together industry, labor, Congressional and state leaders to develop a plan to rebuild America's automotive leadership. It will be one that works for Michigan and that works for the American taxpayers." [emphasis added]
Uh...can anybody say, Corporativismo? Jonah, can we get a ruling on this?

(Hat tip: Laura Ebke)

More

More resented, more distrusted, more despised.

A reasonable barometer of sympathy for terrorism among moderate Arabs? Yes, I think so.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

What's Wrong with the GOP

Mark Shea says it: "[C]onservatism as prostitution to the power of Leviathan."

My frustration with many rank-and-file conservatives stems from what I see as their affection for power...not that they wish to wield it themselves necessarily, as liberals do, but they are warm to its existence and ready to compromise themselves in defense of its exertion by those with whom they identify.

It's why "strength" is the magic word of nearly every Republican campaign.

(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan)

Friday, January 11, 2008

"I Want This Man For President."

Over at NRO Derb responds to Andrew Sullivan's remarks about Ron Paul yesterday.
Just so. Furthermore, I doubt Paul has ever been any different. I had a most interesting email yesterday from a friend in Texas. My friend's father was a slightly-cranky far-rightist who'd corresponded with Paul in the early 1980s. He'd send Paul one of his letters (my friend has preserved them) ranting about something or other. Paul would send a polite letter back, calmly agreeing with the bits he agreed with (limited government, Constitution) and pointedly ignoring the nuttier bits. Letters that were all nuttiness got no response from Paul.

That's our man. He's a rock. And if you're crazy, he's fine with it.

You can b-s in the sound bites, but you can't b-s for a full 65 minutes of questioning. Sit through this (noting, in passing, that the mean IQ of the audience is around 140), then tell me if you can that Ron Paul wasn't the straightest arrow on the stage last night. I want this man for president.

Ron Paul's Best Debate Performance Yet?

I think it was, far and away. Giuliani's vulturine giggle and McCain's frozen shield of a smirk could not have been more repulsive, nor more revealing of an ignorance determined to find a consensus.

Paul's intelligent answers shone through all the rubbish.

Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8

Part 7 was probably his most outstanding moment.

Sticking It Out

Immediately following the disappointing result in New Hampshire, I had begun a post lamenting the fact that Ron Paul didn't get the 3rd place finish that I felt was the minimum he needed in order to generate the buzz of a major upset and go on to be a factor in this year's Republican primaries. My mood was dark.

Then I saw this:



Be change. It doesn't start anywhere else.