All errors should be reported to

Monday, July 04, 2016

National Review, insulting conservatives so Vox doesn't have to

In the old days, in order for a conservative to be called racist, misogynist and stupid, you had to read Daily Kos, Vox, Salon, or any of the other liberal Web sites that are subsidized by some sugar daddy.

But now, thanks to the obsessive hatred of Trump by its editors, the National Review will gladly give a daily dose of insult to any conservative who dares support the Republican nominee this year. Theirs is not inferior ridicule either, as the ad hominem attacks served are as nasty as anything George Soros ever paid for.

The National Review's go-to attacker is Kevin D. Williamson.

His offering on Friday:
Two things: First, it is impossible for a mentally and emotionally normal adult to support Donald Trump’s bid for the presidency without calling into question his judgment or his honor. Second, it is easier to forgive defective judgment than deficient honor.
This is an old liberal trick of voter-shaming that dates back to at least Reagan. You are crazy and without honor if you support Trump because the National Review said so, so shut up.

Williamson loves to tar Trump supporters as racist. From a May 15 piece on Texas voters:
The threat isn't Hispanic voters’ fixation on immigration. The threat is Anglo voters’ fixation on immigration.
He is from Amarillo, so that makes him an expert on Texas. Later in the piece he wrote:
But that is what the Trump movement is about: Murdering the Republican party as a vessel of classical liberalism of the Adam Smith variety and reanimating it, Frankenstein-style, as a vehicle of Anglo identity politics.
Subtle. Racism is now "Anglo identity politics."

Apparently it is OK to be the head of the Federation of Hispanic Republicans, whom he quoted favorably, but not OK to believe in enforcing existing immigration laws because that is just "Anglo identity politics." It is a liberal argument mouthed by a Washington conservative. Willliamson is rather good at it.

Earlier he was not subtle in a piece called The Father-F├╝hrer (a redundancy) now titled Chaos in the Family, Chaos in the State: The White Working Class’s Dysfunction as well. Williamson's piece was a rebuttal to a piece by liberal Michael Brendan Dougherty who mentioned the hamlet of Garbutt, New York, which is so small that the Census Bureau does not list its population.

Dougherty wrote:
The conservative movement has next to zero ideas for improving the life of the typical opioid dependent who lives in Garbutt, New York, outside of Rochester. Let's call him Mike.
Maybe they will make a child tax credit refundable against payroll taxes for Mike. He could get a voucher for a private school, but there aren't many around and he can't make up the difference in tuition costs anyway. In truth, the conservative movement has more ideas for making Mike's life more desperate, like cutting off the Social Security Disability check he's been shamefacedly receiving. It's fibromyalgia fraud, probably. Movement spokesmen might consent to a relaxation of laws against gambling near Mike's congressional district, so that Mike can get a job dealing at a blackjack table. More likely Mike ends up on the wrong side of the table, losing a portion of the SSD check to Sheldon Adelson. Finally, the movement's favorite presidential candidate would like to put American armed forces ahead of a Sunni army outside of Homs, Syria, to fight Bashar al-Assad, ISIS, and al Nusra simultaneously. Russia too, if they don't respect a no-fly zone. Mike's daughter will be among the first round of American women to get a draft card. Mike reads this news and thinks, "Your momma wears combat boots" used to be an insult.
If the conservative movement has any advice for Mike, it's to move out of Garbutt and maybe "learn computers." Any investments he made in himself previously are for naught. People rooted in their hometowns? That sentimentalism is for effete readers of Edmund Burke. Join the hyper-mobile world.
And if Mike runs into a conservative reporter outside a Donald Trump rally, that reporter will then take to the pages of his conservative news outlet and talk about Mike the way a family talks about a distant dementia-afflicted uncle on his deathbed in a jurisdiction where assisted suicide is legal. Officially there's some concern expressed for the poor man's sanity. But the undertone of the remarks comes across as "Couldn't he just die already? We've got important things to attend to (in Syria, of course)." Who has time for trade protectionism?
Williamson indeed fulfilled Dougherty's prediction. Williamson wrote:
If you spend time in hardscrabble, white upstate New York, or eastern Kentucky, or my own native West Texas, and you take an honest look at the welfare dependency, the drug and alcohol addiction, the family anarchy—which is to say, the whelping of human children with all the respect and wisdom of a stray dog—you will come to an awful realization. It wasn’t Beijing. It wasn’t even Washington, as bad as Washington can be. It wasn’t immigrants from Mexico, excessive and problematic as our current immigration levels are. It wasn’t any of that.
Of course, Williamson did not bother to visit Garbutt. But he knows all about small, rural, white American towns because he grew up in Amarillo.

Population 196,429.

Williamson's piece ended:
The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die. Economically, they are negative assets. Morally, they are indefensible. The white American underclass is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles. Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin. What they need isn’t analgesics, literal or political. They need real opportunity, which means that they need real change, which means that they need U-Haul. If you want to live, get out of Garbutt, New York.
In summary, Dougherty wrote: "If the conservative movement has any advice for Mike, it's to move out of Garbutt and maybe learn computers."

Offended, Williamson replied: "They need real opportunity, which means that they need real change, which means that they need U-Haul. If you want to live, get out of Garbutt, New York."

Gee, why would people in Garbutt reject National Review's brand of conservatism, in favor of an America First conservatism that fights the DC Establishment?

Make no mistake, the National Review has devolved into a RAT organization -- Republicans Against Trump -- which is doing Hillary Clinton's dirty work. Rather than accept losing honorably, they have through duplicitous means worked to undermine Trump's convention, cheering on the appointment of Cruz moles as Trump delegates who will "rebel" against Trump. They tell themselves four years of Hillary won't be so bad with a Republican Congress. Then Cruz will rise and crush her re-election chances. But it is Trump or go home. President Hillary is the fascist they warned us against in school. At any rate, I recommend that readers stop going to Kos or Vox to be insulted, but rather read the National Review because at least it isn't funded by George Soros.


"Trump the Press" is now on sale. Please purchase "Trump the Press" through Create Space, as I get a larger royalty. It is a subsidiary of Amazon.

The book also is on Amazon.

Regardless of how you purchase this must reading for Trump supporters and media critics alike. Please post a book review on the Amazon site. That helps attract other readers.

They have begun work on the Kindle edition.


  1. "the Republican party as a vessel of classical liberalism"

    Um, when did this happen? I remember Republicans as the party of Eisenhower, Reagan, and TR.

    The party Willamson speaks of is the party of John Lindsay, Michael Bloomberg, and other hoity-toity sellouts.

    1. Classical liberalism IS conservatism, which has been greatly missed in the GOP for some years.

  2. Do people who haven't made up their mind about a candidate really read those publications? Seems to me to be like my wife reading the latest issue of Guns and Ammo to read the review on the .500 S&W. Out here in fly over country we don't rely on eastern publications to tell us how to think about barbeque, Ford trucks, or football. We grow up with our opinions about all that and politics too.

    I do question the Big 12's decision to let West Virginia join up. They should have tried to keep some of those losers like Missouri or Nebraska.

    Happy Independence Day!

  3. "National Review because at least it isn't funded by George Soros."

    Don't be so sure. He may be buying their wine and booking their cruises.

  4. "it is impossible for a mentally and emotionally normal adult to support Donald Trump’s bid for the presidency without calling into question his judgment or his honor"

    OK, the left calls me racist and the right calls me mentally defective. Bozos to the Left of me, Bozos to the Right of me. Screw them all. These "Righty'es" will get what they deserve in Hillary.

    1. I got 20 years service in the USAF that says it IS possible. I'm guessing Kevin has zero, zip, zilch, nada years of that, but lots of east-coast years.

  5. I held my nose and voted for their Dole, Bush, Bush, McCain, and Romney to support the Republican candidate. These guys, they can't do the same for one election cycle?

    They'd rather give Hillary the keys to the White House than win with Trump and then primarying him in four years with a "better" candidate?

    That's what kills me. And that's why I'm one step away from changing my party registration for good.

  6. Replies
    1. Thanks for the heads up Kitty.

      Sam C

  7. This is what is meant by "punching to the right". The libertarian and institutional conservative movements are enablers and enforcers for the left. I feel like a fool for having participated in the conservative fraud for so long. Until these people realize and assess the damage they've done and publicly declare some kind of repentance they should be ignored.

  8. No true conservative is for our present immigration disaster or any of the "reforms" pushed by the DC Uniparty. Elitist snobs like Williamson hate traditional America as much as Obama does.

  9. National Review has turned so far left it is beginning to sound more like the National Socialist Review. The country has been brought by Obama to the precipice. Some of us want to put on the brakes to keep from going over the edge. Kevin is willing to jump off the cliff with Hillary. Now who is the crazy one?

  10. IMHO National Review are anti-Trump for the same reasons I am. He is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. He may have some good points about illegal immigration, but like all populist preachers, lumps all immigration into one big lump and uses it to sell his schtick.

    It appears a sif I will have to hold my nose, gag, puke, and vote fro Trump, because the only alternative with a snowball's chance in hell of being elected is even worse. But I don't buy snake oil no matter who is selling it.

    I also believe that unless Hillary is indicted before election day Trump is going to be the recipient of an epic ass-whoopin' which could very well lead to enough down ticket fallout to give the
    Democrats the Senate. I also fully expect Trump lovers will blame those of us who didn't fall for the con. But I hope they will be satisfied with their man Trump when Elizabeth Warren, or some other like minded rat bastard commie, is sworn in to SCOTUS.

  11. Kevin Williamson is merely a fawning lickspittle trying to curry favor with his perceived betters at the NR and the GOP establishment.

    He is odious, as are his followers.