We all laughed at Trigglypuff, the name for the hamhock-armed liberal who protested the appearance of Milo Yiannopoulos and other conservatives on April 25 at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.
Her seated temper tantrum and Baby Huey appearance came to symbolize a nation of unserious people whose men no longer wear trousers, but rather cargo shorts.
While we all should feel a tinge of guilt over the humiliation the woman suffers for her act of intolerance in a public place, I don't. She attended an event not to listen to the speakers but to shout them down.
Which leads to her brethren -- Clinton acolytes who embedded in conservative media and now arise to tear down the most conservative candidate since George Walker Bush. These conmen are in better in their appearance but just as doughy and intemperate in their thinking.
The two examples of I cite today are Pulitzer winners Charles Krauthammer (1987) and Bret Stephens (2013). Both men have spent the past year making personal attacks on Donald Trump over things he said while excusing and overlooking the evil things Hillary Clinton actually did.
But Krauthammer's defection should not surprise us. He was so impressed by Reagan's presidency that Krauthammer worked for Fritz Mondale in a feckless attempt to derail Reagan's re-election.
On Megyn Kelly's show last week, Krauthammer said he cannot vote for Clinton or Trump:
Well, look, it's a question of conscience. The fact is I cannot vote for Donald Trump. I thought that on the day he announced. I said it that night. I said on Special Report I didn't think he was even a serious candidate. I got that wrong about the fact that he wouldn't be a factor but I think I got it right that he is unfit for the presidency and I have never changed my mind on that.
As to Hillary, the dilemma I started out my column today in the Washington Post is she is a cynical politician with an empty core of where her beliefs are supposed to be to the extent she has them as a conventional liberal which is a threat to the Constitution. And you saw in the last debate where she said basically the point of the Supreme Court is to defend the little guy. The oath of office for a judge is to say that he does not -- explicitly they have to swear not to recognize rich or poor. This is completely overturning of the point of the law.Krauthammer has forgotten all it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
By not opposing Clinton, Krauthammer forever relinquished his right to complain about any Supreme Court decision because a serious man who realize the power of judicial nomination is the greatest of all the presidential powers. Not wishing to back down on his phobia over Trump, Krauthammer shows no interest in reining in the judiciary. Once a Mondale Democrat, always a Mondale Democrat.
Also, a serious man would examine what a candidate says and who he is before immediately dismissing him. Despite his marketing, Krauthammer shows all the intellectual curiosity of our friend Trigglypuff who atends lectures not to listen but to shout down the speaker.
Equally contemptible is Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal who told Hugh Hewitt this summer:
I will never vote for Donald Trump. I have a very, very hard time voting for Mrs. Clinton. I have been, I have been writing about Hillary Clinton, I just actually looked this up, since 1998 when she was busy standing by when Suha Arafat was launching anti-Semitic tirades against Israel and the Jews. And Hillary Clinton’s record in office is dreadful. Her ideas are dreadful. They will make us less safe. So, but there is no way I’m going to vote for a guy who is just totally uninformed, un-presidential as Donald Trump is.So Stephens not only does not care about the Supreme Court, but he cares nothing about American lives. His thinking is loopy, as he also told Hewitt:
Let me add one more point to that, Hugh. The United States survives so long as at least one of its major parties is politically and intellectually healthy. I don’t think the Republican Party, or I should say the Republican Party as the vehicle for modern American conservative ideas, survives with Donald Trump. I think a Donald Trump presidency sets up an Elizabeth Warren ascendancy. And it not Elizabeth Warren, someone of her ilk. And I think that’s dreadful. I think a Donald Trump presidency raises a new kind of version of conservatism which more closely resembles a kind of Father Coughlin, America first populism and nativism and isolationism, than the confident, modern, cosmopolitan, thoughtful, engaged conservatism of Ronald Reagan and Paul Ryan.So Stephens will support Clinton in order to stop Warren? That makes no damned sense at all. Did he vote for Obama to stop the ascendancy of Clinton?
By "politically and intellectually healthy," Stephens means undemocratic. You people will be told what to think by men like Krauthammer who make a decision and then research to find evidence supporting that call. It is the global warming approach to political science.
Today, Stephens wrote about how "his" Republican Party has left him. He began:
I grew up with parents who liked the old line that they didn’t leave the Democratic Party—the Democratic Party left them. My father’s political heroes were Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman. My mother had been a campaign volunteer for Sen. Eugene McCarthy in 1968. But the party of George McGovern was not for them. As the left turned on “Amerika,” they kept faith in America.He never fleshed out why he rejected the teachings of his parents. But then, given the rubbish of that last sentence, perhaps he never rejected their teachings at all.
And how deep a thinker can he be? His main argument against Trump is that he says things that are impolite:
Culture, civility and character: For decades, conservative publishers have issued a long succession of titles on the importance of personal character to the preservation of democratic institutions. Notable on the list William J. Bennett’s “The Book of Virtues,” whose first chapter deals with the importance of self-discipline. The former secretary of education followed that one up with “The Death of Outrage: Bill Clinton and the Assault on American Ideals,” timed to the Lewinsky scandal.
These books were not wrong. Character counts. The example set by a leader colors the culture of the company, institution or country he leads. We long for presidents who might follow Washington’s “Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior.” Rule No. 1: “Every Action done in Company, ought to be with Some Sign of Respect, to those that are Present.”
Where, in the apparently limitless forgiveness GOP voters are willing to extend to Mr. Trump for his public affronts to “that face” Carly or that “nasty woman” Hillary Clinton, is that Republican Party today?Again, words matter more to him than criminal actions.
Both men allow liberals to frame the campaign not as a difference in issues and approaches to governance, but rather on the latest gaffe Trump made.
But both men also work for the Murdoch family which has invested millions in Clinton's election. These pipers play the Murdoch tune.
Krauthammer and Stephens are Trigglypuff conservatives, jumping in their seats and waving their arms to protest the man who won the nomination of the Republican Party.
The majesty of the English language provides a word for such people: Democrats.
Please read "Trump the Press," a fun romp through the Republican nomination that uses the deadliest weapon to skewer the media experts: their own words. "Trump the Press" is available as a paperback, and on Kindle.