Saturday, June 22, 2019

Sometimes Conservatives Say What Needs to Be Said

Of course, CWL-in-exile has Jim Pauwels writing in this vein, saying what needs to be said.

Today, Bret Stephens of the NYTimes (formerly of the WSJ, and who knows where else) said something that needs to be said to the Democratic circular firing squad and his colleagues at the Times.

He begins by writing of long-ago lunches with an Iranian "diplomat." The  "conversations ... were exceptionally candid. He almost surely sought me out because my pro-Israel stance represented, in the view of the regime he served, the core beliefs of Zionist-occupied Washington. In turn, I got a crisply articulated sense of Iran’s strategic thinking along with invitations to meet with various Iranian leaders...."

Stephens, citing Aristotle, calls this "a friendship of utility," "adventitious, opportunistic and usually short-lived."  He goes on to defend Joe Biden's "friendships" with segregationists Herman Talmidge and James Eastland. Stephens presumably no fan of Biden observes: "He simply dealt with the Congress as he found it and looked for opportunities to be constructive and consequential rather than destructive and obnoxious." The point of Biden's critics: "to rid the party of compromisers of any sort — that is, to purge the Democratic Party of its democratic instincts."

He concludes: "The irony here is that the left’s apocalyptic tendencies have everything in common with the behavior of the Trumpian right: the smash-mouth partisanship; the loathing for moderates on its own side; the conviction that its opponents are unbelievably stupid as well as irredeemably evil...."

16 comments:

  1. Yeah, I agreed with Stephens. What is ecumenism if it isn't talking to people you disagree with? And as a famous liberal president once said, Jaw-jaw is better than War-war.

    But I was afraid the walking brain dead would turn the race for the nomination into the kind of nit-picking it already has become.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I can agree with Stephens and other conservatives who have reached this conclusion, but I won't use it as a limp excuse to vote for a second Trump term, which I suspect is how many Repubs will respond.

    I can name very few Democrats on the current slate who even come close to Trump's inexperience, willful ignorance, and sheer moral turpitude.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unbelievable that some religious people choose Trump as their standard bearer when he's publicly broken just about every one of the ten commandments, and is the living embodiment of Dunning Kreuger effect.

      Delete
    2. Wonderful, Katherine! The Dunning Kruger Effect is a terrific return on my investment of vitandus. And it fits him to a T.

      Btw, the only stable genius I ever heard of was Secretariat.

      Delete
    3. You're welcome, Tom. And I like Secretariat as the stable genius.

      Delete
    4. Not unbelievable at all. He has handed them a conservative supreme court, and they hope this will make it easier to overturn abortion and gay rights, and reduce government regs. He is a useful idiot.

      Delete
    5. Yes, a useful idiot, to those who are apparently willing to accept a lot of collateral damage to our democracy as the price of getting their way. And as long as the idiocy doesn't directly impact them.

      Delete
    6. I don't think Trumpers are interested in democracy. They're interested in domination.

      If Ruth Bader Ginsberg leaves the court before 2020 and the Repubs get another SC appointee, it will be interesting to see whether the party is willing to defer to the Trumpers for a whole other term.

      At some level, good Republicans MUST be feeling that Trump is a ticking time bomb and they know that, given another four years, even the Democrats would be able to scrape up enough evidence for the Nixon Walk of Shame to the Helicopter.

      Delete
  3. But there IS an apocalypse coming or a reasonable facsimile thereof. Some of the Democrats get it. Hardly any Republicans do. And regarding economics, the center is the center of what? Moderation is what, compromise between Attila and Ghengis? The environment and economic inequality are the two big ones. I wish the Dems would lower emphasis on the rest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree wholeheartedly. I also wish that Bernie and Uncle Joe would bow out and the lowest-polling Dems would pick one of the remaining top five to endorse. This is is a cluster you-know-what.

      Delete
    2. Yeah. Right now the progressive vote is split between Sanders and Warren. Were Bernie to withdraw, Warren would be equal to Biden in the polls. I align more closely philosophically with Bernie than Warren, but I like Warren's proposals and specificity. And I'm not comfortable with Bernie's age.

      Delete
  4. Regarding tensions within the Democratic coalition (too early know whether it will turn into a circular firing squad): Pete Buttagieg apparently has had to temporarily suspend his campaign in order to deal with an issue in his town, South Bend, IN, that is dismally familiar: a white cop shot a black citizen, somehow managing to have his body cam turned off when the shooting took place.

    Buttagieg is the bright white technocrat from central casting. But even articulate, Ivy League-educated technocrats struggle to deal with the messiness of racial tensions and African-American/police relations. He might consult Rahm Emanuel, who could almost be his articulate-technocratic mentor, except that Emanuel now has "former" affixed to his mayoral title because of an inability to deal effectively with racial tensions and African-American/police relations.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So, isn't this the week when they have some start-out debates? I think we will have a better idea who are viable candid after that.
    I hope Buttigieg will still be able to participate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did see that Buttigieg still plans to take part in the debates.
      One thing I will be listening for are concrete plans of how the candidates aim to pay for the things they want to do (I'm looking at you, Bernie and Elizabeth). Just saying "tax the rich" isn't going to cut it, and they know it. There's a gap between what might be just and what is possible. W

      Delete
    2. Aargh, typos. "candid" @ 12:22 AM should be candidates. Don't know why a W showed up at the end of 3:28 PM. Clumsy fingers, I guess.

      Delete
  6. I agree with Stanley that "there IS an apocalypse coming or a reasonable facsimile thereof.” The problem is that the apocalypse is both huge and slow-moving. And there will be massive resistance to any plans that attempt to actually deal with the climate or inequality, not to mention the cost and disruption. I can’t imagine any candidate actually speaking frankly about this and still having a chance to be elected.

    ReplyDelete