National Review Excommunicates Donald Trump

The Guardians of the One True Faith have spoken:

Against Trump

Donald Trump leads the polls nationally and in most states in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. There are understandable reasons for his eminence, and he has shown impressive gut-level skill as a campaigner. But he is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones.

Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy. (He and Bernie Sanders have shared more than funky outer-borough accents.) Since declaring his candidacy he has taken a more conservative line, yet there are great gaping holes in it.


Indeed, Trump’s politics are those of an averagely well-informed businessman: Washington is full of problems; I am a problem-solver; let me at them. But if you have no familiarity with the relevant details and the levers of power, and no clear principles to guide you, you will, like most tenderfeet, get rolled. Especially if you are, at least by all outward indications, the most poll-obsessed politician in all of American history. Trump has shown no interest in limiting government, in reforming entitlements, or in the Constitution. He floats the idea of massive new taxes on imported goods and threatens to retaliate against companies that do too much manufacturing overseas for his taste. His obsession is with “winning,” regardless of the means — a spirit that is anathema to the ordered liberty that conservatives hold dear and that depends for its preservation on limits on government power. The Tea Party represented a revival of an understanding of American greatness in these terms, an understanding to which Trump is tone-deaf at best and implicitly hostile at worst. He appears to believe that the administrative state merely needs a new master, rather than a new dispensation that cuts it down to size and curtails its power.


Trump nevertheless offers a valuable warning for the Republican party. If responsible men irresponsibly ignore an issue as important as immigration, it will be taken up by the reckless. If they cannot explain their Beltway maneuvers — worse, if their maneuvering is indefensible — they will be rejected by their own voters. If they cannot advance a compelling working-class agenda, the legitimate anxieties and discontents of blue-collar voters will be exploited by demagogues. We sympathize with many of the complaints of Trump supporters about the GOP, but that doesn’t make the mogul any less flawed a vessel for them.

Some conservatives have made it their business to make excuses for Trump and duly get pats on the head from him. Count us out. Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.

Donald Trump is not a conservative? Next you’ll be telling me he’s not really a Republican either.

But wait! There’s more!

The Republican National Committee has disinvited National Review from participating in the Feb. 25 GOP debate because of its outspoken opposition to Donald Trump.

The decision was announced just hours after the conservative magazine published a special anti-Trump issue that included a scathing editorial about the Republican frontrunner and critical contributions from 22 conservative pundits and thought leaders.

“Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited,” Jack Fowler, the publisher of National Review, wrote in a statement. “The reason: Our ‘Against Trump’ editorial and symposium.”

“We expected this was coming,” Fowler continued. “Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald.”

That sound you hear is tens of thousands of Trump supporters suddenly realizing that Trump Is Not The One. This will trigger a preference cascade and millions of uncommitted GOP voters will flock to the banners of True Cons like Ted Rubio and Marco Cruz.

End of scene, roll credits.

Look, I like National Review. It is one of my favorite political websites and has a bunch of really good writers. But this will not change anything. This is like telling a friend that they are in love with the wrong person.

It doesn’t matter what you say, they’re in LOVE.

The people who will be all excited about this article weren’t gonna vote for Trump anyway. It will just validate their existing opinions.

The people who are still undecided don’t read National Review.


About Deplorable Myiq2xu™

I'm a basket case.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

202 Responses to National Review Excommunicates Donald Trump

  1. Myiq2xu says:

  2. votermom says:

    • 49erDweet says:

      They also seem to ignore the sudden loss of political testosterone whenever most elected conservatives take office. If NR can’t see a problem there, and correct me if I’m wrong, they can’t be trusted with other things, either.

  3. votermom says:

    • Myiq2xu says:

      I understand where they are coming from. Most of them are sincere, rational conservatives. They have spend years advocating for conservative politicians and issues.

      Now here comes Donald Trump hijacking their party and their movement.

      They are 100% correct – Donald Trump is NOT a conservative.

      But so what? This is not about ideology. You cannot defeat Donald Trump with logic and reason. Detailed policy positions are meaningless.

      • votermom says:

        From the voter pov, what does it matter. We are sinking on the Titanic and a boat comes by offering rescue and they’re saying but it’s not the right kind of boat, don’t get in.

      • Somebody says:

        I agree Trump doesn’t pass the supposed conservative purity test, but neither do any of the other candidates. Ted Cruz comes the closest, but falls short of the mark on a few issues. Trust me if Ted Cruz was way out in front they would devote an issue to how divisive Ted Cruz is.

        Nope they’ve shown their establishment, inside the beltway souls to the world. These are the same people that have chided voters in the past for trying to give a conservative purity test to candidates. These are the same people who insisted other candidates were conservative enough and everybody should just get over it. Funny how Trump comes around and now there must be a purity test, what a bunch of assholes.

        I am sick and tired of the circular firing squad going on in republican circles. It’s true they can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, what a bunch of fucking morons. Another thing I’m sick of is Jeb fucking Bush and his TV ads……Marco is a flip, flopper… personal favorite is the one attacking Rubio on immigration, really, fuck you Jeb. There are also several attacking Trump, the latest of which portends to tell the future outcome of the general…..President Hillary, all because Trump was a weak candidate. Oh my fucking god that is soooo rich, Trump is a weak candidate?

        Jeb nobody likes you, go away. It’s like some rich kid that nobody likes and he wants a house or a car, but somehow the cool guy bought it……so the rich guy decides to burn it to the ground, because if he can’t have it nobody can.

        Somebody needs to sit Jeb’s ass down and have a talk with him and they need to do it sooner rather than later. The pundits and the party need to stop trying to engineer things. The candidates need to run their campaigns and we’ll see where the chips fall. If this kind of crap continues on much longer there will be no hope of coalescing for the general election. Instead of shooting inside the tent, might I suggest the mother fuckers turn and take aim at the other fucking party.

        *** Just for the record and in case any of you have forgotten, I have worked with Jeb Bush when he was governor. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, he was a good governor, not perfect but pretty good. I have defended Jeb here on TCH and on other sites. I have always felt it was unfair to judge him by his last name. This isn’t about his last name, he’s had a lack luster campaign, he’s tripped up multiple times, it just isn’t going to happen for him…..quite frankly there are a bunch of them it isn’t going to happen for.

        ***Another disclaimer, I’m not nor have I ever been a far right, fire brand conservative. I’ve always had disdain for those that want to attach a purity test and in times past agreed with the pundits……this tripe though takes the cake, hypocritical, smarmy, ass kissing mother fuckers.

        • Somebody says:

          Sorry for the rant, perhaps I should have had another cup of coffee before posting. Also, please pardon my profanity, I should have perhaps rephrased some of that.

          • Dora says:

            I can just imagine your rant if you had another cup of coffee. Yikes! Don’t be sorry. I loved reading it. 🙂

          • taw46 says:

            Don’t change a word, excellent rant!

          • votermom says:

            I thoroughly enjoyed your rant.

          • Myiq2xu says:

            I love a good rant.

          • Somebody says:

            Thanks, I heard about this last night and it really ticked me off. You know they might as well have all appeared naked on the cover, because they’ve all stripped down and shown us their naked souls. If they did appear naked and put Katie and Dana up front their circulation would have gone through the roof, LOL!

            Many of these same people have in the past insisted that a candidate has to have cross party appeal to win the general election…….a true conservative could never win. Now they criticize Trump for not being conservative enough…….um does that maybe mean he has that cross party appeal they’ve talked up in the past??? Hypocrites the lot of them.

            Somebody needs to do a what they really meant to say of this, because what they really meant to say is that Trump isn’t part of their club.

          • 49erDweet says:

            To be fair, the NR is a 19th century style organization running on 20th century ideas in the 21st century. They are whack!

          • taw46 says:

            Yes, right after the four appeared on Megyn’s show last night, NR had an all-out attack on Twitter. And some of the 22 were tweeting. All-out war on Trump. And the usual ones continued their attack on the Trump supporters. Yeah, that is the way to change minds, by insulting people. That is why I agree with you, Trump just isn’t part of their club. If he were gone, I believe all would turn their attack to Cruz.

          • elliesmom says:

            Profanity is much more effective coming from someone who seldom uses it.😉

          • Anthony says:

            Love you with no coffee!😀 Excellent rant!

          • piper says:

            No need for apologies – best to express your thoughts and feelings.
            Here’s Maxine’s and mine take on coffee.

          • swanspirit says:

            I enjoyed that rant very much , thanks.

        • lyn says:

          All of the above makes TCH great!

          • lildoggy4u says:

            I too enjoy it when we don’t have the echo chamber or group think but hear other points of view. Coffee or not, everybody keep saying whats on your mind and don’t hold back. I welcome the exchange of thoughts on here so much. Thats what makes this my home away from home. I also appreciate that everybody usually backs up what they have concluded or learned with links to sites I may have never seen or seldom visit. i hardly bother to look around anymore on the net but depend on all of you to direct me to what you’re reading an seeing. I keep an open mind and can be persuaded although I have my own bull headed opinions too.
            And we sometimes get a wonderful gift like a look at the galaxy as a “just because”.

      • DeniseVB says:

        Most of NRO were at Redstate last summer. You could tell they were Jebbies. At the time I was Walker/Cruz, and both of them packed a bigger crowd than Jeb! When Erick cancelled Trump, the crowd was a bit divided. Even though Trump was an add-on long after the registration deadline, you could feel the beginning of his surge by people sick of people making decisions for them.

        The NRO people I follow have been nit-picking at Trump for months by predicting his demise. I guess they felt a pile-on would be more effective ? I. don’ That which doth not kill The Donald will make him stronger.

      • Constance says:

        Well if they don’t vote Trump then they can have Hillary. Maybe “Conservative leaders” would prefer that so they can have a field day bitching for the next 8 years. Although I think Hillary is too old to serve for 8 years at this point and 4 years of Hillary is pretty iffy.

        • lyn says:

          It’s just another assault on the white working class. I like Trump, because he loves America. Yeah, maybe he should have been a governor, but the GOPe’s offering on that is limited to Kasich (puke), Christie (Obama hug) Huckabee (cop killer), Gilmore (where is he?) and Jeb! (double puke).

          • lizzy says:

            Maybe the NRO crowd over estimates the attraction of conservatism. I loathe Obama and his anti-American, Muslim loving ways. I ditched the Dems because he was so disgusting but social conservatives make me twitchy so I’m not going for a litmus test. Go Trump, or anyone who can reverse the 0.

  4. Dora says:

    There are no more labels. It’s about nationalism against globalism. That’s what it all comes down to. Unless he is really putting one over on us, DJT is a patriot.

    • Somebody says:

      Nationalist vs globalist is probably a good analogy. However taking on the mantle of nationalist will be construed as Nazism. The pundits both left and right will begin to scream…..”Here comes the Third Reich!” Some of that is already going in with regard to Trump.

      I think a better term to use would be patriot. Maybe someone else can come up with something better than that.

  5. elliesmom says:

    They’re voting for Bernie. He invited them over for the weekend.

  6. DeniseVB says:

    I guess there are those still left to support the case for DJT😉

  7. Dora says:

    Oh my. Another day in the life of the NYPD.🙂

    NYPD Captures Cow in Queens

    The animal fled a slaughterhouse in Jamaica Thursday afternoon

  8. Myiq2xu says:

    Is it wrong to be enjoying this?

    Do Republicans deserve to lose? Consider the state of play as we write this in late January, just days from the first GOP nominating contests.

    The Republican frontrunner is a longtime liberal whose worldview might best be described as an amalgam of pop-culture progressivism and vulgar nationalism. His campaign rallies are orgies of self-absorption, dominated by juvenile insults of those who criticize him and endless boasting about his poll numbers. He’s a narcissist and a huckster, an opportunist who not only failed to join conserv­atives in the big fights about the size and scope of government over the past several decades but, to the extent he was even aware of such battles, was often funding the other side, with a long list of contributions to the liberals most responsible for the dire state of affairs in the country, including likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

    In short, he’s an opposition researcher’s dream. But Republicans have spent tens of millions of dollars on political advertising this cycle and virtually none of it has targeted Donald Trump. He is poised to glide into the early-state contests having largely avoided the kind of sustained paid-media attacks that bring down candidates with far fewer vulnerabilities.

    Where is that money going? Much of it has been spent to attack Marco Rubio — more than $22 million since December 1, according to a Republican source who tracks campaign spending. Rubio defeated incumbent governor Charlie Crist for the Senate in 2010 as an antiestablishment, Tea Party candidate in Florida and won praise from across the GOP as the future of the Republican party and the face of modern conservatism. “You want conservative purity,” said Rush Limbaugh on September 7, 2011. “I’ll give it to you: Marco Rubio, who is someday going to be president of the United States.” Limbaugh was at least half right. Over his time in Congress, Rubio has earned a 98 percent rating from the American Conservative Union.

    His one moment of apostasy, if you want to call it that, came on immigration. But even there Rubio’s position at its core was very close to those held by other conservatives: Sean Hannity called for a “pathway to citizenship” after the 2012 elections, and Ted Cruz favored a pathway to legalization or at least repeatedly made that argument. Even Trump, whose rise is often attributed to his restrictionist immigration views, in 2013 pronounced himself open to “amnesty” after the border was secured.

    So here we are. The Republican frontrunner, a non­conservative longtime Democrat, is waltzing into GOP nominating contests largely untouched by GOP paid media. And the candidate long viewed as the party’s brightest hope for the future has been the subject of relentless negative ads.

    Who is to blame? Virtually everyone.

  9. Dora says:

  10. votermom says:


    • Somebody says:

      Yep they sure would be aiming at Cruz and initially that is where they aimed their incoming. Cruz is too conservative, he’s too divisive, he can’t get along with others, he’s crazy, blah, blah.

      If and this is a big if, but if Donald Trump were to be elected and did manage to make good on securing the border and deporting illegals (his biggest issue)…….without even trying he would reduce spending.

      He would reduce spending because all the illegals getting assistance wouldn’t be here to get assistance. He would reduce spending because all the iphone toting “refugees” wouldn’t be here getting assistance, if he’s true to his word. He would reduce current and future spending because he’d stop the flow of people coming in needing assistance and he’d dissolve the illegal cheap labor pool. He would succeed in reducing spending because jobs would be available for more Americans and those Americans would be paying taxes. He would succeed if he managed to do all that because with a flood of cheap labor leaving the country wages would most likely begin to increase, therefore tax revenues would too.

      All of that would be contingent on him being able to secure the border. If Trump were elected, I have a feeling Congress would suddenly figure out their powers and they would fight him tooth and nail on everything. I don’t know that he’d be able to do a lot of what he’s promised because I think he’d have to fight Congress to do it.

      • 49erDweet says:

        I’m choking up here, laughing over Congress “figuring out their powers”. Sorta like a walrus figuring out it stinks. Good luck with that.

  11. Dora says:

    Are they all concerned about Trump not being conservative enough too? Wow! Who would have thunk it?

    “Jane Fonda Organizes ‘Dump Trump’ Campaign”

    Prominent actors, writers and thinkers joined a “Stop Hate Dump Trump” campaign to denounce the billionaire Republican presidential frontrunner, saying he is a threat to the United States.

    Actors Harry Belafonte, Kerry Washington and Jane Fonda, filmmaker Jonathan Demme and intellectual Noam Chomsky are among those lending their support to the drive to prevent Donald Trump getting into the White House.

    • Somebody says:

      If we had a mass rape event like in Germany these are the same people that would tell all the women they need to be more understanding of cultural differences.

      I simply don’t understand why having a border and enforcing the immigration laws is considered hate. Really? If we don’t have a border then we don’t have a country.

    • taw46 says:

      It’s almost as if there is a coordinated attack. Nah, they wouldn’t do that, would they?

      • Somebody says:

        Nah that wouldn’t ever happen. It’s almost as if they are all part and parcel of the same club……oh no that couldn’t be.

    • lyn says:

      Obama is the only hate-filled “leader” that I see, and yet these Einsteins are silent about him.

  12. Myiq2xu says:

  13. DandyTIger says:

    Seriously, this is the best election cycle evah!

  14. DandyTIger says:

  15. taw46 says:

    Another reason we can’t vote for Trump. Sarah’s clothes.

  16. cynic says:

    I would love to add something to the conversation, but you have all stated, perfectly how I feel. Somebody’s comment: “I am sick and tired of the circular firing squad going on in republican circles.” yup

    I will say, I know a mover and shaker in my state. Her hubby is a Yale, S&B member, along with Geo. Bush Sr. & Jr. These members have their own secret writing, and I was told that when Bush was debating going into Iraq, he sent the President what he thought should be done. When letters are addressed a certain way, they are delivered to the President unopened.

    There is so much that we don’t know when it comes to these movers and shakers. I stated that I was unhappy with our Congressman going on Chicago radio dissing Cruz & Rand Paul. She said to me, “They aren’t Republicans.” This was after a discussion where I asked what a yellow dog and blue dog Democrat were. They couldn’t answer my question.

    It was very eye opening. There is no big tent. It’s, do it our way, or you will be destroyed. I saw it done to a local candidate. They were so gleeful when the took down the TEA Party guy. I considered myself done with local politics.

    I use to like reading comments over at Theconservativetreehouse, but lately, it’s all Cruz hate. I’m sad; a circular firing squad indeed.

    • DeniseVB says:

      New York has Republican primaries ? They’re lucky if they find someone to run for any office. 😉

      • lizzy says:

        You are right Denise, many times they don’t even run Repub. candidates for down ticket offices in general elections in NYC, much less have a primary.

    • taw46 says:

      I never voted in a Republican primary, either. But I will this time 😉.

      • lyn says:

        Same here.

      • leslie says:

        I voted for the current governor in the Republican primary in IL. It was my FU to TPTB. This year I was going to vote for Sanders in the March 15 primary. But now I’m not certain which primary I’ll vote in or which candidate I’ll vote for. Whatever I do, since both parties seem to disregard the voters, it will be a FU regardless.

  17. cynic says:

    I learned a couple of things yesterday.
    1. Mark Levin’s finance’s son is working on the Cruz campaign. He’s selling Cruz on his radio show.
    2. Via Rush’s radio program yesterday, someone has gone to the Clinton Library, and collected hundred of pages of info on Trump. Rush doesn’t know who is doing the search, but they will not disclose what was found until April.

    I am reminded of IL politics. Obama got elected Senator because the Republican party forced Ryan to step down after his sealed divorce documents were opened and it was revealed that allegedly, per his wife Jeri, Jack had wanted her to perform sexual acts with him in public in sex clubs.

    These people play dirty.

  18. helenk3 says:

    why are the insiders of both parties so afraid of intelligent well informed voters?
    To tell the truth I really do not want a “real conservative” president. Most “real conservatives” are hypocrites. I want a man who has the integrity and the courage to stand up for this country.
    I am not a Trump supporter, but I do not trust the republican party and their actions against him and Ted Cruz.

    • piper says:

      I with you on this.

    • taw46 says:

      I am a former Democrat whose party went insane in 2008. They insulted and ridiculed 18 million people who voted for Hillary. Now, the Republicans are doing the same to people who want to vote for Trump. If they manage to destroy him, they will then do it to Cruz. They don’t want well-informed voters, they want people who will do what they say.

    • Somebody says:

      I want someone that will stand up for this country too Helen. I am also very concerned about our younger generation, the American dream is dying.

      • Somebody says:

        I might add that in my opinion having open borders and welcoming millions impoverished third worlders is not going to help the next generation achieve the American dream.

        I have nothing against immigration, provided it is controlled, smart immigration. Two of my neighbors on my street are immigrants, some of the hardest working people you’d ever have the pleasure of meeting. They came here and started businesses and have found success, their children are doctors and engineers. These people cherish the freedoms and opportunities in this country that we often take for granted. Immigrants like my neighbors are an asset to this country.

        • Myiq2xu says:

          There was a time when we could accept large numbers of illiterate (in English anyway) and unskilled workers because we had a rapidly expanding industrial base that needed factory workers.

          That isn’t true any more.

          And despite differences in language and religious denomination, the vast majority of those immigrants were from Christian countries that were part of western civilization. That meant they could assimilate fairly easily.

          Somehow we decided that was a bad thing.

          • Somebody says:

            I’m pretty sure it was the liberals in Congress that decided it was a bad thing.

            If immigrants don’t assimilate then they aren’t becoming citizens. If they have no desire to assimilate then why come here, why not stay where you are if you love it so much? That being said I have no problem with speaking your native language in your own home or maintaining aspects of your native culture. My neighbors do that, but they have assimilated, they are American through and through.

          • taw46 says:

            I am for legal, controlled immigration. In the past, people who were admitted either had a job waiting or someone who was willing to accept financial responsibility for them. We did not give welfare to immigrants. And, we brought in people who would contribute to America. I, too, know wonderful Americans who came here from other countries. And I love that they are here.

            I wasn’t even aware at the time, that major changes were made with the Immigration Act of 1965. Maybe some were good (changing quotas for each country, for example), but no doubt, they were on a mission to alter the demographics of the US (even though they said they would not). Now, they do not want assimilation. If the immigrants do not know what America is, it won’t be America for long. And that is what they want, to change the country.

          • Myiq2xu says:

            There are only two major religions that are proselytizing, and only one of them still uses the threat of death to coerce conversion.

  19. 49erDweet says:

    In all the excitement of Obummer and the huuuuuge snowfall in DC yesterday, I forgot this tragedy.

  20. helenk3 says:

    boehner has been purposely suppressing anything on Benghazi.

    the really sad thing is that this is not surprise nor is it unbelievable

    • jeffhas says:

      What the heck is he doing in South Korea?? Wouldn’t that be on a list of places NOT to be for fear of what just happened?


    • 49erDweet says:

      Helen, I don’t like this but the student “chose” to enter a mad house. Bad things happen in mad houses. Not gonna get my undies in a bunch over this for at least 90 days. Students need to learn to not poke unchained lions with sharp sticks.

      • helenk3 says:

        I understand your point . Remember college students today are taught that communism and socialism are great and capitalism is a bad thing. Maybe he was checking out what he was taught. Nobody ever said college students had street smarts

  21. DeniseVB says:

    • elliesmom says:

      I posted all of the words to the Simon and Garfunkel song Bernie used in his ad on one of the Feel the Bern kid’s FB page. “But that’s a sad song. Why did he use a sad song?” Then they put a meme up about something that used a pic of Karl Marx. They thought it was pro-Bernie. I think maybe I am trolling them on purpose now.

      • Somebody says:

        Haha, I guess you’ve found your new calling?

      • leslie says:

        This morning on MJoe. they played that new Sanders ad and Mika said it was so “happy and optimistic”. And I suppose it is – if you want to remain stuck in the 60’s, wearing long skits, bell bottoms, flowers in your hair and love beads. I liked the visuals in the ad, but found myself wondering if we haven’t grown just a little bit since that time.

        • elliesmom says:

          The Simon and Garfunkel song is actually pretty depressing if you listen to the words. They did melancholy really well. The guy goes looking for America and ends up counting cars on the Jersey turnpike.🙂

          • Mt.Laurel says:

            Simon and Garfunkel were a great vocal duo. However, many of their songs were beyond depressing. In fact, much of the 60’s music my brothers played I found sad in the extreme. It makes old time Country and Western seem fun and upbeat if you actually listen to the words (or read the lyrics on the LP albums).

      • 1539days says:

        They cut out most of that, and just left in the part about people looking for America. This is nothing new, though. “Born in the USA” was invoked in Reagan’s 1984 campaign. Even though people loved the title, the song was about Vietnam (as many Springsteen songs are) and the bad stuff that happened to the vets there.

        Even Trump is selling hope by highlighting despair. “Make America Great Again” says that America sucks now and has declined from some era of greatness in the past.

  22. Myiq2xu says:

    The thing that bothers me about this election is that we haven’t reached Peak Stupid yet.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Geesh, every time we “deal” with people who hate us, it costs the taxpayers billions.

      • leslie says:

        Dealing with Osama (read al-Qaeda) cost us plenty more than billions of dollars. And we want to “deal with al-Qaeda again?!? I thought killing Osama was one of the highlights of the Bronco Bama administration. What was the purpose of killing him, then?

  23. taw46 says:

    Ace has a good post up. Against The Establishment.

    • lyn says:

      Great catch. I agree with it.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Picked this up from the comments, for what it’s worth…..😉 Ace is great !

      NRO has to hate Trump if they want to stay in business – the GOPe is where they get all their donations. Follow the money.

      • lyn says:

        “Follow the money” is the journalist’s mantra.

      • Myiq2xu says:

        Money changes everything. When you start getting paid to advocate you start becoming a whore. I can say anything I want and the only thing I have to fear is getting banned by WordPress.

        But if I was getting paid, or I was dependent on donations or advertising, then I have to temper my opinions to maintain (or increase) my cash flow.

        George Bernard Shaw once asked a pretty young woman at a party if she would sleep with him. for a million pounds. She said yes. Then he asked her if she would sleep with him for five pounds.

        “What kind of girl do you think I am?” she replied indignantly.

        “We’ve already settled that” he told her. “Now we’re just haggling over the price.”

    • Myiq2xu says:

      It’s a pretty sad day when Joy Reid of MSNBC makes more sense to me than National Review.

      Check out her diagnosis (which mostly comes from moderate Republican turned liberalish independent Bruce Bartlett) at 6:45.

      It’s accurate — the establishment/elite has been selling lies to everyone outside the donor class for years. They use their power to enact their own priorities into law, while telling the rest of us “it’s too hard” or “it will scare the moderates.”

      And for years we went along with this.

      Well, as she notes, the issue of immigration has caused this bargain — the elites get their actual agenda, everyone else gets lies and empty promises — to break down, probably forever.

      You know, for years, I felt it was my duty to sell these shit sandwiches to readers for the Greater Good of winning elections.

      I didn’t like doing it, but I thought that, for example, the War on Terror was too important to risk a rupture over other questions.

      Although I’ve come to hate politics and I just despise reading the news now, the one good thing is that I’m liberated from splashing some ketchup on Sandwiches Made of Actual Shit and trying to sell them to people as tasty and healthful.

      I feel liberated. I serve no “Greater Good,” as I don’t know that there’s a Greater Good to be served anymore. So I can just say exactly what I think.

      And what I think is that the establishment has to be destroyed.

      We will not be ignored, we will not be condescended to, we will no longer accept broken promises and lies as our payment for our service to the GOP.

      And if it requires destroying the GOP and electing a Democrat to teach the establishment this lesson, to chastise them and to humble them, then we shall do just that, and do so happily.

      You will either come to terms, or you will be destroyed.

      I❤ Ace

  24. dm says:

    Good luck to all my fellow east coasters – or anyone else in the country dealing with a weather apocalypse. Hubby just got the snow blower and generator started, picked up extra kitty food, already have plenty of people food and grown up beverages…let the chaos begin. Only one real concern – the daughter is scheduled to work tomorrow night at 7. She works outside Philly, has a little Ford Focus, and being a nurse is not allowed to call out. Maybe they will send the National Guard??? Us mommas never stop worrying bout the babies, do we?

    • DeniseVB says:

      Lol, nope. If she’s far from the hospital, I’d probably reserve a couple of nights for her at a nearby hotel if the hospital didn’t have beds in the breakroom.

      • dm says:

        Yep, already ran through all the contingency plans with her. The closest motel is right on the corner of OMG and Holy Shit with no covered parking. I used to worry about her in school at Temple…this neighborhood makes that one look desirable. I am hoping the hospital has worked something out with her. Texted her a while ago, haven’t heard back yet.

    • swanspirit says:

      They used to send 4 wheel drive vehicles for nurses who couldn’t make it in, Her hospital should already be making arrangements to get everyone in, or have those already there stay. She shouldn’t even attempt to drive.

    • dm says:

      I would love for the new VP to be tasked with an extensive budget review for the first year in office…It’s beyond critical mass and needs to be relieved of all the redundancy and stupidity.

      • Somebody says:

        Here, here, that would be fantastic dm. While the new VP is at it, how about purging all the little toadies planted by the Obama and other previous administrations from the ranks of civil service? Most of them are either in the upper echelons or in make work positions, the real rank and file civil servants would be more than happy to point them out.

  25. DeniseVB says:

    Goodness knows we’re trying to be heard😉

  26. Myiq2xu says:

    You’ll never guess who wrote this:

    National Review’s cover assault against Donald Trump is anchored by a masthead editorial dedicated to the thesis that conservatives should oppose Trump because Trump is “a philosophically unmoored political opportunist” whose “politics are those of an averagely well-informed businessman” with “no interest in limiting government, in reforming entitlements, or in the Constitution.”

    It’s a solid argument.

    If you are a dedicated member of the conservative movement in the United States of America as it’s existed for the past 20 years or so, you have in front of you a variety of other potential presidents who have also been dedicated members of said movement. Jeb Bush and Chris Christie and Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz and John Kasich have their disagreements, but they’ve all been laboring on behalf of the same movement and pay homage to the same set of institutions and ideas. Trump doesn’t, really.

    The problem here is that the authenticity of Trump’s conservatism or the orthodoxy of his ideological commitments isn’t really in dispute.

    Trump isn’t an orthodox conservative, but he’s also not a fake conservative. He’s someone who is speaking to the Republican Party rank and file and telling them that orthodox conservative politics has failed and that what’s needed instead is a new form of conservative populism focused more explicitly on American nationalism and white Christians’ ethnic and sectarian grievances.

    And here’s where the editorial falls flat.

    It doesn’t argue that some other candidate is going to do a better job of addressing white working-class concerns about their relative decline in the 21st-century United States of America. Nor does it argue that the GOP has some other path to victory that doesn’t involve increasing its appeal to Trump’s grievance constituency.

  27. Myiq2xu says:

    Scott Adams:

    I need to add one level to the BOTTOM of the persuasion stack. That level involves arguing about the definition of a word.

    Persuasion Stack

    Identity (best)

    Analogy (okay, not great)

    Reason (useless)

    Definition (capitulation)

    You’ll see a lot of debate on whether Trump is a true conservative or not. That is argument by definition. It is the linguistic equivalent of throwing your gun at a monster because the clip is empty.
    National Review’s cover story, in which the big question comes down to whether Trump is a true conservative or not, is your tell for capitulation on the right.

    The left is still in the fight, but the right just capitulated to Trump.

    In the 2D world, it might seem that National Review’s organized resistance of “thought leaders” opposed to Trump is a big deal. But that incorrectly assumes “thought” was ever important. In the 3D world of persuasion, National Review’s move is nothing but throwing the gun at the monster.

    On some level, people can feel that.

  28. votermom says:

  29. DeniseVB says:

    “Freddie” the run-a-way cow was rescued afterall !

  30. helenk3 says:

    just out of curiosity, who runs our government valjar and huma or the people we elected ?

  31. lyn says:

    A big boy answered me on Twitter.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I get jiggy when that happens to me too, even when they call me an idiot (re: read the substance)😛 I don’t find Trump incomprehensible, his history speaks to me. Values, accomplishments, success, personable and everything Obama wasn’t.

      • lyn says:

        Well, I haven’t read any of their garbage, but thanks for the interpretation.😉
        St. Ronnie also had excellent speech writers.
        I’ve been called stupid by two little male Twitter twerps–one a Trump hater and the other an Obot–and I blocked them.

      • taw46 says:

        I don’t think Reagan would have advocated for NR to publish a special edition, with 22 people writing essays attacking Trump, with the purpose of removing a candidate from an election, 11 days before the first votes. {{shrugs}} could be wrong.

      • Myiq2xu says:

        I remember St. Ronnie. I voted for him twice. He promised to cut taxes, cut the deficit, cut the federal debt, cut regulations, and cut the size of government.

        He did cut taxes, but they went back up later.

        • lizzy says:

          He cut fed taxes for his rich friends. When my fed tax cut came through they withheld more to cover increased social security taxes.

    • lizzy says:

      I don’t think Reagan articulated much of anything. He read a teleprompter with feeling.

  32. foxyladi14 says:

    Take care dear friends ❤

  33. Dora says:

  34. leslie says:

    I’m cramming in as much as I can in the few minutes I have while the youngest grandbaby is napping. there is so much today!
    This is Laura Ingraham’s take on the NRO damnation of Trump (and even though they might not come right out and say so, his followers):

    • lyn says:

      I saw that last night and was glad to see it.

      • lyn says:

        Ingraham was taking NRO to task with her tweets last night. I agree with her. The GOPe just became irrelevant, and she stole The Klown’s excommunication angle.
        OT, my state and federal taxes are done!

  35. Dora says:

    WOW!… Must See=> Women on “Outnumbered” BLAST National Review over Anti-Trump Campaign

    • taw46 says:

      That was good. “It’s the voters who decide”, not the NR.

    • Shez ZK says:

      Finally found my WP password, I’ve been trying to login since last night.

      That was a great clip, I saw a comment that they wished it had included the full segment. Loving the NRO backlash, new hashtags, and the fed up WRATH. I’ve seen plenty say the #Gangof22 arrogantly thought they were going to be saviors with adoring waves of accolades. It’s ICY out there in the real world.

      Dora, are you on Twitter? Just like lyn I happened to cleanse my Following list of dregs and dumbasses last night, and then followed a bunch of fresh new people instead. My timeline resonates so much better now.

Comments are closed.