It seems like it was only yesterday, but in fact it was three days ago when distinguished New York Times columnist Bret Stephens presented the case for Trump. Of course, Stephens sprinkled his text with disclaimers, presenting his bona fides as a Trump detractor. He opposes Trump but he is desirous of keeping his job on the Times op-ed page. To be fair, no Times columnist will long continue to pontificate from its pages if he seriously supports Donald Trump.
In other words, "Trump was a far better President than (the execrable) Biden, but I'm going to spend the next year demonizing Trump so that I can continue to be invited to Upper-West-Side cocktail parties".
And yet, Stephens continues to complain about Trump's alleged character deficits, mendacity, and other nonsense, all of which complaints are either emotional nonsense generated from thin air or are put into very, very dark shade by comparison with any Democrat you care to name. It really is remarkable when you think about it how dissatisfied all these Reagan, Buckley, and Bush Republicans are when they finally had an opportunity to get most of what they said they wanted since 1955 couldn't find anything better to do with their time than to backstab the one man who managed to deliver something and to cloak themselves in intolerably smug self-righteousness. If the republic falls their names will belong on the epitaph every bit as much as those more well-known names.
The problem with people like Stevens is that Trumps defects seem to blind them to the defects of the Clintons, Obamas and Biden's of the world. I'm fully aware of Trump's defects and would prefer a different Republican candidate. At the same time, I'd crawl over broken glass to vote for him if he's running against Joe, Hilary or Barrie. Or Michelle. As bad as he might be, they are worse. Worse as people, less truthful and less moral. And ultimately, less competent.
I am starting the countdown clock on Steven's firing now. If the NYT fired the editor who had the temerity to publish an op-ed by Senator Cotton, how long can Stevens expect to last after publishing a laundry list of praiseworthy things about Trump and derogatory comments about Biden? Stevens' virtue signalling ("I really, really, really don't want Trump to win! Honest! Pinky swear!") might save him, but I agree he is skating on very thin ice.
I'm old enough to remember that the NY Times first established the op-ed page to provide opinions contrary to the paper's party line, and IIRC that was the way it actually worked for quite a while--at least until the pearl-clutching feminists took it over. Now it slavishly parrots that party line, and anyone countenancing anything else (like Sen. Cotton's offering) will find him/herself out on the street.
The Stephens piece reminds me of what were likely the attitudes of the Soviet nomenklatura during their end times; everyone had lost his idealism but couldn't face the thought that it was all coming to an end. No one would openly admit the game was over. A tipping point was reached, and when the border guards refused to act any further on behalf of the regime, it imploded. Stephens admits Trump's policies, i.e., his leadership, were far better than what we have now, but opposes him on what seems a exaggeratedly negative ad hominem characterization. We may be at a precursor stage when Progressives have lost all conviction for their cause and only the crazies have any passion for it.
Stephens was one of a multitude who caused this. He and they went over the edge regarding Trump, making things up about him and crying wolf that the world would end. They were irrational. They were cheerleaders for stopping Trump, and have been cheerleading for that from 2015 until now, and beyond today for most of them (Kristol et al). So Stephens finally writes a decent column and takes a couple of mea culpas but I don't give a darn what Bret thinks or writes. The fact it's taken him eight long years, with 4 years of Democrat destruction (2020 Covid until now) speaks incredibly ill of him. A pox on him.
And I don't like Donald Trump! I never have. Not from when he burst onto the scene decades ago; not with his TV program, and not today. But I voted for him in '16 and '20 because the stakes were too high, and if he becomes the nominee (almost certain for him) then I'm voting for him in November. I recognized then, and now, the issues with Trump, but Trump's "norm breaking" doesn't cause 1/10th the problems that Democrat norm breaking causes, whether it's Clinton, Kerry, Obumbler or Lyin' Biden. So, as the nominee, Trump will always have my vote over every single possible Democrat. All of them.
In other words, "Trump was a far better President than (the execrable) Biden, but I'm going to spend the next year demonizing Trump so that I can continue to be invited to Upper-West-Side cocktail parties".
And yet, Stephens continues to complain about Trump's alleged character deficits, mendacity, and other nonsense, all of which complaints are either emotional nonsense generated from thin air or are put into very, very dark shade by comparison with any Democrat you care to name. It really is remarkable when you think about it how dissatisfied all these Reagan, Buckley, and Bush Republicans are when they finally had an opportunity to get most of what they said they wanted since 1955 couldn't find anything better to do with their time than to backstab the one man who managed to deliver something and to cloak themselves in intolerably smug self-righteousness. If the republic falls their names will belong on the epitaph every bit as much as those more well-known names.
The problem with people like Stevens is that Trumps defects seem to blind them to the defects of the Clintons, Obamas and Biden's of the world. I'm fully aware of Trump's defects and would prefer a different Republican candidate. At the same time, I'd crawl over broken glass to vote for him if he's running against Joe, Hilary or Barrie. Or Michelle. As bad as he might be, they are worse. Worse as people, less truthful and less moral. And ultimately, less competent.
I am starting the countdown clock on Steven's firing now. If the NYT fired the editor who had the temerity to publish an op-ed by Senator Cotton, how long can Stevens expect to last after publishing a laundry list of praiseworthy things about Trump and derogatory comments about Biden? Stevens' virtue signalling ("I really, really, really don't want Trump to win! Honest! Pinky swear!") might save him, but I agree he is skating on very thin ice.
I'm old enough to remember that the NY Times first established the op-ed page to provide opinions contrary to the paper's party line, and IIRC that was the way it actually worked for quite a while--at least until the pearl-clutching feminists took it over. Now it slavishly parrots that party line, and anyone countenancing anything else (like Sen. Cotton's offering) will find him/herself out on the street.
The Stephens piece reminds me of what were likely the attitudes of the Soviet nomenklatura during their end times; everyone had lost his idealism but couldn't face the thought that it was all coming to an end. No one would openly admit the game was over. A tipping point was reached, and when the border guards refused to act any further on behalf of the regime, it imploded. Stephens admits Trump's policies, i.e., his leadership, were far better than what we have now, but opposes him on what seems a exaggeratedly negative ad hominem characterization. We may be at a precursor stage when Progressives have lost all conviction for their cause and only the crazies have any passion for it.
Excellent unpacking of what Stephens wrote. But it would have been worthwhile to point out that -- contra Stephens -- George Floyd wasn't murdered.
Stephens was one of a multitude who caused this. He and they went over the edge regarding Trump, making things up about him and crying wolf that the world would end. They were irrational. They were cheerleaders for stopping Trump, and have been cheerleading for that from 2015 until now, and beyond today for most of them (Kristol et al). So Stephens finally writes a decent column and takes a couple of mea culpas but I don't give a darn what Bret thinks or writes. The fact it's taken him eight long years, with 4 years of Democrat destruction (2020 Covid until now) speaks incredibly ill of him. A pox on him.
And I don't like Donald Trump! I never have. Not from when he burst onto the scene decades ago; not with his TV program, and not today. But I voted for him in '16 and '20 because the stakes were too high, and if he becomes the nominee (almost certain for him) then I'm voting for him in November. I recognized then, and now, the issues with Trump, but Trump's "norm breaking" doesn't cause 1/10th the problems that Democrat norm breaking causes, whether it's Clinton, Kerry, Obumbler or Lyin' Biden. So, as the nominee, Trump will always have my vote over every single possible Democrat. All of them.
Trump's virtues
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-GAw1lLWJA&t=2s