| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| David Horowitz on Kristol's perfidy |
| 2016-05-31 |
| A typically wordy David Horowitz criticism of Bill Kristol and his diehards... Sounds like a 60s era pop band. Over the Memorial Day Weekend, Bill Kristol doubled down on his betrayal of this country with a pair of tweets: “Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate — an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance,” Kristol tweeted. He also said, “Those accused of betraying GOP by opposing Trump can take heart from P. Henry 251 years ago today: ‘If this be treason, make the most of it!’” This fatuous invocation of an American patriot to justify the betrayal typifies the arrogant disregard for political realities shared by all those involved in a defection that could produce even greater disasters than the Obama era’s 400,000 deaths by jihad and 20 million refugees across the Middle East. A week earlier, a “Never Trump” diatribe appeared in National Review, written by Charles Murray. To summarize why “Trump is unfit outside the normal parameters” to be president, Murray cited these words by NY Times columnist David Brooks: Donald Trump is epically unprepared to be president. He has no realistic policies, no advisers, no capacity to learn. His vast narcissism makes him a closed fortress. He doesn’t know what he doesn’t know and he’s uninterested in finding out. He insults the office Abraham Lincoln once occupied by running for it with less preparation than most of us would undertake to buy a sofa … He is a childish man running for a job that requires maturity. He is an insecure boasting little boy whose desires were somehow arrested at age 12. This is a perfect instance of “Trump derangement syndrome,” the underlying animus that motivates Kristol and his destructive cohorts. Dismissing Trump as an ignoramus and a stunted twelve-year-old is the stuff of schoolyard put-downs, not a serious critique of someone with Trump’s considerable achievements. Yet this is typical of Trump’s diehard opponents on the right. Is Trump more unprepared than Barack Obama whose qualification for the presidency was a lifetime career as a left-wing agitator? And how did that work out? Despite the lacunae in his executive resume, Obama is now regarded as “one of the most consequential presidents in American history” by reasonably qualified experts. Can Trump be reasonably criticized, and is he something of a loose cannon? Of course he can, and yes he is. But criticisms that focus exclusively on the candidate miss the larger reality of this election, which is not merely a contest between two candidates but a clash between two parties and constituencies with radically differing views of what this country is and should be about, and even more importantly about the threats we face and how to deal with them. Obama’s most consequential domestic legislation is the Affordable Care Act, which he had no part in writing. It was the work of left-wing think tanks and the congressional Democrats. So it will be with Trump, which is why all the blather about his vagueness or impracticality on policy issues is beside the point. Will he build a wall the length of the Mexican border? Probably not. But will he secure the border? Probably so. Will a Democrat — whether Hillary, Bernie, or Joe Biden — secure our borders and stop the flow of illegal immigrants, criminals, and terrorists? Certainly not. In addition to their decades-long war for amnesties and open boarders, Democrats are responsible for the more than 350 “Sanctuary Cities” that openly defy federal law and provide safe havens for those same illegal immigrants, criminals, and terrorists. Open borders, Sanctuary Cities, importing unvetted Muslim refugees from the Middle East are but the tip of the iceberg in assessing the threat that the Democratic Party and its candidate (whoever it is) pose to America’s national security. For twenty-three years since the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the Democratic Party has been the party of appeasement and retreat in the holy war that fanatical Muslims have declared on us. The first bombing of the World Trade Center misfired but still killed six people and wounded 1,000 others. Clinton never visited the site while his administration insisted on treating it as a criminal act by individuals who needed to be tried in criminal courts, an attitude that would culminate in Barack Obama’s refusal to recognize that we were in a war at all, and certainly not one with fanatical Muslims. To a man and woman, the Democratic Party’s elected officials continue to participate in and support this denial. More at the link |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #5 In Defense of Krystol, he must *REALLY* believe Trump is the devil because he's tearing down National Review's credibility to the point I find it hard to believe they'll be around in a year or two. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2016-05-31 17:29 |
| #4 That and he'd be able to provide both a Birth Certificate AND College Transcripts, EU6305. |
| Posted by: Mullah Richard 2016-05-31 15:32 |
| #3 There. That's more like it. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2016-05-31 12:22 |
| #2 et tu Brute not to Mr Trump, but to all the registered Trunks you and yours chided, coerced, and demanded vote for losers like Dole, McCain, Romney, et al. All those back stabs to Sara Palin, backing and funding a senile Senator over a Tea Party alternative, and delivering Boehner V.2. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2016-05-31 08:40 |
| #1 SPENGLER: Bill Kristol Isn't a 'Renegade Jew.' Just a Sore Loser Throwing a Tantrum |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2016-05-31 02:13 |