The Age Of Trump And Conservatives Showing Themselves To Be "Contemptible, Partisan Hacks"
Mona Charen, not exactly a bleeding-heart lefty, writes at National Review about the Gianforte assault on Ben Jacobs and the disgusting response from some on the right:
But the age of Trump has corrupted a great many people and shattered norms. Those whose moral compass has long since been stashed in the bottom drawer defending the indefensible piled on to applaud Gianforte's thuggishness.The Media Research Center's Brent Bozell tweeted, "Jacobs is an obnoxious, dishonest first class jerk. I'm not surprised he got smacked." (For the record, I've known Bozell for decades and hope this was a momentary lapse of judgment. We've all experienced the itchy Twitter finger.)
Laura Ingraham chose to impugn Jacobs's manhood: "Politicians always need to keep their cool. But what would most Montana men do if 'body slammed' for no reason by another man?" She followed up with "Did anyone get his lunch money stolen today and then run to tell the recess monitor?"
Dinesh D'Souza struck the same tone, calling Jacobs a "crybaby," and also implying that the story was a "scam" perpetrated by Jacobs to swing the election to the Democrat.
None of this is a gray area. You either uphold certain basic standards of decency or you don't. Some who call themselves conservatives have shown that they are nothing of the kind. To be conservative is to be honorable. These are contemptible, partisan hacks. Let's close with another Ingraham tweet whose cynicism passeth all understanding: "Loyalty...courage...valor...honor...truth...at risk of becoming lost virtues in Washington, DC."
Here's more -- and maybe some of what's to come:
.@MJGerson remains a voice of moral clarity on the right. pic.twitter.com/XSr3uCo1u0
— Max Boot (@MaxBoot) May 26, 2017
Charen via @RonRosenbaum1
[1.] Since when does Max Boot wear a pretentious hat?
[1a.] Since when do journo/pundits use pretentious woodcuts as Twitter avatars?
[2.] I think Gerson is wrong: Trump didn't win that election, Hillary lost that election.
Try to think back to those debates, and his defeat of all the other candidates. Trump literally mocked the size of their dorks, and they couldn't politically survive the encounter... The Republicans of 2016 were that far removed from the enthusiasms and needs of their typical voters. They thought conservatism was a broad-based constituency for endless immigration and for tax cuts on capital gains.
The Republican party is has proven itself preternaturally useless to most conservative Americans... It's weird to see that anyone still cares about it on Memorial Day 2017, or imagines that Trump was ever going to carry the GOP's water. Liberals in the Democratic party may be resentfully oblivious of the lessons being offered to them, but conservatives in the GOP are positively somnambulant.
Okay, fine: If conservative principles are worthwhile, they'll affirm themselves whether or not anyone bothers to articulate them... That's how truth works.
Crid at May 27, 2017 2:23 AM
1) If "blue state" policies are the modern Utopia, then perhaps someone could show where these thriving, vibrant, cutting-edge communities exist because of their enlightened policies?
2) These people are on video actually assaulting people for wearing MAGA hats, and the Trump people are horrible? Must be that "Words do hurt!" crowd. Nothing is too horrible to be justified, huh?
Radwaste at May 27, 2017 5:16 AM
Well said Crid. Which is amazing since this is a Trump thread.
Ben at May 27, 2017 5:33 AM
In law, in situations such as this, there is a continuum from no excuse to justified. This was somewhere in between.
One can approve of a jerk getting smacked and still deplore the act.
The reporter interrupted a private meeting and shoved a recorder in the guy's face. Wouldn't leave.
As one tweeter asked, name the last time you--a dem--voted for a republican because the dem candidate screwed up. Not happening, is it.
One picture had the cap; "I don't often drive drunk and leave a woman to drown, but when I do, I'm reelected by democrats."
If there's any gloating, it's about making the dems live up to their own rules. See Cong. Etheridge's assault on a student journo. No problema. Cause he is a dem.
Everybody gets that.
This is a case of misdemeanor assault...and a Rohrshach test.
Richard Aubrey at May 27, 2017 5:43 AM
Well said Crid. Which is amazing since this is a Trump thread.
Ben at May 27, 2017 5:33 AM
A congressional special election in Montana really isn't about Trump. It is only a desperate democratic party trying to make it *about Trump*.
If you include the general election in November, so far they are 0 for Four on that gambit.
Isab at May 27, 2017 5:50 AM
How is Trump to blame for Gianforte's thuggishness?
And please don't conflate "Republican" with "conservative." One is a political party the other is a political philosophy. Not all Republicans are conservatives. And not all conservatives are Republicans.
The Democratic governor of Montana used his veto power to align the Montana election with the national Democratic Party strategy of early voting and remote voting, insisting that the special election be conducted as a mail-in election with ballots being sent to voters to be filled in and mailed back. Gianforte's attack on Jacobs happened at the end of the campaign. Most of the voters had already mailed in their ballots by then.
And Gianforte is facing assault charges, so his thuggish move is not endangering Freedom of the Press. The instruments that are supposed to be protecting reporters (and citizens) are working as they should.
My guess is that if Gianforte cannot handle an intrusive Montana press, he'll be overwhelmed by the intrusive DC press and probably get himself into bigger trouble once in Washington. This guy won't last long.
His opponent, a folk-singing nudist (link possibly NSFW), was probably not a better choice.
The Republican party is not, and never has been, America's conservative party. It started as a Northeastern business-friendly big-government party opposed to slavery. The party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Nixon, Romney, McCain has never been wholly or solely a "conservative" party.
States Righters have called the Republican Party home since Harry Truman began the process of divesting the Democrats of any non-progressive element. Fiscal conservatives have called the Republican Party home since Barry Goldwater, but have never been welcomed with open arms by the party elites. Social conservatives have called the Republican Party home since Jimmy Carter drove them out of the Democratic Party. The Republican Party elites view the social conservatives (religious right) as a plague on the party.
Ronald Reagan managed to unite the three wings of the Party (the fiscal conservatives, the social conservatives, and the Northeastern liberals) to win the 1980 and 1988 elections. No candidate has since united the Party like that.
The problem for conservatives is that splitting from one of the two major parties would mean diluting what little influence they now have on policy.
Conan the Grammarian at May 27, 2017 6:17 AM
I was pulled over in Massachusetts for reckless driving. When brought before the judge, I was asked if I knew what the punishment for drunk driving in that state was. I said, "I don't know, reelection to the Senate?" ~ Emo Philips
Conan the Grammarian at May 27, 2017 6:36 AM
> amazing since this
> is a Trump thread.
Carolla once said after hanging up on a caller, "We'll never know what he meant by that... But also, we'll never care."
> The Republican party is
> not, and never has been,
> America's conservative party.
Doooooooooooooooooooood.
Crid at May 27, 2017 6:43 AM
That "basket of deplorables" comment certainly didn't endear her to blue collar voters, traditionally a Democratic bulwark. Combined with Obama's comment about rural voters clinging to guns and religion, working class voters are starting to think the national Democrats are looking down on them. And they're probably right.
But Trump did do some things right in that election. He energized voters who felt they were being ignored by Washington.
A group of voters that thinks it was decimated by NAFTA is going to pay attention to a candidate who talks about NAFTA being the "worst trade deal in the history of the world."
Conan the Grammarian at May 27, 2017 6:45 AM
All this wailing and tearing of shirts is premature. As we learn from Patrick Swayze in "Next of Kin".... "You ain't seen bad yet, but it's comin'."
vanderleun at May 27, 2017 7:40 AM
I also find it wrong when they talk about rural vs. urban voters in regards to the last election. Because the suburbs are all counted as rural. Maybe I'm behind the times but acres and acres of houses is a bit different from corn fields. Trump got 63M votes. There are only 46M rural citizens in the US. And I know not all of them showed up to cast their ballot.
"A congressional special election in Montana really isn't about Trump. It is only a desperate democratic party trying to make it *about Trump*."
I agree Isab. But Trump drives Crid batty. So for anything with the word Trump anywhere near it and Crid reacting sanely is a pleasant surprise.
As for the Democrat party's turnaround efforts, I don't see any progress so far. Driving around with Bernie Sanders to hector people isn't an effective strategy. The real question is will the Republican party crack along ideological lines. As Conan points out there are at least three major groups that make up the Republican party. The Republican party elites are quite ready to throw Trump under the bus. If they do so they may force the other two groups out and end up destroying the Republican party as a whole.
Ben at May 27, 2017 7:46 AM
I'm with Gianforte. Anyone should beat up people who get in his face and harass him with repeated nonsense.
Where is the outrage on the left when Antifa do this as a means of shutting down speakers?
jdgalt at May 27, 2017 8:19 AM
What if Greg Gianforte thought Ben Jacobs was a Nazi?
The media has already confirmed that it's alright to physically attack a Nazi.
Snoopy at May 27, 2017 8:19 AM
Searching through the archives here - not finding any articles condemning physical attacks on Trump supporters.
Snoopy at May 27, 2017 8:21 AM
Where was the outrage when Obama give McCain the middle finger?
Where was the outrage when Obama called some of us "teabaggers"?
Where was the outrage when Obama used the IRS to go after political opponents?
Some now have the nerve to get outraged over a set up "body slam"?
charles at May 27, 2017 9:50 AM
The Dems have been accusing Republicans and conservatives of being the worst sorts of people. Antifa has taken that a step further and started beating on them and claiming they're justified.
Nazis, ya know?
Sooner or later someone will respond in kind, and there will be blood in street. Antifa blood. Then the cry will be "oh, how terrible" and "what happened to civility in the public square?"
I R A Darth Aggie at May 27, 2017 9:58 AM
> Searching through the archives
> here - not finding any
> articles condemning...
Be sure to spin into foaming rage whenever any personage or media source isn't totally, conveniently dialed into whatever you have on your mind at any given moment. Okay?
Go nuts. Get angry, talk trash, pick fights, load weapons.
It's fun to imagine what you mean by "searching the archives" of an 18-year-old blog.
Crid at May 27, 2017 10:04 AM
Some now have the nerve to get outraged over a set up "body slam"?
"Set up"?
The amount of "But Obama!" on this thread is interesting. I can remember when conservatism involved personal responsibility and not whiny deflection (which is now a bipartisan disease), but invoking the awful Ted Kennedy is a stretch even by modern standards.
Kevin at May 27, 2017 10:38 AM
It is because this is the new normal Kevin. Leftwing groups have been getting away with even worse behavior for decades. Rightwing groups have decided what is good for the goose is good for the gander and are doing the same thing. You can't have one sided civility. It just doesn't work.
Ben at May 27, 2017 12:07 PM
"Candidate attempts to remove trespasser from his private office." There. Fixed it for you.
BlogDog at May 27, 2017 12:23 PM
Crid wrote: "The Republicans of 2016 were that far removed from the enthusiasms and needs of their typical voters. They thought conservatism was a broad-based constituency for endless immigration and for tax cuts on capital gains.
The Republican party is has proven itself preternaturally useless to most conservative Americans... It's weird to see that anyone still cares about it on Memorial Day 2017, or imagines that Trump was ever going to carry the GOP's water. Liberals in the Democratic party may be resentfully oblivious of the lessons being offered to them, but conservatives in the GOP are positively somnambulant.
Okay, fine: If conservative principles are worthwhile, they'll affirm themselves whether or not anyone bothers to articulate them... That's how truth works."
My comment is mostly a king sized cut-and-paste, albeit with my emphasis added. Nevertheless, I think that Crid's comment was good enough said a second time.
L. Beau Macaroni at May 27, 2017 3:05 PM
jdgalt: I'm with Gianforte. Anyone should beat up people who get in his face and harass him with repeated nonsense.
Uh, no. Are you out of your fucking mind?
Regardless of what anyone says to you, unless it's a credible threat of immediate physical harm, you keep your damn hands to yourself. Verbal obnoxiousness is not grounds for assault. (If it were, Crid would have been beaten to death decades ago.)
That said, I have some problems. While I haven't seen any video footage of the confrontation, I have listened to a recording of it, and I suspect Jacobs is milking this incident for all its worth.
He seemed very calm after the incident, and his only complaint was about his broken glasses. So, why did he take an ambulance? It seems to me that if he were in an altercation and required medical attention and that his condition was so severe that he needed to take an ambulance, he would have shown some signs of pain and would have complained about injured body parts rather than broken glasses.
Possibly, he was in shock and didn't realize how seriously he was hurt, but it seems more likely that he was going to try to make as much out of this incident as he could.
Patrick at May 27, 2017 5:27 PM
Conan: His opponent, a folk-singing nudist (link possibly NSFW), was probably not a better choice.
Begging your pardon, but does the fact that someone is a folk-singer or visits clothing-optional resorts make them somehow unsuited for office?
Seems to me that neither one of these things is relevant to their ability to represent their constituents.
I only ask because, as it happens, I did both those things once. I was in a social group that I encountered online, and we met at a clothing optional resort in Land O'Lakes, which is about 40 minutes north of me.
I went with a friend of mine, and I remember our arrival. We ditched our clothes in the car and I looked about the parking lot, but saw no one. Basically, since neither one of us had been here before, I was looking for some clue that we were in the right place, like another naked person in the parking lot or something.
I saw nothing on the reception building that suggested we were at a clothing optional resort, but then again, what else could I expect? A giant billboard with naked people on it which said, "Clothing optional here!"
So, we braved the trek across the parking lot wearing nothing but flip-flops and carrying towels and walked into the reception building. Thankfully, as it turns out, we were in the right place and caught up with the rest our group.
We hung out in the pool area for a while, had dinner and afterwards, we all took separate self-guided tours of the resort, since I had never been here before.
As I looked around on my own, I discovered a karaoke bar. I went in, discovered everyone there was clothed, but no one came up to me to explain that clothing was a requirement in this bar. And I saw no signs to that effect on the door. The DJ (or, I guess he's a KJ, for 'Karaoke Jockey'), dressed in a country-western outfit, came up and said hello to me, gave me a nice little spiel about what he did and what I had to do if I wanted to sing.
Didn't say anything about me not wearing any clothes, so I got myself a coke (since I don't drink at all) and hung out.
I performed two songs, my first one being "Cat's In The Cradle," by Harry Chapin.
Had a great time, and got some compliments on my performances.
The social group has since been dissolved, so I have no more opportunity to visit the resort.
So, Conan, what is it about folk-singers who visit clothing-optional resorts that makes them unfit for office? I have no political ambitions of my own. Just curious.
Patrick at May 27, 2017 5:57 PM
Forgive me, fellow "conservatives", if I don't go along with the approval of Gianforte's beatdown of Jacobs. And I actually supported Gianforte with money. Fortunately, it was only 10 dollars. If I were in Montana the next day -- since I believe in voting on the actual election day -- I would have switched to the libertarian candidate.
No excuses. Hopefully, Gianforte will conduct himself more honorably in Congress, if he does not get thrown in jail first.
mpetrie98 at May 27, 2017 6:45 PM
Patrick, FYI, Fox News reporters witnessed Gianforte's assault on Jacobs -- their account not only supported Jacobs', but actually made it sound worse than Jacobs did.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/24/greg-gianforte-fox-news-team-witnesses-gop-house-candidate-body-slam-reporter.amp.html
Gianforte could spend up to 6 months in jail for tge assault I hope he does.
He must be reeeeaaaally proud of that GOP healthcare plan if he'd rather assault someone than answer a question about it.
Gail at May 27, 2017 6:45 PM
Judging by some of the other comments on this thread, it is so much easier to police the other side than to police ourselves. Yes, the Antifa and other groups are horrible people for what they do, but Gianforte could have simply had his staff escort Jacobs out of the meeting.
mpetrie98 at May 27, 2017 6:50 PM
Agree, mpetrie. Violence is wrong whoever throws the punch.
And this guy was running for Congress. If anything, he should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one, than a bunch of protesters or rally attendees.
In Congress, he's going to have a lot of questions thrown at him by reporters, constituents, fellow congress people -- it bodes ill that he couldn't handle this one without violence.
Gail at May 27, 2017 7:22 PM
"If anything, he should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one, than a bunch of protesters or rally attendees."
I see this all the time, and it is a symptom of the average person's desire to get "somebody else" to do tough things. One of these is behave properly. Such a person might say, "I pay this person to act properly and know things so I don't have to."
Patrick asked why being a folk-singing occasional nudist makes someone unfit for office. I'll ask this: considering the ultimate responsibility for running a Constitutional republic rests with the citizens, why excuse the public from the need for decorum and responsible behavior? Why even hint at a pass for lewdness and violence of someone is NOT in office?
Why excuse a mob?
We get the behavior we allow.
Radwaste at May 28, 2017 2:35 AM
First, there's no evidence Quist took his clothes off. He took a singing gig at a naturist resort - several gigs, in fact; some with his daughter, also a folk singer.
Second, nothing about nudism or folk singing directly disqualifies him from holding Congressional office. Senator Orrin Hatch is a songwriter and musician who once managed a folk group. No word on whether Orrin Hatch has ever sung at a nudist colony or embraces nudism.
Third, since you're usually a stickler for exact words and prickly about misquotes, please note that I said "probably." My comment could well have reference Quist's support for single-payer healthcare, support for Bernie Sanders, and other questionable political positions. A folk singer might make a fine Congressman, but that doesn't mean we should all line up to vote the Indigo Girls into office.
Fourth, I'm happy for you that your experiment with nudism turned out well, but that doesn't mean I think you're qualified to hold office or would be inclined to vote for you, at least not without hearing your positions and actual qualifications for office.
Conan the Grammarian at May 28, 2017 8:22 AM
Harvard study reveals what we kinda sorta already knew:
Media coverage of Trump is obsessive and highly negative.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 28, 2017 8:30 AM
As much as I agree that Gianforte was wrong in this situation, I dislike blanket statements like "Violence is never the answer." Sometimes the other side leaves you nothing but violence as a response.
We didn't defeat Imperial Japan in a tickle fight. And we won't defeat ISIS with witty insults and verbal barbs.
==============================
Much of the outrage in this thread seems centered on the fact that Gianforte won, despite body-slamming a reporter. However, he didn't win because conservatives (and Republicans) ignored his boorish behavior or were hypocrites.
The mail-in ballot tactic the Democratic governor of Montana mandated for this special election backfired. The Democrats thought they had a better chance of winning with mail-in ballots and absentee voting.
They didn't count on Gianforte doing something stupid at the last minute. They didn't plan an October surprise and were unable to take advantage of it when one fell into their laps.
An October surprise only works when the bulk of the ballots were not already mailed in September.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2017 6:04 AM
Frankly, I'd like to do away with electronic voting and remote voting and absentee voting and mail-in voting and add stringent voter ID laws.
Go to the polling place, identify yourself, vote on a machine, have the ballots tallied under supervision by both parties.
If you can't commit one evening to do your duty as a citizen and vote, why should you have a say in how the nation is run?
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 29, 2017 9:33 AM
> I'd like to do away with electronic
> voting and remote voting and absentee
> voting and mail-in voting and add
> stringent voter ID laws.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at May 29, 2017 9:33 AM
☑ ☑ ☑
Crid at May 29, 2017 9:53 AM
Agreed. With reasonable exceptions for shut-ins and invalids.
The idea that voting has to be made so easy that the average moron can do it means the morons will be voting in large numbers.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2017 10:33 AM
I agree with Gog, with a cavet, three days of voting if everyone went voting on the same day everything would be shut down, banks, hospitals, ect
lujlp at May 29, 2017 1:02 PM
Except, that's the way we've been doing it for a coupla centuries, before we decided it was inconvenient for the snowflakes and started "simplifying" the process with absentee ballots, voting by mail, and early voting.
But you may be right. We're wimps. Our ancestors were hardier folk. They managed to get to a polling place to vote and still do their jobs or farm their fields.
Voting by mail or absentee ballots make it easier for the snowbirds to vote in their summer and winter residences (thus voting twice for president). I don't know with what frequency this occurs or the impact it is having on the presidential election, but I know of people who have voted twice that way.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2017 2:08 PM
So...
Soldiers serving your country overseas? Tough shit, you snowflakes don't get to vote.
Going to be on an unavoidable, unmovable business trip for a month, and give enough of a shit about an election that you'd go through the steps to obtain an absentee ballot ahead of time? Pfft. Tough shit. We don't want you informed voters who give a damn.
I agree that it's a bad idea to let *everyone* cast a mail-in vote (especially way in advance) for *any* reason. Here in New York, you have to fill out an application to obtain one, and you have to fit into one of the required categories to qualify (and btw, it's a felony to fill it out falsely). I think that makes sense. http://www.elections.ny.gov/NYSBOE/download/voting/AbsenteeBallot-English.pdf
But if you have a valid reason you know about in advance that means you can't cast your vote in person, and you're willing to go through steps similar to the ones we have in NY to get an absentee ballot, it likely means you're the kind of informed voter who SHOULD be voting.
And Conan, your ISIS and Imperial Japan examples really aren't comparable to Gianforte at all. Using violence to counter and stop violence is quite different from being the initial aggressor. As the three Fox News witnesses verified, Jacobs didn't get aggressive at all (contrary to the fib Gianforte tried to spin). If Jacobs had thrown a punch at him first, however -- or at someone else in the room -- then Gianforte would of course have been justified in using force.
Gail at May 29, 2017 3:28 PM
Gail, I stated earlier that Gianforte's actions were unacceptable. I only took exception to blanket statements that violence is always wrong.
In this case, it was wrong. In some, even ones not involving ISIS or Imperial Japan, it may be the only course of action available, bullies, for example.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2017 4:34 PM
So Conan, suppose all the cops, firefighters, emergency repsonders, and hospital workers are all standing in line for six hours waiting to vote?
Some services cant afford for everyone to take the day off.
Maybe instead of three days make it four, Friday to Monday, that way only half the work force is off on any of the two given work days
lujlp at May 29, 2017 5:14 PM
They work in shifts. It's not like every one of them will be in line waiting to vote. Some will vote in the morning, some in the evening, and some on their lunch break. And perhaps vital workers can be part of that reasonable exception that allows remote voting.
Conan the Grammarian at May 29, 2017 7:31 PM
Searching through the archives here - not finding any articles condemning physical attacks on Trump supporters.
Snoopy at May 27, 2017 8:21 AM
Try the story right below this one.
Shtetl G at May 30, 2017 7:54 AM
"I can remember when conservatism involved personal responsibility..."
That ended when the Left decided that civilized behavior is a weakness to be exploited. Eventually people will do whatever they need to do in order to defend themselves.
Cousin Dave at May 30, 2017 10:53 AM
Leave a comment