As a quick summary for those of you unfamiliar with his work. Mr. Bret Stephens of The New York Times is a self-styled "True Conservatives" -- one of a handful of Conservative Mensheviks who were tossed out of the Republican party once the Conservative Bolsheviks finally completed their takeover of the party apparatus. They constitute a tiny band of dislocated losers who have been wrong about pretty much everything since forever and are professionally and psychologically unable to cope with the fact that the hated Libtards have been right about them all along.
And yet somehow they have all found comfortably sinecured sanctuary in the offices of America's leading newspapers and cable news networks where they are paid large sums of American money to make sweeping Delphic pronouncements about how Democrats should behave. Such as this from Mr. Bret Stephens, today in The New York Times:
Just Confirm Kavanaugh...I refer to the decision of Senate Democrats to wage a tooth-and-nail battle to oppose Kavanaugh, an effort that is likely doomed to fail and equally likely to hurt Democratic chances in the fall. Who knew Chuck Schumer was so content with his job as as Senate minority leader?Let’s count the ways in which the Democrats aren’t helping themselves...For now, however, the first question Democrats ought to ask themselves is whether they really have political capital to waste on a losing battle...Fierce opposition to Kavanaugh hurts Democrats...Liberals always cry wolf...Democrats should have learned in 2016 that what counts in American politics is location, not turnout. Virtue signaling in Park Slope isn’t going to win a Senate election in Nevada...Democrats would help themselves, and the country, by returning to the old standard and refusing to let Kavanaugh’s confirmation become the political event of the season.
The reason I delight in the noumenal concept of Bret Stephens, paid New York Times Opinion Haver, is the same reason I am appalled by Mr. Stephens' actual presence and work product on the op-ed page.
Because it tells me is that, for all of the limitless resources at their command, in the fight for the ideological future of America, the very best players The New York Times can field as starters for Team True Conservative are the likes of Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss and Ross Douthat and David Brooks. These are their first round draft picks. This is the fucking apex of respectable conservative public intellectualizin' in America.
Palookas. Intellectual stumble-bums. Tomato cans with feet of lead and jaws of glass who any Liberal club fighter could knock through the ropes one minute into the first round.
This is why all public bouts are rigged to insure that no True Conservative ever faces any serious challenge or real competition.
Because Conservatism is now so soft and inbred and ridiculous that there is literally nothing keeping it from collapsing under the weight of its own duplicity, hypocrisy and depravity but massive transfusions of cash from its crackpot billionaire stake-horses and the thin garment of media respectability which newspapers like The New York Times keep loaning it.
And I take some comfort in that.
Behold, a Tip Jar!
5 comments:
I love reading you Driftglass. Thank you.
Partisanship aside.
Kavanaugh should not be on the lower federal court where he is at. Conservo- Affirmative action for wealthy brats who's royal family names do not want to be tarnished with the spoils of spoiled children who cannot and should not fend for themselves as individualists. That they prescribe for everyone else.
The more I read of kavanaugh's record, the less I exist under "We the People".
Judge Dread Kavanaugh, "It's the law. Obey it because I made the law".
Too true, but...
As they have shown time and time again, they don't want to fool ALL of the people ALL of the time, just ENOUGH people for JUST LONG ENOUGH, so they can continue rewriting POG history on the fly.
As for Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss and Ross Douthat and David Brooks they should spend the remainder of their days stomping on flaming bags of doggie poo.
There's some unfortunate truth that this is likely a losing battle but Bret Stephens' false assumption is that going down fighting will spend "political capital". Dredd Scott was a loss for the Abolitionist cause but that only fueled their outrage and energy. The Scopes trial was a loss for teaching evolution but that didn't exactly play well for those opposed to it. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe in and take the hit for the team. Having the courage of your convictions, even if you don't come out a winner in the short run, can sometimes generate political capital.
Post a Comment