Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Hit Squad
Do not make yourself a target for the Clintons. This has been a rule for as long as we’ve known them. If you get in their sights, bad things happen to you. The latest case in point is Scott Adams, writer of the Dilbert comic strip who has turned his thoughts to blogging about the Trump phenomenon. According to Adams, because he has been writing things favorable to Trump (something he would likely contest as he would claim that he was merely describing what he was seeing based on his own experience and training) he has seen his usual schedule of speaking engagements dropped. This is rather similar to the usual practice of late for universities to disinvite conservative speakers. Blogging on the election the way he has, has cost him financially.
As something of a semi-serious running joke, months ago Adams had endorsed Hillary for president for (as he put it) “my own personal safety” – this on the grounds that Hillary and the Democrats were painting Trump as a fascist while stirring race hatred, which all meant that if Trump did win there would be unprecedented post election violence. Endorsing Hillary would therefore both deflect some attacks now, and would hopefully shield him if she lost. Last week he changed his endorsement to Trump, in no small part for financial reasons:
The bottom line is that under Clinton’s plan, estate taxes would be higher for anyone with estates over $5 million(ish). I call this a confiscation tax because income taxes have already been paid on this money. In my case, a dollar I earn today will be taxed at about 50% by various government entities, collectively. With Clinton’s plan, my remaining 50 cents will be taxed again at 50% when I die. So the government would take 75% of my earnings from now on.
Yes, I can do clever things with trusts to avoid estate taxes. But that is just welfare for lawyers. If the impact of the estate tax is nothing but higher fees for my attorney, and hassle for me, that isn’t good news either.
You can argue whether an estate tax is fair or unfair, but fairness is an argument for idiots and children. Fairness isn’t an objective quality of the universe. I oppose the estate tax because I was born to modest means and worked 7-days a week for most of my life to be in my current position. (I’m working today, Sunday, as per usual.) And I don’t want to give 75% of my earnings to the government. (Would you?)
Things have changed for Adams since then. One of Adams’s consistent observations has been that while Clinton has portrayed Trump as a fascist and his supporters as violent racists, especially as there has been a notable trend of violence at the fringes of Trump rallies, the real violence has nearly always been perpetrated by Clinton supporters. Last week Adams asked his Twitter followers to send him examples of such violence, and that was when things escalated against Adams (emphasis mine):
This weekend I got “shadowbanned” on Twitter. It lasted until my followers noticed and protested. Shadowbanning prevents my followers from seeing my tweets and replies, but in a way that is not obvious until you do some digging.
Why did I get shadowbanned?
Beats me.
But it was probably because I asked people to tweet me examples of Clinton supporters being violent against peaceful Trump supporters in public. I got a lot of them. It was chilling.
Late last week my Twitter feed was invaded by an army of Clinton trolls (it’s a real thing) leaving sarcastic insults and not much else on my feed. There was an obvious similarity to them, meaning it was organized.
At around the same time, a bottom-feeder at Slate wrote a hit piece on me that had nothing to do with anything. Except obviously it was politically motivated. It was so lame that I retweeted it myself. The timing of the hit piece might be a coincidence, but I stopped believing in coincidences this year.
I get that Never Trump members here are unpersuaded by arguments against Hillary on things like the Supreme Court. What I do not understand, though, is why they are unpersuaded by the simple observation that the Clintons (and the Democrats) actually do target their critics and work to destroy their careers and their lives.
I see many arguments of one sort or another that argue that Trump must lose now so that Conservatism (a term at this point of which I am increasingly leery) can spend the next 4 years rebuilding, and that Hillary must be so obviously terrible a president that we should be guaranteed a win in 2020. Yet this fact remains – people who cross the Clintons often find their lives made suddenly very difficult. Why is there such confidence that we would be allowed to even make the case against her? Must we have an additional 4 years of an executive inflicting the IRS on political opponents? Must we have an additional 4 years of the administration orchestrating with political activists to smear writers? Why the confidence that in the next 4 years the Republicans will be allowed to rebuild without intimidation?
Finally I often see the Never Trump members here use some variant on the argument “if Trump is the solution, then the Republic is already beyond repair.” It should be realized that in many respects our Republic is indeed damaged beyond repair. A party that organizes national smear campaigns to discredit, humiliate, and ruin the careers of private citizens who dare criticize their operations, that is aided and abetted by tech companies like Twitter, is a party that has already decided the Republic and its governmental limitations do not apply to themselves. Hillary’s embarrassing incompetence on national and international issues is bad enough (Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were also terrible), but the willingness to destroy the lives of critics and attempt to silence enemies should terrify us all. Hillary has attempted to brand Trump as a fascist, but it is Hillary and the Democrats who are organizing armies to smash windows, burn cities, and riot. It is they who are running the hit squads. It is they who are the fascists.
[Editors’ Note: Welcome, Instapundit readers! Interested in becoming part of the best conservative community on the web, and post your ideas where they might get Instalanched? Ricochet is just $5/month and the first one is on us. As our Founders say, join the conversation.]
Published in General
“Stronger Together”
Excellent post Skipsul. Great observations. The left is authoritarian and for the past 8 years we’ve had a authoritarian leftist as president and it has made not only the country worse but the people worse as well. People are stoked into violence by the government and the media to the point that there is rioting in the streets. If the left wins (ie: Hillary Clinton) it will at the very least continue or get much worse.
This is not a battle between Democrats and Republicans, it is a battle between liberty and authoritarianism. If you are for liberty then do anything you can to stop the left and their authoritarian aspirations.
Bravo, Skipsul. Very scary indeed.
If “Conservatism” is an idea or philosophy it can’t be rebuilt, only an organization or person can rebuild.
I do agree that there has to be a drastic rebuilding of those organizations that want to persuade Americans that Conservative, or classical liberal, ideas are worth pursuing but if Conservatism, Inc. is a house being rebuilt there’s a lot of rotting timber that needs to be thrown out prior to that rebuilding.
I don’t think many people will agree on who needs to go.
Great post. I couldn’t agree more.
Or it could just be that Scott Adams is in possession of a monster ego or is a troll par excellence… Perhaps he simply sees in Trump a kindred spirit. A man of basically inexhaustible resources who shapes reality into whatever he wants it to be because he’s untouchable.
The trouble is, reality isn’t for shaping. The reality is that this free-wheeling, egomaniacal style which places Trump or Adams in the center of the universe and has events revolving around him (Clinton’s hit squad is out to get me!) doesn’t match what’s really going on: When you make of yourself a target in the political arena and exit the arena of being a comic strip writer you can expect to take the hits that come with entering the octagon.
If Adams finds those hits to be unpalatable, perhaps he should go back to the drawing board. Literally.
“I oppose the estate tax because I was born to modest means and worked 7-days a week for most of my life to be in my current position.”
Come on, what are your kids going to do with all this money, other than squabble endlessly over it and add to global warming by buying big houses and SUVs and traveling to exotic vacations? (sarcasm)
Adams is a fascinating case because he saw all of this coming, but went ahead anyway. Perhaps he is simply brave, or perhaps he thought his published predictions about what HRC would do to him if he endorsed Trump might give him some cover, or maybe he just wanted to convince us of his argument with some actual events. Whatever the case, he is a dangerous man. Let us hope that the politics of personal destruction (what a carefully constructed phrase that was) backfire good and strong.
We were supposed to get a Republican president in 2016 by that same logic.
Also, many young voters today have no recollection of the 4% growth we had during the Bush years. All they know is a fixed-pie-economy w/ 2% growth, carved up and doled out to the favored, and they can’t imagine it being otherwise.
It is not new and not unique to the Clintons. In 2004 I was targeted by Kerry supporters who tried to destroy my career and life.
Shorter version: If you don’t like Hillary Clinton and what her supporters do to you, shut up.
“Comrade, you have freedom to agree with the party. If you don’t agree we will make sure you get the best psychiatric care.You also have the freedom to shut up. If you don’t, don’t worry we will take care of that problem too.”
Majestyk, are you proposing freedom of speech or freedom of livelihood? Pick one.
Clinton and Trump are both vindictive thugs who try to destroy their opponents without ethical restraints. If there is a difference, it is that Clinton is better at it.
Martin Niemoller: “First they came for the socialists ……”
I find it odd that so many arguments around the election are either “But Hillary is the same but worse!” or “But Trump is the same but worse!” depending on what we’re talking about.
You’d think we’d just put our markers down and leave it be.
I saw a car with a “Never Hilary” sticker in the middle of the back bumper on the highway around Grove City. Any chance that was you?
To be fair to Maj, there is the simple reality that if you make your living being popular in some manner, whether as an actor or a cartoonist, then making public statements that anger part of your audience is likely to have a negative impact on your career.
On the other hand, it’s undeniable that it’s way safer to comment from the left than from the right.
But … what’s the fun in that?! You’d be one of the last that I would think would ever suggest such a thing!
Nope, no bumper stickers and I’m mostly only out in the wee hours.
I do get tired of the interjections. Especially when it boils down to “Your candidate is glue!”
I’m saying, when you enter the coliseum as a gladiator, be prepared when the other participants are carrying actual swords.
What about this was unknown in regard to the Clintons? They attack and personally destroy people whom they regard as their enemies? You don’t say. This is how they play the game and if Trump or Adams didn’t know that then they needed to have their heads checked.
Does that make the Clintons right to do it this way? Of course not. But thieves are going to steal, fish are going to swim and Clintons are going to smear. Like sharks, if they aren’t swimming, they’re dying and when they’re swimming they smash everything in their path.
A big part of the reason that the Clintons get away with and have gotten away with their corrupt activities is that so many in the so-called opposition party are willing to provide them cover for political expediency. It is time to call out the Clintons and the Democrats as the corrupt, money-grubbing fascists that they are.
Re: Trump, can you give us an example?
Adams is perfectly free to make whatever comments he wants from his position. He comes by his position vis a vis his work as a cartoonist and this earns him no credibility in the political sphere. It would be as if I were to begin telling Adams the best way to market a cartoon strip because I’ve written extensively on public policy. I would be justly attacked and ridiculed for my ignorance.
Does he have the right to comment? To say what he does? You bet. Does he have the right to do so and then reapply his clown nose to avoid the heat that he’s called down on himself? No.
So go on, Mr. Adams – I’ll merely share a cautionary quote from Ayn Rand with him: “Judge, and prepare to be judged.”
Apparently we read the post by Adams very differently. I saw him reporting matter-of-factly about his personal experience not whining about it.
Having followed Adams’ blog since this whole situation began, his moral universe is sufficiently inverted that he doesn’t take this sort of thing as an insult or something to whine about. It’s a deep compliment to him that he is seen as being important enough to attack in this way. He’s a troll under a bridge who’s been thrown a whole goat. He’s ecstatic about it.
There is a difference between disagreement, anger, and going out of your way to destroy someone. It is sad that so many Conservatives must keep silent or lose work. They are almost branded non-humans.
Whenever anyone says … “Your candidate is glue!” Just crank up Joan Jett …
p.s. it is what keeps @docjay sane throughout this crazy political season …
How does that square with
?