Enemies of Freedom

 

We don’t need to be lectured by enemies of freedom who claim some phony moral principle they hide behind to constrain us. Even if people like Max Boot, Tom Nichols, National Review, and others weren’t the bevy of hypocritical clowns they are, it would still be unacceptable for someone to impose their will on you from doing what you think is right or best. Their hypocrisy is just the icing on the cake.

Freedom is not just the ability to get fat and consume crap food, crap entertainment, and crap news from degenerate corporations. Freedom includes the freedom to act politically and to change the framework if need be. The same way the left loves regulating our private action, the enemies of freedom on the right love to regulate our political action. There are a million and one regulations on why we can’t do X, Y, or Z. It’s unprincipled. It’s not in line with the founding. It’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed. Don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t. Can’t can’t can’t can’t can’t can’t. Won’t won’t won’t won’t won’t.

And then they have the gall to claim they’re for freedom. What freedom? The freedom to get a big gulp and give yourself diabetes! Hell yeah! That’s about as far as freedom goes. What if I want to be free from corporations imposing gender ideology on kids? Nah. Too far. We don’t believe in that kind of freedom. You can go to Disneyworld and gorge yourself on cakes and 40-dollar cheeseburgers in their parks though! Hell yeah!

Is this what all the people who died in our wars died for? The freedom to cut your penis off, but not the freedom to come together and stop a practice we believe is abhorrent? We shouldn’t use our political power to undermine both the economic and political power of those who fight for this ideology? Says who? Last I checked this was a free society. And we can be for any law we want to be for. We can support any kind of politician we want. We can castigate any actor or group of actors we find to be unacceptable. We can be against any kind of practice we find detrimental. I don’t need to be tolerant, because I’m free. And freedom includes the freedom not to tolerate that which I find objectionable.

And we don’t need to be lectured by people who claim every action they take and every thought they have is warranted, merely because they claim their values and principles are the correct ones. And if we don’t agree with them then we have none and should be quiet. We don’t have the freedom and they have maximum freedom to push anything they want to push because they’re the anointed.

The right throws around principle the same way the left throws around racism. Both are meant to silence and stop the seizing power away from people who have presided over 40 years of decay.

There is nothing principled about the current trajectory we are on. There is nothing moral about either party and their terrible members and leadership. There’s no virtue in allowing mega-corporations who got their mega status through special carveouts and favors telling us what we should or should not do as a people. And the people who have anointed themselves the vanguards of this ideology or that ideology, this cause or that cause, this party or that party have no business telling us what we can or can’t do. That it interferes with their little ideology or their little world and it threatens their station is where our freedom meets their limits.

Go ahead and write for whatever loser magazine you want to write for. Go ahead and prostitute yourself to whatever club or group or cause you want to claim is so important or so valuable. You’re free to do it. And the rest of us are free to stomp all over it and tell you that we don’t care. The same way they tell us they don’t care when we want action in a direction unsuitable to them. They’re no different than someone who pulls out a copy of Mao’s little red book and tells you it’s not in line with party policy. I don’t need to be in line with your ideological garbage. I don’t need to be in line with your policy. I don’t need to be in line with your party. I don’t need to be in line with your principles. Left or right. Know why? Because I’m free. 

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 58 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    I love freedom. I also care about what will work to secure and preserve as much of it as possible. Sometimes that means forming alliances with people who don’t agree with you about some things. Shoot, always it means forming such alliances.

    I respect everyone’s right to declare his or her independence from every party and faction. However, as the old adage says, we may not care about government but government certainly cares about us. With that in mind, I’ll continue to ally myself with the faction and party most likely to bring the nation closer to where I want it to be. I’m not quite old enough and not quite tired enough to turn my back on the process and go home. I may get to that point, but I haven’t yet.

    For now, I’ll continue to pragmatically pursue an ideal.

    • #1
  2. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Very well said.  I wonder if Robby Starbuck agrees with you.  Last I heard he was coolly shadow banned from the Republican primary ballot for Congress in Tennessee.  Closed meeting.  Closed door.  At night.

    Republicans.

    • #2
  3. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I love freedom. I also care about what will work to secure and preserve as much of it as possible. Sometimes that means forming alliances with people who don’t agree with you about some things. Shoot, always it means forming such alliances.

    I respect everyone’s right to declare his or her independence from every party and faction. However, as the old adage says, we may not care about government but government certainly cares about us. With that in mind, I’ll continue to ally myself with the faction and party most likely to bring the nation closer to where I want it to be. I’m not quite old enough and not quite tired enough to turn my back on the process and go home. I may get to that point, but I haven’t yet.

    For now, I’ll continue to pragmatically pursue an ideal.

    I’m old. I’m tired. Not going to wait for you. 

    time for new alliances. 

    • #3
  4. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    Max Boot should have stayed in the Soviet Union. He belongs there.

    • #4
  5. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Max Boot should have stayed in the Soviet Union. He belongs there.

    I don’t need to hear from the likes of Max Boot ever again. Here’s a guy who spent years saying that markets are the ideal. Free action in the private sector is what’s sought after and desired. Isn’t Musk’s purchase of Twitter a completely free market and voluntary decision? Yet here he is castigating it. He doesn’t want it. And then he will turn around and lecture about the principles of free markets and US foreign policy and all kinds of things. These people are full of it. 

    • #5
  6. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    But what of those people today who indeed have plenty of bread, literally and metaphorically?

    Why are they so eager to trade in their freedom, and that are they seeking to trade it in for?

     

    • #6
  7. Franz Drumlin Member
    Franz Drumlin
    @FranzDrumlin

    Read Kevin D. Williamson’s essay on European Internet regulation posted on today’s National Review website. Hardly a craven whine from a hypocritical clown.

    • #7
  8. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    Well this makes sense, no?  A man can live as a slave, but even a slave must have bread.

    Max Boot has become Das Boot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Boot

    I don’t understand how Boot, once a reasonably-aligned conservative with a fondness for military affairs, can have fallen so far off the wagon.  It’s such a change in worldview as to be incomprehensible.  Are people like this bought off?  Did he have a stroke or a brain fever?

     

    • #8
  9. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I love freedom. I also care about what will work to secure and preserve as much of it as possible. Sometimes that means forming alliances with people who don’t agree with you about some things. Shoot, always it means forming such alliances.

    I respect everyone’s right to declare his or her independence from every party and faction. However, as the old adage says, we may not care about government but government certainly cares about us. With that in mind, I’ll continue to ally myself with the faction and party most likely to bring the nation closer to where I want it to be. I’m not quite old enough and not quite tired enough to turn my back on the process and go home. I may get to that point, but I haven’t yet.

    For now, I’ll continue to pragmatically pursue an ideal.

    I’m old. I’m tired. Not going to wait for you.

    time for new alliances.

    Sure. I understand. Just so long as whatever we do has a real chance of working. That’s what counts: it has to work. Otherwise it’s just a tantrum.

    • #9
  10. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    Well this makes sense, no? A man can live as a slave, but even a slave must have bread.

    Max Boot has become Das Boot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Boot

    I don’t understand how Boot, once a reasonably-aligned conservative with a fondness for military affairs, can have fallen so far off the wagon. It’s such a change in worldview as to be incomprehensible. Are people like this bought off? Did he have a stroke or a brain fever?

    I’ve been wondering the same thing. It’s such a radical turn from what he once wrote; really a puzzling change. He doesn’t seem like the same person. But then there’s Jennifer Rubin…

    • #10
  11. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    Well this makes sense, no? A man can live as a slave, but even a slave must have bread.

    Max Boot has become Das Boot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Boot

    I don’t understand how Boot, once a reasonably-aligned conservative with a fondness for military affairs, can have fallen so far off the wagon. It’s such a change in worldview as to be incomprehensible. Are people like this bought off? Did he have a stroke or a brain fever?

     

    I’ve been wondering the same thing. It’s such a radical turn from what he once wrote; really a puzzling change. He doesn’t seem like the same person.

    He’s not the only guy who makes me wonder if he ever believed what he was shoveling.

    • #11
  12. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    Well this makes sense, no? A man can live as a slave, but even a slave must have bread.

    Max Boot has become Das Boot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Boot

    I don’t understand how Boot, once a reasonably-aligned conservative with a fondness for military affairs, can have fallen so far off the wagon. It’s such a change in worldview as to be incomprehensible. Are people like this bought off? Did he have a stroke or a brain fever?

     

    I’ve been wondering the same thing. It’s such a radical turn from what he once wrote; really a puzzling change. He doesn’t seem like the same person.

    He’s not the only guy who makes me wonder if he ever believed what he was shoveling.

    Maybe we have to figure that the large number of people lying to the left doesn’t leave many openings for new hires, but there was – at least for a while – a wide-open field for lying to the right.

    • #12
  13. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    It appears as if Max Boot only tweets in order to publicly  humiliate Max Boot.

    • #13
  14. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand. 

    • #14
  15. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    I think you’d find that many/most/perhaps all criticism of Max Boot would be very different and perhaps nonexistent if he hadn’t done such huge flip-flops seemingly out of thin air, likely Because Trump.

    • #15
  16. DrewInWisconsin, Oik! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Oh noes. You criticized NR on Ricochet. That is not allowed. Prepare for incoming!

    • #16
  17. DrewInWisconsin, Oik! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I thought this quote couldn’t be real.

    But it is.

    • #17
  18. Nanocelt TheContrarian Member
    Nanocelt TheContrarian
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    I too have read National Review for years. It has become more and more difficult to take seriously, as NR was the original Never-Trump publication. Those who favor cooperation with all parties more or less on “our side” need to consider why  the NR writers abandoned us the minute Trump announced his campaign. Where was their willingness to collaborate with the like minded, like us?  They threw us under the bus instantly, as if we were  Birchers besmeared by WFB himself. Sanctimonious ideologues IMHO. Self-appointed Grand Inquisitors of “Conservatism”.

    I’m old too, but being male, I still think I’m 18 and am as feisty, though slower of wit, and sans the wisdom of age. I grew up 40 miles from where Cliven Bundy ran his cattle. I understand where he comes from. I’m from there myself. The hinterlands of the Nevada wasteland. Rich Lowry has no idea of the nature of the people there. He and his magazine savaged Cliven. When his conviction was thrown out (WITH PREJUDICE, meaning the government could not return to attempt to prosecute him) by a judge who was appalled at the FBI actions that egregiously violated Bundy’s civil rights, Lowry basically hid under his desk. Minimal information, no apologies, no mea culpa, no nothing, no NADA. The main concern of NR is preserving its elitist status and its self aggrandized importance in its own mind and its supposed influence on national policy and politics.

    In soto voce the writers of NR savaged Ron de Santis and the Republicans in Florida for  removing Disney’s special district status, as if the good people of Florida should pay obeisance  to an organization that vowed to use its resources and media to indoctrinate small children sexually, regardless of the wishes and interests of the parents. SO they basically came out in favor of the sexual grooming of small children. As did all the Libertarian and conservatorial economists, from Don Boudreaux, Veronique de Rugy, Henderson, et. al. These people wish to control the ideology of “conservatives” but they utterly disdain ordinary Americans, and in particular they are absolutely hostile and insulting toward anyone of conservative bent who doesn’t kowtow to their definition of conservatism.

    Why are the writers of National Review so hostile to US?

    • #18
  19. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    You should make that a separate new post.

    • #19
  20. DrewInWisconsin, Oik! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Nanocelt TheContrarian (View Comment):
    They threw us under the bus instantly, as if we were Birchers besmeared by WFB himself.

    Heck, one of Ricochet’s notorious Nevers has frequently used that very comparison in suggesting we be thrown from the conservative movement.

    • #20
  21. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik! (View Comment):

    I thought this quote couldn’t be real.

    But it is.

    Not quite.  This video was posted 10:29 PM · Jul 6, 2021 and is in reference to Trump controlling how people think.  I’m sure the same sentiment applies to Musk, though.

    • #21
  22. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    I think you’d find that many/most/perhaps all criticism of Max Boot would be very different and perhaps nonexistent if he hadn’t done such huge flip-flops seemingly out of thin air, likely Because Trump.

    I would probably agree – Max Boot seems to have gone over to the dark side. National Review hasn’t.

    • #22
  23. Painter Jean Member
    Painter Jean
    @PainterJean

     

    In soto voce the writers of NR savaged Ron de Santis and the Republicans in Florida for removing Disney’s special district status, as if the good people of Florida should pay obeisance to an organization that vowed to use its resources and media to indoctrinate small children sexually, regardless of the wishes and interests of the parents. SO they basically came out in favor of the sexual grooming of small children.

    Wow – who knew, huh? I happened to agree with the reasoning of Charlie Cooke, to take just one writer. It is going to cost taxpayers in Orange County more to pick up the services that Disney used to do. Punish Disney, by all means, but punishing the taxpayers of the area seems like an ill-considered way to make a point. The special district happens to benefit the residents of the area, not just Disney.  So by your stellar reasoning, I must be all for the sexual grooming of small children too!

    The stupidity of this kind of thinking is discouraging, to put it mildly.

     

    • #23
  24. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    In soto voce the writers of NR savaged Ron de Santis and the Republicans in Florida for removing Disney’s special district status, as if the good people of Florida should pay obeisance to an organization that vowed to use its resources and media to indoctrinate small children sexually, regardless of the wishes and interests of the parents. SO they basically came out in favor of the sexual grooming of small children.

    Wow – who knew, huh? I happened to agree with the reasoning of Charlie Cooke, to take just one writer. It is going to cost taxpayers in Orange County more to pick up the services that Disney used to do. Punish Disney, by all means, but punishing the taxpayers of the area seems like an ill-considered way to make a point. The special district happens to benefit the residents of the area, not just Disney. So by your stellar reasoning, I must be all for the sexual grooming of small children too!

    The stupidity of this kind of thinking is discouraging, to put it mildly.

    Is someone claiming that Disney can’t be taxed enough to pay for what they used to pay for directly?  Or that doing so would somehow put Disney out of business?

    Do tell.

    • #24
  25. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):
    Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor asserted that people will eagerly trade freedom for bread.

    Well this makes sense, no? A man can live as a slave, but even a slave must have bread.

    Max Boot has become Das Boot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Boot

    I don’t understand how Boot, once a reasonably-aligned conservative with a fondness for military affairs, can have fallen so far off the wagon. It’s such a change in worldview as to be incomprehensible. Are people like this bought off? Did he have a stroke or a brain fever?

    I’ve been wondering the same thing. It’s such a radical turn from what he once wrote; really a puzzling change. He doesn’t seem like the same person. But then there’s Jennifer Rubin…

    Boot and Ruben were likely sycophants of intel agencies. That’s where the pro-war stances came from. They backed any politician who was for continuing or starting wars, and that includes Hillary Clinton circa 2016.  In retrospect they are very consistent if you look into which particular politicians they backed. Common denominator;  very pro intelligence and pro military interventions. I see the intel agencies as the meth-addled paranoid monster chasing boogeymen and playing weird politics.

    Then the word was Trump is the enemy, threatening , evil and must be stopped at any cost. Everybody in DC has friends and sources, or maybe just people they’d like to impress. Jen Rubin didn’t ever have wine with guys from Langley? Give me a beak. Max Boot wasn’t sucking up to every defense contractor in every one of his advocacies for the next intervention? 

    And everything with these people is personal. They hate a person. not a system or an ideology. That’s apparently too complex for them. It’s Putin, it’s Elon Musk, it’s Trump it was Bush and Reagan before.  It’s always a person who is really bad who has us all in bondage and suffering. It’s never the absurd and ridiculous system they created under our noses. Or the system that allowed this guy to come to power. 

    • #25
  26. Justin Other Lawyer Coolidge
    Justin Other Lawyer
    @DouglasMyers

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    Couldn’t agree more.

    • #26
  27. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik! (View Comment):

    Oh noes. You criticized NR on Ricochet. That is not allowed. Prepare for incoming!

    Yup. I consider William F Buckley and his legacy to be worthless. I don’t care for fusionism. I don’t care for that brand of conservatism or its intellectual legacy and protectors. It’s failed. When the entire magazine wrote a big anti trump issue but never a big apology issue that was it for me. I have criticisms of Trump. He wasn’t perfect. But on the eve of him clinching the nomination for them to throw their entire weight behind stopping him was unforgivable. And not just saying they’d prefer another nominee. But making it clear he’s unacceptable to win the nomination and unacceptable to be president. 

    • #27
  28. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    Justin Other Lawyer (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    Couldn’t agree more.

    National Review is the place I go to hear I’m a bigot if I don’t agree with trans nonsense and that I never should have voted for Trump. And how I should see the left’s point of view. It’s the place that got rid of Mark Steyn. I have no patience for it. Sorry. 

     

    • #28
  29. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    Nanocelt TheContrarian (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    I have no patience for the inclusion of National Review in that list. I like National Review – my late husband and I have subscribed to it for decades. There’s a variety of opinions that its writers express on a variety of topics. I can usually learn something, even with those whose position I disagree with. If I want to get a conservative opinion for or against defending Taiwan, for example, National Review is where I expect to read a thoughtful exposition of both positions. It strikes me as profoundly stupid to make a point of insulting and alienating those who are on your side, even if not precisely where you stand.

    I too have read National Review for years. It has become more and more difficult to take seriously, as NR was the original Never-Trump publication. Those who favor cooperation with all parties more or less on “our side” need to consider why the NR writers abandoned us the minute Trump announced his campaign. Where was their willingness to collaborate with the like minded, like us? They threw us under the bus instantly, as if we were Birchers besmeared by WFB himself. Sanctimonious ideologues IMHO. Self-appointed Grand Inquisitors of “Conservatism”.

    I’m old too, but being male, I still think I’m 18 and am as feisty, though slower of wit, and sans the wisdom of age. I grew up 40 miles from where Cliven Bundy ran his cattle. I understand where he comes from. I’m from there myself. The hinterlands of the Nevada wasteland. Rich Lowry has no idea of the nature of the people there. He and his magazine savaged Cliven. When his conviction was thrown out (WITH PREJUDICE, meaning the government could not return to attempt to prosecute him) by a judge who was appalled at the FBI actions that egregiously violated Bundy’s civil rights, Lowry basically hid under his desk. Minimal information, no apologies, no mea culpa, no nothing, no NADA. The main concern of NR is preserving its elitist status and its self aggrandized importance in its own mind and its supposed influence on national policy and politics.

    In soto voce the writers of NR savaged Ron de Santis and the Republicans in Florida for removing Disney’s special district status, as if the good people of Florida should pay obeisance to an organization that vowed to use its resources and media to indoctrinate small children sexually, regardless of the wishes and interests of the parents. SO they basically came out in favor of the sexual grooming of small children. As did all the Libertarian and conservatorial economists, from Don Boudreaux, Veronique de Rugy, Henderson, et. al. These people wish to control the ideology of “conservatives” but they utterly disdain ordinary Americans, and in particular they are absolutely hostile and insulting toward anyone of conservative bent who doesn’t kowtow to their definition of conservatism.

     

    100%

    • #29
  30. GlenEisenhardt Coolidge
    GlenEisenhardt
    @GlenEisenhardt

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

     

    In soto voce the writers of NR savaged Ron de Santis and the Republicans in Florida for removing Disney’s special district status, as if the good people of Florida should pay obeisance to an organization that vowed to use its resources and media to indoctrinate small children sexually, regardless of the wishes and interests of the parents. SO they basically came out in favor of the sexual grooming of small children.

    Wow – who knew, huh? I happened to agree with the reasoning of Charlie Cooke, to take just one writer. It is going to cost taxpayers in Orange County more to pick up the services that Disney used to do. Punish Disney, by all means, but punishing the taxpayers of the area seems like an ill-considered way to make a point. The special district happens to benefit the residents of the area, not just Disney. So by your stellar reasoning, I must be all for the sexual grooming of small children too!

    The stupidity of this kind of thinking is discouraging, to put it mildly.

     

    What’s stupid is this position that conservatism should suffer no hardship in order to win. We can’t do anything because it might negatively affect someone somewhere. I don’t care if Disney goes out of business. I don’t care if all the jobs and all the entertainment they provide evaporates in to thin air. Protecting kids is more important. And if Disney doesn’t relent then they’ve slit their own wrists and I feel no sympathy for them. Disney should be smacked so hard and the costs should be heavy. If they have to fire people then so be it. Saving children in the USA is more important than saving the Disney corporation or keeping them comfortable. 

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.