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.
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?
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.]