Thursday, March 3, 2016

The Bookworm Beat 2/25/2016 — the “no debate” edition and open thread

The Bookworm Beat 2/25/2016 — the “no debate” edition and open thread

Woman-writing-300x265Work and family meant no debate for me.  Anyway, I’m sick of a debateformatthat has candidates snarling like dogs at each other and at the moderators without actually providing useful information. In this post, I hope to provide some useful information.
Foreign policy matters in this election.  Both Jonah Goldberg and Charles Krauthammer make a point few of us have missed (or at least few conservatives have missed):  Obama is leaving the world in a much more fragile, dangerous state than it was when he took office.  I believe I said back in 2007, and I know I said back in 2008, that Obama’s determination to withdraw America from the foreign scene was going to unleash some madness.  It would also create new strategic alliances abroad, some better than others.
The new Obama-era reality is that, America’s past influence (whether as ballast, policeman, or financier) is gone.  The next president had better have some plans for dealing with this reality, whether we go all isolationist or try reasserting ourselves.
My take on Hillary is that her frequent flier miles do not offset her spectacularly bad decisions with regard to Russia, Syria, Libya, etc.
Bernie couldn’t care less about foreign policy.  Like Russian Communists in 1917, he wants to withdraw from the world and turn our nation into a worker’s paradise.
Trump talks big, but I don’t believe such big talk will work, which leaves us with . . . nothing.
Rubio is solid on foreign policy, but amnesty. . . .
I still like Cruz — he’s a hawk, but a more cautious hawk than Bush, in that he’s realized that, while we could kind of remake Germany and Japan after WWII, because both were modern nations and both were bombed into the dust, that kind of nation-building doesn’t work with Muslims.  I think Cruz has a more subtle mind than the other candidates, and I have a strong, albeit inchoate, feeling that this is a virtue for a president dealing with foreign policy.
Cruz’s tax plan is better than Trump’s.  I’m not a numbers person, so I’m not saying that Cruz’s tax plan is better.  An analyst at The Hill is saying that.  Check it out and see whether you agree or disagree.
Speaking of Trump and taxes.  One of Trump’s selling positions is that he’s really, really rich.  But how rich is he?  Well, Trump’s not saying.  That is, he says a lot, but he refuses to produce the one document —tax returns — that is most likely to reflect his wealth accurately (as opposed to all other documents that can be as true or untrue as he wishes).  Given Trump’ssometimes distant relationship with truth (something that’s a virtue on reality TV and, depending on how you like to do business, in cutting business deal), it would be nice to pin him down on the verities of his main claim to fame — being a multi-billionaire.
Should Rubio’s position on amnesty disqualify him as a true conservative candidate?  John Hawkins thinks so and I agree.  Here’s the sad truth:  Conservative outreach has failed to convince Hispanics that Progressives are lying when they say conservatives eat Hispanic children for breakfast and want to throw everyone else in the ocean.  Progressives want Hispanics, legal or illegal, because they know with reasonable certainty that this influx will ensure a permanent Democrat voting majority.  No matter Rubio’s motives, if he’s pressing for a course of action that will wipe out conservatives’chance to win elections for the next three decades, what kind of conservative is he?
Some Trump supporters have gotten bitten by the crazy bug.  Curmudgeonly Jonathan Last has officially come out against Trump because he’s concerned about the fanaticism of Trump supporters.  I’ve had the same concern about some of those who comment here.  Many make the traditional political arguments I understand, whether about Trump’s abilities versus other candidates’ abilities, his promises versus their promises, or his principles versus theirs.  Others, however, talk in doctrinal terms that leave me bewildered and a bit frightened.  Even if he doesn’t want to be a demagogue, too many of his fans want him to be one for my peace of mind.
Avi Woolf is also washing his hands of the unseemly passion he’s witnessing.  Matt Walsh isn’t impressed either by the fact that Trump fans love that Trump gives it good and hard, but they don’t admire the same forthrightness when Trump detractors give it right back (oh, and Walsh also really, really hates Trump, so be warned).
Trump’s campaign is bringing something very ugly out in people — and it’s a reminder, perhaps, that civility is a very thin veneer at best, and we’d better be careful how much we go about picking away at it.  And please note that I am not attempting to impugn either Trump or his supporters.  I am merely suggesting that while both have virtues on their own, when combined, much like ammonia and bleach, they seem to produce a dangerous vapor.
It’s obvious that Last, Woolf, and Walsh understand the fury and frustration driving Trump supporters.  But like me, they think the people backing Trump are being sold a bill of goods.  This vengeful fury isn’t the way to right the wrongs they see in an America battered by 50 years of Progressive education and media, and 7 years of Obama’s vision playing out.  America needs to return to principled small government constitutionalism; it doesn’t need to be pushed further down the Big Government road, only with Trump at the helm, rather than Obama, Hillary, or Bernie.

No comments:

Post a Comment