Quote:
Originally Posted by SEC_Chick
|
I stopped reading after he started like this:
Quote:
Let’s start with the question of Donald Trump’s racism. I find the competition to be most offended by the offensiveness of President Trump’s fecal-crater comments to be more than a little tedious.
|
Yes, the most important thing to discuss on that topic is not what the President says (or the fact that he said it as he was blowing up a bipartisan deal to save DACA, which is to say that he said "shithole" in the process of holding hostage lots of people who have lived in this country their whole lives, for demands which are shifting and unclear -- making it increasingly apparent that he is screwing those people not as the means to some other goal, even a goal as tawdry as re-election, but as an end in itself) -- no, the most important thing for Goldberg is "the competition be most offended." I find no principle there at all, just a cheap rejection of other people's principles. And an obsequiousness, a commitment to anti-anti-Trumpism not because of the principles involved but despite them. It's a little reminder that the thing that really binds conservatives together is not any principle, it's opposition to the left. Goldberg could have principles if only they weren't so tedious.
eta: It's symptomatic that everyone is focused on Trump's calling other countries "shitholes," and not on the fact that only days after he held a photo op to say he would sign whatever Congress brought him, he rejected a bipartisan deal to fix DACA. A principled conservative might find a way to have a problem with that, if not for the fact (as above) that conservatives are bound together by opposition to the left, and so bipartisan deals are categorically suspect.