At least that’s the word from Washingtonian magazine: DC conservatives are very, very hurt that liberals won’t date them (despite all the Republicans in Congress and their staffers, apparently there are not enough conservatives to date in their own pool). Just because someone supports a white-supremacist president, does that mean they’re beyond the pale?
Right-winger Lisa de Pasquale thinks this is a bad idea: sure, you want someone who shares your values, but why insist on them sharing your politics? Funny, I always hear conservatives describe how their votes are driven by their values, does de Pasquale mean they were lying about that? She goes on to argues that the worst names conservative fling out are “snowflake,” whiny” and “cuck,” which ignores that “cuck” is supposed to be a vicious insult in the alt.right world (and that some conservatives throw out considerably worse—I’ve been called “traitor” a couple of times). “By contrast, those on the right are called ‘Nazis,’ ‘racists,’ ‘bigots,’ ‘sexists’ and, if NRA members, ‘part of a terrorist organization’ by left-leaning people, simply for having conservative leanings.
“Conservative leanings” may be doing a lot of work here. Did someone get called a sexist because they support lower tax rates on corporations. or because they believe women shouldn’t work outside the home or that rape victims had it coming? Both of these could be considered “conservative leanings” but some people with conservative leanings are bigots and sexists. On the far right, for example, we have enthusiasm for controlling women through rape gangs and white sharia. Georgia wants to let adoption agencies turn away gay parents. Or county clerk Kim Davis, who claims she’s a hero for refusing to marry gay couples (or let anyone in her office marry them) but believe she’s the persecuted one (this past post might be relevant). Pundit Rod Dreher thinks French anti-semite and racist Marion Le Pen is pretty awesome, though Of Course he disapproves of her more extreme views.
de Pasquale is just a variation on the time-honored theme that liberals are mean to conservatives and full of hate, unlike, say, Trump. And that campus PC (which squashes conservative voices) is out of control, whereas a right-wing news corporation expanding its propaganda reach is no big. Next thing you know, they’ll say conservative comedy isn’t funny!
Moving on from that little issue-of-the-day—
Pastor Robert Jeffries used to insist it was wrong to compromise moral standards to get the right person elected. In the age of Trump, he’s changed his mind. I’m sure he and the other court evangelicals will be thrilled when Republicans change the law to let them be openly partisan while keeping their tax exemptions. Likewise right-winger Dennis Prager believes Trump destroying liberals is so godly, Trump must be doing holy work. So does Eric Metaxas, who says Trump critics are like the Good Samaritan’s carping brother (there is no brother in that parable).
The 1 percent hate pensions because pension programs reduce their power.
The Trump era is like a reality show is a cliche, and not even a clever one.
Even the Trump White House acknowledges Obama-era regulations are cost-effective (but they ain’t changing their anti-regulation policy).
I will give points to Benny Hinn for admitting he was wrong about the prosperity gospel. And to the usual odious Mona Charen for pointing out Republican hypocrisy in talking morality while supporting Roy Moore, child molester (she was resoundingly booed at CPAC for this).
Perhaps this cover by Earl Mayan expresses my feelings best.