Skip to main content

Still Don't Disagree With This

Welp. The GOP got itself stuck with Trump. This articulates pretty well my thoughts since last November. I don't agree that Never Trumpers have simply failed to put on their "big-boy" and "big-girl" pants, to just vote for him. Judicial myopia. With a hat-tip to Anderson for some help there. I have never responded to the battle-cry, "Judges!" before now, and I'm not starting now.

If I could disregard social issues, (abortion, gay unions/"rights", etc.) I'd vote for Hillary without hesitation. If you don't live in the thought-world where that might be an option, well, there are no locks on the metaphorical doors; I will leave you to whatever emotivist rage against me you are feeling.

The argument goes something like this: As her e-mails and Goldman Sachs speeches might show, she is a relentlessly triangulating careerist. She's no progressive ideologue. She's tough as nails; that's why we don't like her. She's smart, and she's at least as good a deal-maker as the Republican nominee, and probably better. She'll want her signature things, but she's all too happy to quietly help Paul Ryan re-build his brand, even if it's on the hush-hush, and she takes the credit. Most importantly, she's had half-thoughts before her morning coffee better than anything her opponent has said or written. We probably won't cease to exist if she wins.

I can't disregard abortion, and all those other attacks on human dignity that are actually a part of the Democratic platform. There is a non-negligible chance that Hillary Clinton believes in abortion et al, really believes in it, and is willing to persecute those who fight against it. The worst-case scenarios might be real; the practice of religion in the US may be irrevocably changed. This is all the reason I need not to vote for her.

We haven't even talked about her e-mails yet. I've heard of innocent mistakes by good officers being punished far worse. And Secretary Clinton's willingness to continue lying about it speaks volumes about her temperament and judgment. I wouldn't be overly stunned if someone decided to prosecute after the election. Poor Nixon thought he was in the clear 2 years when it all came crashing down.

And what Clinton did is far worse.

No need to belabor that point. If you want the truth, I'm ashamed and disappointed that so many solid Catholics are simply falling in line with Trump. This is not Mitt Romney. This is not George H. W. Bush. This is not John McCain. The fact that this man shares the title "Republican nominee" with these good and heroic men slanders them, and brings us deserved shame. I don't think it's too strong a point. Character matters, and it still matters, even if you are blinded with the galling hypocrisy of the Democrats. I'd feel the same way if Trump were winning. The fact that he is not makes it easier, to be sure. I hope, however, that these strong words are making some of you uncomfortable. I think a good number of you have been ignoring your gag reflex this entire election cycle. If we do that for too long, no one continues caring about what Christians in public have to say. Worse still, we will be like the rest.

As a side-point, there is a narrative in vogue with Republican interventionists (or "hawks", if you like) that Democrats are weak in foreign policy, that even their well-intentioned hesitations embolden our enemies, and make us less safe. We have believed it for decades, and used it to win countless elections. It's false, and it has no basis in fact. We should be far more concerned that a willingness to use force is not joined with prudent moral reflection concerning the conditions under which force will be employed, and that this malady affects both parties.


Popular posts from this blog

Underneath, It's All The Same

 As a general rule, I hate "pox on both your houses" takes on politics. Most of the time, I'm inclined to think that a particular person chooses this take because someone else has made them uncomfortable with a certain aspect of their own philosophy. If they adopt a posture of cynicism, maybe they can escape the moral force of that criticism. That could be bulverism in any one case, but I have seen it before, and I can't paint a picture without generalizing. Anyway, I didn't come here to talk about that. I came here to say that both major parties in the United States--and the people themselves--have embraced the absolute individualism at the heart of classical liberalism. Rightists want freedom from constraint in economics, environment, religious liberty, and a few other things. Leftists don't believe in this absolute individualism with respect to economics or the environment (not to mention religious liberty), but they do embrace it with respect to human sexu

You're Not Going To Die If The Democrats Win The Elections

I guess I'll tell you my gripes with Crisis magazine: the whole thing sounds like a Rod Dreher fever dream. You would think that armies of drag queens were kidnapping children to take them to the infamous Story Hour, in some kind of right-wing dystopian novel that is the reverse of The Handmaid's Tale. Come on, man. In other news, I would like to congratulate the Democrats, on seemingly finding some semblance of an economic message. You know, I'm old enough to remember when they actually were the party of the working class; it seemed like there for a while, they were the party of debt-ridden upper-class English majors, complaining because their slice of the pie lacks cherry sauce. [Wait, aren't they still those people?--ed.] Too soon. Anyway, I am what they used to call a "social conservative". And to be clear, I am not a social conservative for the sake of winning an election; I really believe and try to do the things that I say in this regard. Someone, howev

Final Election Analysis

 We might even say we're mere hours away from beginning to know who will assume the office of president on January 20 of next year. I'll cut right to the chase: I think this is going to be a really big win for Joe Biden. Real Clear Politics has shown a very heavy right bias, in the including of sketchy online polls, and in delaying the release of live voter polls more favorable to Joe Biden. Even so, their national polling average shows the lead for Biden at 7.8%. Keep in mind that if that were to hold, it would be a bigger percentage margin than Barack Obama achieved in 2008. The state polls are tight nearly everywhere, but they show clear leads for Joe Biden. The upper Midwest probably will not make any presidential calls on the night of the election, but Biden's lead in states that Trump should absolutely easily hold in a reelection campaign indicates to me that the president is in real trouble. He achieved a popular vote percentage in 2016 of 46%. He's going to be n