8 Comments

National Review was a Derp State operation from its inception, it just managed to hide it better in the past. But the truth is anybody who knew anything and was paying attention could see that NR was an enemy of the United States of America and our Constitution back in 1962 when they came out against the John Birch Society by lying about it. They had to lie about it because to tell the truth about it would have worked contrary to their treasonous purposes.

There's a very telling paragraph in this NR article about the subject:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/william-f-buckley-john-birch-society-history-conflict-robert-welch/

"On the upside, as he had anticipated, mainstream and liberal commentators praised Buckley for taking on Welch. James Reston termed Buckley’s editorial “brilliant.” The Washington Post, in its editorial praise of his stand, referred to Buckley as “a conservative Catholic who recently scolded the Pope for showing socialistic tendencies.” Time pronounced National Review a “surprising” new recruit to the ranks of the JBS’s critics and proclaimed it an “increasingly lively, literate journal.” Clearly, Buckley was having an impact beyond the confines of the conservative movement."

So, only an idiot wonders whose side NR is on and has been since the beginning.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

"If the Post agrees with Buckley, then Buckley must be one of THEM. That's dumb. Don't get mad because sometimes people agree. "

This is not a coherent argument. The problem is the implication that Buckley agrees with the Post. It works both ways. Do YOU agree with the Washington Post about anything? If so, then, you cannot possibly be a patriotic Constitution loving American, because the Post hates America and our Constitution and especially Patriots who cling to our guns and our Bibles.

Most tellingly you give your deceitfulness away when you characterize the pro-American view as driven by anger: "Don't get mad" you say? Really? How is that not dismissive, and rude? What respect does such manipulative drivel give to the idea of logical argument?

Nice try, though, moonbat, do spin again.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Like Forrest Gump's Mom said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I think of my self as more of a wise ass.

Expand full comment

“The learn to code” and trashing people they have no idea about angered a lot of people.

Pushing their version of the “free market” with open borders, slave labor overseas, no tariffs by America but cool if they’re done to us...Probably not a good idea.

Going to guess this type of attitude is how you summon nemesis.

All the “free market” has done is fuel the revolution. Can’t have a country or culture without borders. There might be some evil out there that wants revenge on America and the West and trade doesn’t matter to them? What’s weird is all the non Western countries get this...

I watched John Ford’s, “The Grapes of Wrath” lately (I know it’s a book) It’s all about labor costs to this day...

Government should be limited to actual defense and war (tariffs are part of defense). I would say infrastructure, space exploration ( I threw that in there), and interstate commerce. Those are broad but no time for the minutiae...

Lastly, younger adults need mentors to assist in their growth, not overlords restricting it.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

It appears that the irony of complaining about "right-wing intellectuals" on the National Review blog escapes you.

You leftist loonies have no self-awareness, that much is obvious.

The fact that you fit in well here says more about National Review than anything else, though, I'll grant you that.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

"The tiniest minority of all: the right-wing intellectual."

QED.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Ha ha, you're so dumb.

Expand full comment