Some worthy thoughts on mendacious politicians, the Clintons (but I repeat myself), and Donald Trump:
I’ve talked enough about the virtue of politeness and persuasion in politics. But how about a little disdain for unrestrained political carelessness? Trump’s total lack of ideological or intellectual rigor and consistency is making fools of people who once claimed they cared about such things.
Trump’s schtick as a sprinkler system of insults is getting everyone dirty. He throws mud on anything and anyone in his way. But that muck washes off quite easily. What stains down to the soul is the eagerness to apologize for, or even celebrate, the filth. In his professional life, Trump has left a trail of wreckage. His own James McDougals are strewn about like victims after a tornado. And his defenders celebrate this as proof he’s a great businessman.
Now the F6 is heading for Washington. His fans remind me of the naïve fools in Independence Day who welcome the aliens with cheers and handmade signs on rooftops, incapable of fathoming that they will be greeted with a death ray. The analogy breaks down because the dupes on the roof didn’t pave the way for the invaders. Meanwhile, Trump’s supporters have been crucial in bringing the Middle Finger of God to our doorsteps.
I didn’t try to wangle an invite, because I’m currently in Missouri, sort of on vacation (which is why the light blogging as well). But if I’d been in CA, I’d have probably driven up, just to see who else was in attendance.
A timely essay on the current state of the nation from Charles Murray.
[Sunday-morning update]
A bridge too far: I agree with Ace that Trump finally damaged himself last night, at least with actual Republicans. It’s one thing to say we had bad intel; it’s entirely another to say that Bush deliberately lied us into war. That’s the ravings of the left, not a leading Republican candidate.
The stay implies that they think the administration is likely to lose on the merits when the case is argued. But this points out the stakes of the election, given that the next president is likely to appoint more than one justice.
[Wednesday-morning update]
Jonathan Adler explains the ruling. (Note: He is more concerned about climate change than I am.)