Translate

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Our Principle Enemies

Roger L. Simon calls on conservatives and sort-of-conservatives to unite against Hillary Clinton, whom he labels as "the Principle Enemy."
And, whether they know it or not, Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, center-right folks, all those who favor smaller government and increased freedom, do have a principal enemy. But, surprisingly, it’s no longer Barack Obama. He is over. He was already a lame duck when Obamacare plucked most of his remaining feathers. The damage he can do may still be serious, but most of it will be reparable.

The principal enemy for the right and the center-right is now Hillary Clinton, the vastly favored frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. She is so far in front, in fact, that her competitors are not even in hailing distance. Hillary is the one who can consolidate and solidify the “gains” of the Obama era in a way Obama himself never could because she is much more politically savvy — Obama was only savvy about getting elected, not governing — and has the backing of her even more politically savvy husband. Hillary is the one who can fully remake the United States into some version of Western Europe or, yet more frighteningly, China, a permanently stratified state capitalism governed by quasi-totalitarian bureaucrats. (We can call this system Soros Marxism, meaning a ruling clique of increasingly rich corporate czars employing a propagandistic veneer of socialist equality to keep the power and wealth for themselves.)
Calling her a Soros Marxist is, in itself, a revealing fact--that behind people like Obama and Clinton are other wealthy and powerful people that prosper through the crony-capitalism (or Soros Marxism, if you prefer). The problem, which Simon ignores, is that the RINOs are beholden to (or at least, smitten by) the Soros Marxists.

So, which way forward? Try and get the RINOs to act against their selfish interests, or try to replace the RINOs with people that actually represent their constituencies? The past several elections cycles have suggested that, left to their own devices, the RINOs will not select anyone to run for President that is capable of winning against even a moderately charismatic Democrat. The past several years have also shown that the RINOs will immediately run to their masters (the Democrats) if for any reason they do not fear for their jobs. I do not see cooperating with RINOs as a winning strategy.

I also think the Benghazi incident will come back to bite Hillary, no matter how much the New York Times tries to revise history. As Andrew Klavan writes:
But my question to the New York Times is this: What difference does it make?
Either the incompetent Mrs. Clinton engaged in a shameful cover-up of the truth or she shamefully sold out our values for the values of murderous scum. If the attack was committed by terrorists and she knew it, she’s a liar. If the murderers killed because someone insulted their filthy and violent creed with a video, she’s a collaborator with evil. Disgusting in either case.
 This needs to be hammered home over and over again. Will it matter to the die hard Democrats? No. Like ardent Nazis, they will support their leaders to the bitter end. But it will make it extremely difficult for the RINOs to provide tacit support for Hillary.

No comments:

Post a Comment