Saturday, December 3, 2016

Response to Goldberg's G-File

By Rich Kozlovich

Jonah sends an e-mail every week called the G-File, talking about pretty much whatever he pleases....and sometimes it's ....well....weird.  His positions on Trump this election have been almost irrational, so I think this article needs a response. 

Dear Mr. Goldberg,

I'm beginning to think you're ignoring my replies to you over some of your...well....weird comments.  You're clearly brilliant - I read Liberal Fascism, then bought the discs to listen to in my truck.  I also bought and gave it away, so I really do think you're brilliant....But....I'm shocked....shocked I tell're not paying attention to what I'm telling you!!!! 

I didn't like Trump because I viewed him as a self serving entertainer with an ego all out of proportion to his worth, and who was a perpetual candidate in order to get free advertising for his most important commodity - himself!  I've always felt if you want to see who a man is you look to see how he treats his wife.....and well as Newtie and Billy have been contemptible, and Newtie, who I assume you feel isn't "corrupting conservatism", bounced from position to position on Global Warming like a rubber ball in a handball court - and sounded totally convincing even when his views were180 degrees apart.

Mitch McConnell is what?  I'm  not thinking he's a "traditional conservative" - whatever that means - since he's not had the courage to force Obama and the Democrats to obey the Constitution and pass a budget.  But he's not "corrupting conservatism"? 

Ryan has shifted his position so many times on the budget - which hasn't been passed for how many years now - allowing Obama to spend via executive privilege like a drunken sailor on his first leave after 60 days at sea.......wasting enormous amounts of money - and he isn't "corrupting conservatism"?

However - even surprising me - it began to appear Trump could win this thing - even surprising him - to which I've been told is true. And he began to shift.  But did he create a "cult of personality". 

What exactly is that?

In this case I think that argument is a logical fallacy.  Cults of personality can only exist in a confined environment where no one and no thing can disturb the head nodding in an echo chamber of delusional propaganda.   That only occurs in a socialist paradise with no human rights and no options except to obey.  Do you really think that applies here?  His positions have been of concern, especially about putting Hillary in jail, but aren't you jumping the gun?  Hyperbolic predictions at this point are premature. 

I'm from Ohio and thought Kasich - having followed his career since the Reagan administration - would be one of Ohio's greatest governors.  He's a disaster as a result of his position on Obamacare....ultimately sticking Ohioans with billions of dollars we don't have.....and unlike the federal government......Ohio can't print it's own money.  He's a numbers guy....he had to know the history of government financed health care at the federal level.   He had to know the economics were all out of whack.  But he's apparently gotten a message from God to impose it - against it's rejection by the state legislature - on Ohio and go around the country telling other states the same clabber. 

When he took office he dumped a plan to create a rail system between Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.  The argument for it was we didn't want our federal money to go to some other state so we better take it and build the system.  His argument for dumping it was after the federal money ran out we were going to lose money on this mess every year it was in existence.  So why did he completely reverse the logic to impose Obamacare in Ohio, along with promoting every left wing calamity ever imposed on an unsuspecting public to "promote jobs", including the same kind of sweetheart deals Trump just made.

I met him a couple of years ago and I found him to be suffering from a serious case of weird compounded by a massive infection of hubris, and now we also know he's a liar, a bad theologian and heretic, claiming he has the right to define conservatism as he see fit.  But he's not "corrupting conservatism"?

Is it possible these "conservatives" more clearly represent being "body snatched" than Trump?

As for his flirtation with Romney - it demonstrates a side of Trump we've not seen in the past, and quite frankly - I'm impressed because public persona is - "it's all about me"- yet that may not be what he does in his real life to be successful.  Those who know me in my industry have - over an over again heard me say - "it's not about me, it's about the mission", and it seems to me - that's how he's's all about the mission.  He may view this as an historic moment in American history where as President can actually save America and is going to accept the "mission".  

That's heady stuff for anyone!

Do you really think Barro's article is worthwhile analysis?   However - I don't like the Carrier thing either and the signal it sends, but will that define his presidency? 

We'll see!

What we need in order to have clarity is definition.  What exactly do you consider "conservative ideology", and who do you think embodies it?  From all the people you've mentioned - I find all of them, including Huckabee and Romney, to be - at best - leaky vessels as allies in any conservative movement.  I liked Cruz from when he first went into the Senate, but all of his efforts were challenged by the "conservatives" in the Senate and the House.  So who was "corrupting conservatism" then? 

I still think he would have won if Trump didn't upset the apple cart, and I would be interested in seeing a list of what you consider "true" conservatives - but only after defining what you believe is "true conservative philosophy". 

As a side bar - Truth is the sublime convergence of history and reality - I no longer consider myself a conservative - I've defined myself as a conservative traditionalist based on history and reality. 

No comments: