December 19, 2017

Some things are just too involuted for me.

"Conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

42 comments:

mezzrow said...

splitters...

Bay Area Guy said...

As to Trump, Rubin and Frum are hopelessly lost.

If you're a "conservative" and still a never-Trumper after his first year, well, ya might wanna give up politics and go into bowling.

Nonapod said...

a savagely personal attack

Yeah, what nonsense. I read the piece and it didn't seem remotely "personal" to me, it was attacking the inconsistency of her positions. To me, personal would be attacking someone's physical appearance or family. This was criticizing her arguments .

Mike Sylwester said...

I don't care what anybody says, I like David Frum.

I like also Bill Kristol, Charles Cook and many other Trump-haters.

They are real intellectuals, and they just cannot stand Trump's philistinism.

Can't we all just get along?

Gahrie said...

Frum is a tool of the Leftwing. Rubin is ensnared by Trump Derangement. Cooke is a never Trumper with ethics.

I give Cooke some credit for consistency.

Qwinn said...

I read the piece criticizing Rubin, and yes, there was nothing personal in it at all. It just quoted her accurately and showed her whiplash 180 self-contradictions with no explanation possible other than total TDS. It was perfectly fair. That quoting Rubin accurately and in context made her look like a complete tool isn't the fault of anyone but Rubin.

Drago said...

Jennifer Rubin is the LLR Chuck of the Washington Post. Always in rhetorical alignment with the dems, even at the cost of sacrificing previous positions.

Rubin mentioned Chuck Schumer 76 times last year and mentioned Pelosi around 66 times last year.....and not a single criticism of either.

Not a single one.

It doesn't get any more LLR and "accidentally leftist" Chuck-y than that!

Michael K said...

I gave up on Frum a few years ago.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"I read the piece and it didn't seem remotely "personal" to me, it was attacking the inconsistency of her positions."

Yeah, "savagely personal" means Cooke accurately quoted Rubin's words.

Her entire political stance boils down to "If Trump did it, I hate it!"

I've said before that if Trump cured cancer, the Trump haters like Rubin and Chuck would be mad at him for putting oncologists out of business.

Drago said...

Mike Sylvester: "Can't we all just get along?"

Well, yes. Of course. Why not.

However, when Frum, Rubin, Kristol et al start changing their positions on policy just to naysay what Trump is proposing than you and I part ways on the "can't we all just get along" "thing".

What are your thoughts about those you "like" (and by the way, I was a fan of these guys too for a long time too) when they switch policy positions just to oppose Trump?

Rubin's backflips on any number of issues is absolutely revealing and Kristol talking about releasing his "inner socialist" is even more revealing.

Nonapod said...

they just cannot stand Trump's philistinism.

They need to get the @%#^ over it.

The Landlord said...

"Conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

Sounds more reasonable than DARK David Frum DOWN.

dda6ga dda6ga said...

Yep, she sounds just like any ex-wife discussing child support and the need for a new car and dentures...

robother said...

In the last paragraph, Cooke literally accused Rubin of throwing a baby! out with the bath water! in December! in the Northern Hemisphere!

It doesn't get more savagely personal than that.

BDNYC said...

@ Bay Area Guy

I'm a conservative who didn't vote for Trump and I still wish he wasn't president. I agree with him on some things and disagree with him on others. I despise the Resistance. I think the Russia collusion is hogwash and basically just an excuse for entrenched interests in DC to undermine Trump and his agenda. I believe Trump is entitled to control the executive branch, and I believe the voters are entitled to the policies of a Trump presidency. I believe Trump often conducts himself dishonorably, he lies too much and he diminishes the office. His populist antics and tweets make me cringe. He's an embarrassment to the country.

I may still have to vote for him in 2020.

Should I give up on politics and go bowling?

Sebastian said...

"Can't we all just get along?"

As Cooke showed, with Rubin it's not clear what you'd have to get along with.

But the answer is no, we can't all just get along.

We tried W, who wanted to get along. We tried McCain, who wanted to get along. We tried Mitt, who wanted to get along. Dems despised and the MSM vilified them all. That's how we got here.

Even Trump would prefer to get along. He got along with everyone fine before he ran for prez as a GOPer. After that, he couldn't get along with many people. Surprise.

Jim at said...

A savagely personal attack ... by pulling her own quotes and highlighting them.

Yep. Pure savagery.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"they just cannot stand Trump's philistinism."


It isn’t just that. The GOPe was positive, absolutely positive that their boy Jeb! was going to win the nomination. He had the pedigree, the GOP connections, the money. Lo, along came this vulgar upstart, this joke, who kicked Jeb! in the balls and ran away with the nomination – because Trump criticized things the GOPe and Establishment didn’t care about or favored, like illegal immigration and globalism. And then he won the general – another hard kick in the cojones. He made people like Rubin and Frum and Will look like out-of-touch hacks and fools instead of paragons of political wisdom.

They’ll never, ever forgive him, any more than the liberals will. After winning, Trump then proceeded to pour a dump truck full of salt on their wounds. Lowry and Mark Levine have admitted Trump has had a good first year; even Jonah Goldberg is grudgingly willing to give Trump some credit although Goldberg was attacked personally by Trump and (understandably) finds that difficult to forgive.

People don't like people who make them look foolish. Trump made them look stupid.

Oh, and did you notice that Frum said basically that conservativism is what leading conservatives say it is? Well isn’t that a fine display of integrity coming from a “leading conservative?”

Mike Sylwester said...

Drago at 1:33 PM

What are your thoughts ... when they switch policy positions just to oppose Trump?

They just hate, hate, hate Donald Trump.

Even when they agree with Trump's policy positions, they fear that Trump is ignorant, incoherent and unreliable on the positions.

They are right that Trump is a buffoon, but they should embrace him as OUR buffoon.

I voted for Ted Cruz in my primary election, but I was happy to vote for Trump in the general election, and I was ecstatic when he won.

The Trump presidency is lots of laughs. I laugh about it every day.

Michael Medved recently wrote a superb column that has influenced my thinking. The article was published by USA Today under the title "Donald Trump's dysfunctional presidency might just be a boon for empty wallets".

There, Medved pointed out that the USA had a series of "bad" presidents during our so-called "Gilded Age". Ironically, however, our economy flourished with growth and innovation, because those presidents were too ineffective to manage our economy.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/10/17/history-shows-terrible-president-can-mean-prosperity-michael-medved-column/565195001/

Bay Area Guy said...


"I may still have to vote for him in 2020.

Should I give up on politics and go bowling?"

---------------------------------------
Yes, but only if you can nail that dreaded 7-10 split.

Bob said...

Althouse reports conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece.

Bob said...

> "Conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

>> "Althouse reports conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

Commenters remark on Althouse's report that conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece.

Roy Jacobsen said...

> "Conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

>> "Althouse reports conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

>>> Commenters remark on Althouse's report that conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece.

Women and Minorities hardest hit

Bob said...

> "Some things are just too involuted for me."
> "Conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

>> "Althouse reports conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece."

>>> Commenters remark on Althouse's report that conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece.

>>>> Women and Minorities hardest hit

Critics complain women and minorities hardest hit when commenters remark on Althouse's report that conservatives LIGHT David Frum UP for attacking Charles C.W. Cooke over Rubin piece.

StephenFearby said...

Charles C.W. Cooke usually tosses a tasty word salad.

Although this one was kinda a rant, Rubin deserved to be taken to the woodshed.

Maybe she'll learn something useful from this public thrashing.

"Taking someone to the woodshed means meting out punishment in private, out of the view of any onlookers.

The phrase dates from an era prior to the early years of the 20th century, when (a) most people lived in rural areas, (b) people had woodsheds behind their houses for the storage of firewood, and (c) corporal punishment was commonplace. It typically referred to the father taking a child out back, either into the woodshed or behind it, for a thrashing. The reasoning was ostensibly to spare the mother having to listen to the child's wailing."


Haven't heard Rubin's wailing reply yet.

Qwinn said...

Frum white-knights for Rubin by defending her against non-existent personal attacks, no one notices inherent sexism.

Kyzernick said...

Rubin needs to stop writing and start collecting cats full time. Her ship sailed about 5 years ago.

Drago said...

Mike Sylvester: "I voted for Ted Cruz in my primary election, but I was happy to vote for Trump in the general election, and I was ecstatic when he won."

Ditto.

Leora said...

Whole thing reminds me of Jr High.

Chuck said...

Drago; I'm not evn going to get mad at you today.

I read that piece by Charlie, when it first came out. Before any of the Frum/blowback controversy even began. Actually, I did not realize there was any controversy at all, until I saw this Althouse post. And as usual, I'm grateful to Althouse for yet another timely, informative posting. I love Charlie Cooke, and I enjoyed reading this latest one from him.

And Drago, I have to say I sort of cringed reading it. "Please don't let me be Jennifer Rubin!", I was thinking.

Now I have another confession to you. I barely knew who Jennifer Rubin was, before she began to get regular spots on MSNBC. I saw her tagged there as "Conservtive Washington Post Columnist," and I thought, "What conservative writing has she done?" I'm not a WaPo subscriber or even a regular reader.

Anyway, I liked that column by Charlie Cooke. I am going to try to take some value from it. I'm going to be careful about lapsing into Trump Derangement Syndrome. I'm sure, Drago, you will note well the number of times that Charles went out of his way to condemn the "conservative" Trump sycophants right alongside of the "conservative" Trump-haterz. Did you catch that? You have to say yes; it is right there in the column.

I also do not have to answer for all, or even any, of Jennifer Rubin's dramatic position reversals where everything Trump does is wrong but two years ago Rubin had the opposite views. I don't have those positional reversals to answer for. My complaints about Trump are almost always personal. Sometimes more broadly about "stupid," but not usually about things like Israel's strategic interests.

You can't stand to let me do it, Drago, but perhaps the most important distinction between me and Jennifer Rubin is the basic issue that I voted for Trump. I don't think Jennifer Rubin did; I don't think she'd admit it now if it were true. I voted for Trump, and don't mind saying so. I've always said so, from just before the 2016 general.

And because she's a twit columnist and has to write about every little thing, she also has to exhaustively cover all kinds of issues that I've never written a word about. And mostly, those are her positional flips that Cooke was writing about. Nothing that I need to answer for.

But Drago, I hope it gives you some minor (and no more) pleasure that the thought you had crossed my mind as well.

Ray said...

A+ response from Chuck on the matter.

When I read the column earlier this week at the National Review, I was surprised by how inconsistent Jennifer Rubin was. It's amazing how many of the anti Trump Conservative types are ideologically inconsistent, beyond anything Trump supports we don't.

Drago said...

Chuck: "Drago; I'm not evn going to get mad at you today."

Huzzah!

Drago said...

Chuck: "Drago, you will note well the number of times that Charles went out of his way to condemn the "conservative" Trump sycophants right alongside of the "conservative" Trump-haterz."

I don't know what the definition of a "Trump sycophant" is.

If it's someone who supported Cruz in the primaries and then was enthusiastic about voting for Trump in order to defeat Hillary and then have been extremely pleased with the actions taken by President Trump (who is actually governing with Reaganesque policies) then I guess I'm a sycophant.

But you are indeed every inch a Jennifer Rubin.

Chuck: "...but perhaps the most important distinction between me and Jennifer Rubin is the basic issue that I voted for Trump."

There is actually zero evidence of that, and in any event, it is irrelevant. You are completely in operational and rhetorical alignment with the dems. Your motivations are irrelevant.

Drago said...

LLR Chuck: " I'm going to be careful about lapsing into Trump Derangement Syndrome"


"Too Late!"

Inga said...

Conservatism Can't Survive Donald Trump Intact

As reflexive support for the president redefines their movement, most conservative commentators have caved to pressure, following along.


Nicely put.

Marty Keller said...

And Inga swings and misses--again.

As Drago asks, who are these "reflexive supporters" (and what does that actually mean?) and how have they "redefined their movement"?

Seems to me that Mr. Trump is a rather unique political presence who has defied most attempts to put him in a box. On the other hand, that means he will have a tough time tranferring his successes to other individuals or even movements, particularly as he seems to lack a coherent governing strategy.

So what, exactly, is the "pressure" to which "most conservative commentators have caved"?

dhagood said...

"If it's someone who supported Cruz in the primaries and then was enthusiastic about voting for Trump in order to defeat Hillary and then have been extremely pleased with the actions taken by President Trump (who is actually governing with Reaganesque policies) then I guess I'm a sycophant."

that pretty much defines me as well. i will note that what got trump the most traction was the illegal immigration issue. poll after poll has shown a big majority of americans don't like illegal immigration and wants it to end. trump stated clearly that he thought illegal immigration was bad and he was going to do something positive to end it. everybody else, including cruz, waved their arms wildly and shrieked how horrible having to opine on the immigration issue was. without the illegal immigration issue, there would be no pressident trump.

Big Mike said...

I used to read Jennifer Rubin quite regularly, even more than I formerly read Althouse, but Rubin really, really became unhinged as it became more and more clear that Donald Trump was going to be the nominee. She and David Brooks have this in common: they are what a left-wing extremist newspaper thinks a “proper” conservative ought to be like. But even before she went off the rails I regarded Rubin as left of center. She only resembles a conservative if your point on the political is quite far to the left. Once upon a time the house conservative columnist at the Post was James J. Kilpatrick. It says a lot about the degradation of a once fine newspaper that they think George F. Will and Jennifer Rubin can fill Kilpo’s shoes.

And speaking as a 2nd generation feminist, I think it’s utterly presumptuous of Frum to think Jen Rubin can’t fight back on her own. She’s a big girl playing — or trying to play — in the big leagues. She should be able to handle the critical pushback by herself without some man presuming to speak for her.

Kelly said...

Hell, i voted for Trump and I’m a never Trumper. Makes no sense, but there it is.

Angel-Dyne said...

Drago: I don't know what the definition of a "Trump sycophant" is.

Someone who doesn't seriously believe that Trump is the Antichrist.

Frum and Rubin are interesting only if one is curious about the etiology of TDS.

Mike said...

“Bob Pounces on Headlines, Althouse Slow to React”

Qwinn said...

Dhagood: That doesn't match my recollection. Cruz's policy on illegal immigration was arguably tougher than Trump's, and he never seemed to shy away from it to me. As I favored him in the primaries, I was very annoyed by claims that "only Trump is talking about it." No, he was just the only one the media would discuss talking about it. Anything Cruz said about it was just ignored completely.

That said, I've been very pleasantly surprised by Trump. As much as I liked Cruz, I can't be sure he'd be doing any better than Trump has been policy wise.