National Review Attacks Trump

by Right Wing Fighter

National Review is now attacking Donald Trump. Here are some excerpts:

Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones.

Have they happened to notice that their “broad conservative ideological consensus” has failed to obtain a single achievement of note in the last 20 years? The last noteworthy conservative achievement was welfare reform in the late ’90s. What is the point of a broad consensus if it can’t actually manage to do anything? Additionally, they fail to notice that according to several polls, 40% of the Republican base agrees with what Trump is saying. Seeing as politics is the art of the doable, it makes sense to at least consider that Trump may be doing something right here.


As for illegal immigration, Trump pledges to deport the 11 million illegals here in the United States, a herculean administrative and logistical task beyond the capacity of the federal government.

This is the same old left-wing claptrap about the impossibility of rounding up 11 million people. In fact, it would not be difficult, since it only requires (A), enforcing our already sufficient immigration laws; (B) increasing the federal government’s number of men, the amount of money, and the sophistication of equipment for the purpose of immigration enforcement; (C) sending the message to illegal aliens via the above steps that America is serious about its laws, and that they might as well self deport since we are going to deport them ourselves once they are located. Do they think the federal government is an anemic giant, incapable of even enforcing laws merely because several million people have broken them? Where is all that talk of the all-powerful federal government that is only a stone’s cast from gobbling up all our freedom like a free lunch? Apparently it can be weak when it serves NR’s purposes.


Trump has shown no interest in limiting government, in reforming entitlements, or in the Constitution. He floats the idea of massive new taxes on imported goods and threatens to retaliate against companies that do too much manufacturing overseas for his taste.

What has all that “interest” in limiting government and the constitution actually achieved? Dodd-Frank gave the government enormous control of the banking industry, back in 2010. It has been five and a half years and that bill has not been repealed. What about ObamaCare? We’ve had that five and a half years too. What about Obama’s amnesty? Zip has been done. What about all the decades in which illegal aliens have been crossing the boarder, prompting multiple amnesties, and National Review and that “broad consensus” couldn’t be bothered to talk about it? No, much better to vent hot air about the constitution, liberty,  and the ‘principles that make this country great’. Never mind the fact that all those things will cease to exist if the country is swamped by people with no regard for them.


As for “massive new taxes,” what they mean is protective taxes on imports. A perfect example of the need for these can be shown in the fracking industry. Right now the Saudi Arabians are flooding this country with cheap oil to attempt to drive our oil producers out of business. Now, a protective tax would be levied on goods that are being sold at a cheaper price than our manufacturers can produce them, and would thus protect our jobs from this kind of economic warfare.


As for the crack about punishing businesses that “do too much manufacturing overseas for his taste”, it has nothing to do with some whimsical fancy on Trump’s part. Japan’s auto industry has to a great extent ruined ours; China has to a great extent ruined our manufacturing of consumer products; Pakistan, Indonesia, and several other countries have to a good extent ruined our clothing industries. The reason for this is that companies have taken their business overseas where they can pay workers pennies as opposed to paying Americans dollars. That is why we have become increasingly a service-based economy: you can’t outsource burger-flipping and hardware store cashiers. Of course, fighting for the jobs of Americans would be a betrayal of NR’s non-nationalist principles. Better to be a globalist than a patriot.

If Trump were to become the president, the Republican nominee, or even a failed candidate with strong conservative support […] The movement concerned with such “permanent things” as constitutional government, marriage, and the right to life would have become a claque for a Twitter feed.

Again, what has this noble movement actually accomplished? Has Roe v Wade been repealed? Has the growth of the federal government actually been affected since the Reagan administration? Has homosexual “marriage” been in the least reversed? Of course not. For all their hand-wringing about the disaster that Trump’s administration, nomination, or even political existence is supposed to have, what have these highly concerned do-nothings actually managed to accomplish? Very little in fact. But there are always those waiting around a fire to cry “STOP!” anytime someone with a fire hose not up to regulation tries his hand at the fire. “No! No! You can’t do it! You aren’t up to our standards.” The man simply points at the fire. “What have you done about it? I’ve got a hose, let me at it!” “No! You don’t have the right principles for firefighting!” The man throws down his hose. “Well what the heck have you done about it?” “That’s not the point!” they shout, “you must have the right principles for firefighting!”

You can read the entire article if you wish at this link: