We would like to pontificate on this more, rationalize it more, critique it some. The article was instigated by reactions from “purists” in the conservative sphere as regards Trumps pardon of Joe Arpaio. Perhaps we can hold forth in coming days but for now this article by Kurt Schlichter writing at Townhall can stand for our general sentiments as regards “dealing” with the left.
Conservatism Is Not A Suicide Pact (excerpts)
What will bring the Rule of Law back? How do we get to the Conserva-Eden we are expected to act like we already reside it? Perhaps another statement of principle? Maybe another post on some unread conservajournal? I know – how about more complaining about how frustrated conservatives are uncouth and should just sit there and take whatever fascist garbage the left dishes out? . . .
So, my finger-wagging True Con friends, what’s your plan? How do we go from liberals abandoning the Rule of Law, and such ancillary and associated components of a society based on liberty like free speech and free enterprise, to a liberty-based society operating under the Rule of Law? “Elect more True Cons!” isn’t a plan; it’s an aspiration, and not much of one. I don’t need another cliché, or another citation to general principles, or some variant of my new favorite, all-purpose get-out-of-having-an-actual-plan-free card, the old “We’re better than this” line.
My plan is to cause the left so much pain by applying their new rules to them that they give up trying to grind their Birkenstocks into our faces forever. Yes, as a practical matter that means allying with President Trump, guy I formerly criticized in detail and without restraint, and who was my 16th of 17 choices in the primary (Jeb! was last because he’s an insufferable wuss and I won’t suffer him).
See, I reject the notion we are ever somehow morally obligated by conservative principles to lose to liberals. If I have to swallow something awful, I’ll take half a loaf any day over an entire loaf of liberal dung . . .
Abstract principles are not a plan. A couple weeks ago I wrote about how, now that the tech companies that dominate the flow of information and discourse in our society have decided to insert their politics into their businesses, we should use our political power to ruthlessly regulate them back into neutrality if they persist. It’s an awful idea, in principle, and I’d like to avoid it. But I’d also like to avoid conservatives being utterly banished from the internet. . . .
. . . I say make our enemies feel the pain they would inflict upon us because it might change their behavior – again, there was a time when conservatives believed in punishing wrongdoers. I also support fighting back because it denies them victory and dominance over us – do you have any illusions that Hillary Clinton and her pet Supreme Court would not be imposing/upholding “hate speech” bans that would silence anyone to the right of Angela Davis if we had not blocked her with Donald Trump?
Our summation to the Ryan’s and other holier-than-thous is that there is actually nothing unconservative about the use of the pardon when it comes to largely politcal matters to set right a politically driven prosecution and a judge that is too enthralled with the judiciary’s majesty and / or too obtuse to dispense justice.
Trump’s action does not challenge the rule of law under our constitution. His power is plenary. The judge can convict all day but other branches get to weigh in on whether justice is served. Trump has declined to execute punishment, to give a man a pardon made guilty by executive decrees more than “law”. Arpaio remains convicted by all that Obamaesque and judicial majesty. That part he probably wears as a badge of honor in his retirement as Sheriff.
As to Schlichter’s more general stance — the left has ignored, manipulated “rules” so as to make the game for now unwinnable for conservatives by the old rules (particularly legislatively and as regards the judiciary). So using some of their rules against them is appropriate, or we might as well vacate the field. Call it the left’s favorite shibboleth “hypocrisy” if you must, but that is better than being a non-entity in the fight for good over evil. It is not a matter of the end justifying the means, the means are within bounds.
I never thought I’d have to say that half the guys on “my” side are whack jobs. In Apocalypse Now, Col. Kurtz asked, “Are my methods unsound?” Capt. Willard replied, “I don’t see any method at all.” Me neither. Pardoning Sheriff Joe was the right thing to do.
Whether these guys like Trump personally or not, 99% of what he’s done or proposed is exactly what Ryan/McConnel have said they wanted to do. Where’s the problem? Unless Ryan/McConnell have been lying the whole time.