The American Conservative: overwhelmingly for Obama

Dan R. writes:

The American Conservative has a symposium of its writers on the election. More than three-quarters of the participants are in favor of or indifferent to the idea of four more years of Barack Obama, the antithesis of nearly anything conservative. Last year I allowed my subscription to expire. There have been no regrets.

LA replies:

Doesn’t this further justify the withering condemnation of that magazine—known here by such names as The Anti-American Leftist, The American Dhimmi, and The Paleostinian Conservative—that I’ve been expressing since the moment it came into existence ten years ago?

To repeat my basic take on The American Conservative: Notwithstanding its name, it was not founded out of belief in a traditional America or belief in the good. It was founded out of pure emotional animus—animus against neoconservatives, animus against Israel, and animus against America for supporting Israel. It published any nutty irresponsible libertarian, any low-life America-hating leftist, so long as he shared the magazine’s resentment of neocons and of Israel. And while the magazine has gone through some changes (and in each issue will publish one or two articles that could fit in any normal conservative publication), it has remained true to its fundamentally negative and reactive orientation. It has, among other things, supported the legalization of illegal aliens; claimed that Muslim terrorists were the invention of neoconservative propagandists; charged that Bush, under the control of neocons, spent an entire year lying to the world about his reasons for invading Iraq, an act that was “really” done solely at the behest of Israel; embraced the Palestinian view of Israel as a monstrous oppressor state, which harms the Palestinians out of motiveless malignity; offered advice to jihadists on how they could defeat America; advocated that when America withdrew from Iraq it should admit as refugees all Iraqis who wanted to come here; and supported the election of John Kerry in 2004. And now it supports, or has no problem with, the re-election of Obama, which, among other things, will seal the imposition of Obamacare on the country and seal Obama’s alliance with our jihadist enemies.

- end of initial entry -

Dan R. replies:

Simply put: yes. As I said, I have no regrets about letting my subscription expire.

One of the most disappointing comments was by Peter Brimelow, who is supporting the open-borders libertarian Gary Johnson. Brimelow concedes that Johnson is “useless” on immigration, but in fact he’s much worse than that. And how it squares with VDARE is beyond me.

Daniel S. writes:

While most of the assorted cast of characters at The American Conservative (James Pinkerton and John Zmirak being among the honorable exceptions) either endorse Obama—is founding editor Scott McConnell even a conservative?—or the utterly useless, leftist-libertarian Gary Johnson, the magazine’s founder Pat Buchanan has endorsed Mitt Romney for president. Thomas Fleming of Chronicles has indicated that he too might vote for Mitt Romney.

I understand the skepticism many conservatives have toward Romney, a skepticism I share, but for a self-proclaimed conservative openly to support Obama or cheer for his victory over Romney is utterly disgusting. The Obama-cons are defined not by what they love, but what they hate, and they see the anti-white, anti-Western, cultural Marxist Obama as a vehicle for their hatred.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 31, 2012 10:41 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):