Rubin, wouldn’t you like to be a conservative too? | Jen Kuznicki

Rubin, wouldn’t you like to be a conservative too?

By On March 4, 2013 · 48 Comments

It’s been the height of humor since the election, to watch people scurry and position themselves as conservatives.  The same people who nastily rebuked every conservative choice for president during the Republican primaries, as “too conservative�?, while holding Mitt Romney as the most, “severely conservative�? choice for President.

While it makes an observer try to define what conservative is, there is caution, because within conservative circles, there is much argument.  There are SoCons, FiCons, PaleoCons, NeoCons, and Libertarians.  These parts of a whole argue on what should be stressed within the conservative argument, and what should be minimized.

But everyone wants to be one.

Notice how politicians, and their ardent supporters, claim every mantle.  One argues he is a Social Conservative, but argues for abortion under certain conditions.  One argues he is a Fiscal Conservative, but fully backs a State-run public-private partnership “to create jobs.�?  One argues he is a Paleo Conservative, but backs amnesty.  Even within Libertarian circles, individualism and freedom mean very different things.  And nobody wants to be what has become a slur, NeoCon, after the Ron Paul faction gets through with you.  Defend our nation’s interests? How dare you?

But the funny aspect of all of this is that people who want to be defined as conservative, have no truthful claim to it.  Like say, Jennifer Rubin.

Mark Levin this morning on his facebook page about Rubin’s latest blog post which she comically titled, “.�?  Rubin, who is not a conservative, although she and the Washington Post insist she is, tries to express truth with no ability to determine it.  The beltway definition of conservative has those of us who live outside of it bursting into laughter, as well as shaking our heads at the ridiculousness of it all.

Rubin:

The right is not divided into moderates and conservatives, as a smart pollster told me, but between those who can count and those who cannot. If conservatives do not attract larger numbers in the fastest-growing parts of the electorate, they will not win elections, their agenda will become a dusty artifact on the shelf and the country will slide further into decline.

No, the right is not divided into moderates and conservatives.  The right is conservative, because conservative is right.  If truth is what is asked for in Rubin’s post, it should be obvious upon this simple truth.  The charlatans like Rubin gloss over the fact that people can be influenced by those who know the truth, because Rubin is actively influencing with illusion, hiding behind a word that has been bastardized by the very people she defends.  Sloppily degrading conservatives as math-challenged dimwits and carrying the water for useless immature consultants is more Rubin’s style.  In fact, the conservative ‘agenda’ is the only thing able to turn the country around, so it would be right and true for ‘Right Turn’ Jenny to use her influence to defend the way of life she herself wants to belong to.  The country will slide further into decline by not doing so.

Rubin wants to chastise conservatism to make it what is not, so she can be called conservative.  Nothing doing, not because I say so, but because it just doesn’t work that way.

Those who say that the right needs only to be more articulate and more forceful in defense of the exact same agenda are kidding themselves.

See how Rubin wants to change the agenda because she thinks it isn’t working?  It is more that those who claim the agenda do not understand it, yet want to promote themselves in defense of it.  If being a moderate was the cool thing to do, she’d be laughed off the stage by trying to defend that label, but it is obvious that being a conservative is cool, which is why she wants the label.  Cutting out all the conservative things about being a conservative is a monumental task, but Rubin is up to it.  Dan Riehl has shown and again, Rubin’s disguise.

But in order to be a conservative, you really have to think introspectively, determine what you believe, understand nature, the founding of the nation, revel in the glory that is the United States of America, and speak truth to power.  Rubin hasn’t done so, instead, she lazily redefines conservatism to make it what she agrees with.

And redefining things suits Rubin:

It is time to get out of the 1980s and into the 21st century.

Of course, the clever rewording of the obligatory, “Reagan is dead�? maxim from the anti-conservative faction of the Republican party.  To say that Reagan is dead is to say conservatism is dead, and if conservatism is dead, why try to define yourself as one?  And beyond that, getting ‘into the 21st century’ is not what will happen if conservatism isn’t applied, strenuously and without reserve.  We will be heading backward, into the dark, before there was a great republic that showcased the greatness of the individual and became the world’s superpower.  Rubin has no historical context, and is shrilly offering impossible conclusions in unison with those who are the enemies of conservatism, reinforcing their irrational views.

CPAC should pass out some writings of Edmund Burke and Russell Kirk. They were practical and prudent, and they understood that we cannot remake our fellow citizens or reinvent their habits and inclinations. They understood that limited government is not an end unto itself but a guarantee of liberty. And they knew that by rejecting the utopianism of the left and remaining grounded in the world around us, Americans can expand freedom and create a prosperous, vibrant and decent society.

If CPAC has to pass out writings of Burke, we can stop right there and fold it.  But Rubin has been using the same quotes from Burke and Kirk for months now, and she applies their words to her little project of destroying conservatism.  She isn’t fooling anyone, except perhaps the rest of the beltway bubble-dwellers who can’t figure out how to stay socially plugged in while defending that which they decry as ‘out of date’ and losing.  Those of us in flyover country are not interested.

 Younger conservatives have to take the movement into their own hands, refurbish it, revitalize it, cast off what is not relevant and persuade others to join the movement.

Sounds cool.  Young conservatives should read history and the enlightenment, the Bible, and then tell Rubin she is the one not relevant.

Tagged with: • • • •
 
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Loading Loading IntenseDebate Comments...