James Pinkerton opens with a history lesson.
If there’s one thing we’ve learned over the last half century, it’s that a victory for the left in the media is not the same thing as a victory for Democrats in electoral politics. Yes, the media might be trying hard on behalf of Democrats, but favored media causes—most obviously various flavors of left-liberationism—are often not the same as American centrism. And it’s in the center that a party builds out a majority. In other words, if the Democrats let the media push them too far to the left, that’s not good for their electoral health.
Yes, he's thinking about the fallout from the Kavanaugh confirmation, but then, softness on crime, softness on communism, softness on counterterrorism, macroeconomic torpor, "you didn't build that," and inedible school lunches might have contributed.

This time, though, there's something more troubling at work.  John Hinderaker notes that the calls to "resistance" might not end well.
I am sure a lot of Republicans in Washington are upgrading their security systems and making sure they are prepared to defend themselves against crazed Democratic Party activists. This isn’t the America I grew up in, but it is the America we all live in now.

The thing I don’t understand is, why do Democrats like Cory Booker, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, etc., think they are the only ones who can use violence to advance their cause? Do they not understand what a whirlwind they will unleash if they try to use political violence as a path to power?
Particularly if they provoke people who want to post what they want, pray how they want, associate with who they want, and carry a pistol to protect those other rights.

In a subsequent post, Mr Hinderaker recognizes as much.
Why are Democrats confident that political violence is a one-way street? Conservatives are, on average, better armed than liberals and–I think it is safe to say–more personally formidable. Yet liberals clearly have no fear that conservatives will respond to their violence and mob intimidation in kind. I think that is because they assume we are better than they are. We care about our country, we value its institutions, and we try to maintain the basic presumption of good faith that underlies our democratic system.

The Democrats are right to think that we are better than they are, but conservatives’ patience is not infinite. The potential for significant political violence is higher today than it has been at any time since the Great Depression, and perhaps since the Civil War. The Democrats are sowing the wind, and they may reap the whirlwind.
Let the record show that retiring U. N. ambassador Nikki Haley might have been the first Republican politician to lower a rebel flag in South Carolina since Sherman's March.

Perhaps the militant normals will be angry enough to go to the polls in November.
The incoherent Democrats are reduced to street violence, the press is discredited, our institutions are mostly pathetic. Who benefits? President Donald J. Trump. Trump truly is the man of the hour. Trump has been on to the “fake news” press from the beginning. And if there ever was any fake news, it is Christine Ford’s Democrat-engineered lie. Trump represents normal Americans who didn’t go to Harvard or Yale but have a modicum of common sense, which many professors at those institutions obviously don’t.

Trump nominated a solidly conservative justice to the Supreme Court, and steadfastly stood by him despite the Democrats’ wacko smears. I don’t think the Democrats understand how many millions of people view their smear campaign with contempt, and appreciate President Trump for standing by his nominee.
To paraphrase another Republican with experience waging a civil war, "I can't spare this man, he fights."
Trump relied on his own visceral sense of the moment and mocked Christine Blasey Ford for gaps in her memory, directly impugning the accuser’s credibility.

Establishment Republicans initially reacted with horror. But Trump’s 36-second off-script jeremiad proved a key turning point toward victory for the polarizing nominee, White House officials and Kavanaugh allies said, turbocharging momentum behind Kavanaugh just as his fate appeared most in doubt.

Tuesday evening in Southhaven, Miss., Trump laid into Ford with the ruthlessness of an attack dog and the pacing of a stand-up comedian. The crowd roared with laughter and applause. Aides privately crowed as footage of the performance was played and replayed many times over, shifting the national discussion from scrutiny of Kavanaugh’s honesty and drinking habits to doubts about Ford’s memory. And in Washington, Republican senators — though they condemned Trump’s mockery of Ford — felt emboldened to aggressively demand Kavanaugh’s confirmation, which became a near-certainty Friday and looks to become official with a vote Saturday.
The Democrats' enablers in the press probably thought that throwing a few ice cubes would be enough to convince Judge Kavanaugh to say "Enough," or for Senators Graham and Collins to go to the White House and tell Our President he didn't have the votes.

The enablers lost their composure, the senators stood up for the rule of law.

General Simon Bolivar Buckner thought it unchivalrous of General Grant to write, "No other terms than unconditional and immediate surrender. I propose to move immediately upon your works."

General Buckner had stronger stuff than ice cubes to throw.

John Podhoretz notes, the Democrats are still making parade-ground charges, the way the armies of 1861 did.
Republicans and conservatives could see the same enemies arrayed against Kavanaugh they had seen over the past 35 years: liberal interest groups and the Democratic politicians whose staffs help populate those groups, working hand in hand with a pliable and credulous media to create the impression of guilt and evil where there are no facts to back up that impression.
This time, they couldn't. They'll likely be back, nastier, next time.

That is, if they get a next time.  Let the thing be pressed.

No comments: