The conveniently belated awakening among “conservatives” continues

Carol Iannone writes:

Not exactly a blistering piece, but The American Spectator discusses conservative failure to criticize Bush:

The bottom line is that for too long, conservatives treated President Bush as one of their own, defended him ferociously, and as a result often gave him a free pass even when his policies and job performance warranted criticism. The distinction between the conservative movement and the Republican Party became blurred, and consequently Bush’s failures came to be identified as failures of conservatism even though they were nothing of the sort.

LA replies:

Not bad. But where has The American Spectator itself been for the last eight years? During those eight years, was it criticizing conservatives for “[treating] President Bush as one of their own, [defending] him ferociously, and as a result often [giving] him a free pass even when his policies and job performance warranted criticism”? No, it was not. The time serving “conservatives” have waited until the very end of Bush’s presidency before criticizing their fellow conservatives over their shameful and disastrous self-abasement to him. By contrast, VFR has from its beginning in 2002 consistently criticized Bush for his liberalism, and conservatives for their excessive support for him.

Concerning the recent Obama “con”-fab, Carol Iannone also writes:

Krauthammer admits he has been co-opted by Obama.

Tim W. writes:

I wonder if Obama made a mistake in not inviting Charles Johnson to the meeting with “conservatives” at George Will’s house? Johnson could have provided him with an enemy’s list of authentic conservatives.

David B. writes:

At the end of this VFR thread there is a comment by me about the first criticism of Bush I has seen at The American Spectator. It was over two years ago and by Ben Stein, of all people. It was in his monthly diary.

LA replies:

Are you saying it was the first time that TAS had criticized Bush at all, or the first time they had criticized him on immigration?

In any case, the linked entry is worth re-reading, as showing the weak, dishonorable course of “conservatives” in dealing with the immigration issue.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at January 17, 2009 12:13 PM | Send