Video: Why the Right is Right

September 21, 2015

Ever wonder how it is that we’re right and they’re wrong, and just you can explain this to… “them?” Humorist and author Greg Gutfeld takes the stage for Prager University with the explanation:

No need to thank us, progressives. We’re happy to help.


The real legacy of Margaret Thatcher

January 16, 2012

With the release of “The Iron Lady,” there’s been a renewed interest in the person and political career of Margaret Thatcher, in my opinion the second-greatest (1) British Prime Minister of the 20th century. The film has received mixed reviews (also) generally crediting Meryl Streep for a great performance that lifted a problematic script. I haven’t seen the film, myself, so can’t comment on how accurate it is.

The Heritage Foundation, however, was concerned that the film would underplay the great things Thatcher accomplished in Britain by resolutely applying conservative principles. So, they produced this short video reminding us of the Iron Lady’s legacy:

Footnote:
(1) Winston Churchill will always be the greatest. Always.

PS: Sorry about the non-posting this weekend, folks. The NFL playoffs took priority. How ’bout them 49ers?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What We Believe: gun rights and the 2nd amendment

November 8, 2010

In part five of his series on what American conservatives believe, Bill Whittle looks at the right of a free people to bear arms, how that is an essential part of our democratic republic, and pokes holes in the arguments of the gun-control lobby:

He’s missing some historical context for the Second Amendment, how it arose from a provision of the English Bill of Rights that itself was a reaction to the attempts by the Stuarts to ban firearms (for a good discussion, see Levy, Origin of the Bill of Rights, chapter six), but he’s spot on about the right to own guns being a sign of trust between citizens and their government. Suppress that right, and the bonds of trust are severely weakened as only agents of the State may bear arms while the people must rely on them for protection – and on their goodwill.  The citizen, in other words, is a citizen no more, but a servant.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What we believe, part 2: the problem with elitism

October 17, 2010

Bill Whittle continues his series on what American* conservatives believe, this time dealing with the problems caused by a self-appointed ruling class:

Part one is worth reviewing.

*I specify “American” conservatism, since there are significant differences with conservatism as understood in Europe. Conservatism in the US tends strongly toward limited government and free market economics, which no one would associate with, for example, the UK’s Conservative Party.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What we believe: conservatism and the Tea Party

October 9, 2010

Bill Whittle has long been one of my favorite PJTV commentators; his video essays are incisive, uncompromising, and closely reasoned, all done in sincere, good-natured, and polite style. He’s not a firebreather; he doesn’t have to be, because he knows what he’s talking about.

Bill has a new video on his own YouTube channel (ht: Hot Air) in which he provides a clear, simple statement of the essential tenets of American conservatism: a belief in limited government and free enterprise. It’s well-worth the ten minutes of your time to watch:

While I think “classical liberal” is more accurate than “conservative,” that’s an argument over terminology that just isn’t all that important these days. What truly is important is the message: limited government versus the all-powerful state and individual liberty versus tyranny. Whittle introduces our side of the argument beautifully, and I’d like to see this video posted widely across the blogosphere.

And I dare any progressive to post as simple, clear, and honest an explanation of their beliefs in response. No emotional appeals to being “for the children” allowed.

It would be illuminating.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


US and UK: not the same conservatives

April 20, 2010

British blogger Mike McNally writes in reply to Anne Applebaum’s article in The Washington Post chiding Republicans for being too far to the right and too angry, telling them they should be more like the British Conservative Party under David Cameron. McNally’s reply: “Surely you’re mad?

Contrary to what Applebaum, who describes herself as “a fully paid-up member of the mushy political center,” would like U.S. conservatives to believe, the contrast between the current British and American political scenes could not be more dramatic. In America, what could be a defining battle between statism and individual freedom is just getting started. And while in Britain there’s little difference between the parties, the differences between Republicans and Democrats have never been starker.

Applebaum writes: “The history of the Tories shows that if by exciting your base you lose the center, then you lose the next election too.” Leaving aside the fact the she’s comparing apples to oranges, it seems as if commentators like Applebaum and Frum are living in what we might call a pre-3/23 world. They obsess about “the base” and “the center,” but on the day Obama signed the health care bill into law, against the wishes of a majority of the American people, such distinctions lost much of their meaning. Increasingly, you’re either for Obama and his agenda, or you’re against him.

And Applebaum apparently hasn’t been looking at the polls. Obama’s approval ratings are in the tank. The Democrats’ favorability ratings are at an all-time low. The GOP is enjoying leads on the congressional ballot that are virtually unprecedented. Maybe she also missed the elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

Why at this stage would Republicans want to change the way they speak? As it happens, mainstream political opposition to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid has been remarkably civil, given what’s at stake, but if you can’t get angry at the prospect of your country being irreversibly damaged by the most arrogant, incompetent, and out-of-touch president and Congress in history, when can you get angry? This is no time for mushy centerism and rebranding exercises. America needs the conservatism of Thatcher, not Cameron.

I don’t know enough about British conservatism to place them on a scale, though they seem like “Labour-lite” from this distance. American conservatism, on the other hand, is largely classical liberalism – small government, free markets, low taxes, broad individual liberty. Given the mood of the electorate, I have to agree with McNally that the Republicans would be crazy to want to imitate the Conservative Party.


Perhaps, if your Center is well to the Left

October 5, 2009

Sarah Palin is Far Right?

No. Rather, I think she’s just right.