Unfortunately, conservative writers and commentators whom I truly respect are beginning to seriously question their activism. I’ve now watched four conservative bloggers close up shop, toss the keys to angry “conservatives,” say their farewells, let Jesus take the wheel, and now have cat memes and dinner recipes filling their timelines. While Republicans in government are not in the uproar we’d like to believe, conservatives themselves are caught in a toxic battle that bears a resemblance to, but is far worse than, the war between the right and the left. Been there, done that. Those who don’t particularly like your opinions quickly look for that button to press, the one we all have. “I’m over it,” and “what good am I doing?” are both theories thrown around by those bombarded with sermons from the pulpit of complacency. “Give me memes or give me death!” is the mantra of the 21st Century. “Agree with me or I’ll silence you!” is the universal opinion of the aged schoolyard bullies; albeit older in years physically, their deplorable maturity level sipped from the fountain of youth around the same time they shoved Billy in his locker.
The truth that goes unsaid in public, yet is whispered in private during moments of defeat, is that we could all walk away. The madding room of information bouncing wall to wall could be silenced, the gentle hum of Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN lingering on TVs while emotional quotes and stories of the daily grind fill the gaping hole where information once called home. We, both small – like myself – and large voices, could walk away and hand the reins over to the bitter and incompetent fools playing pretend in their own little political world of Gunfight at The O.K. Corral.
It’s true, we could.
But sticking around and being a constant annoyance – the thorn in their side, the pebble in their shoe, the paper cut on their knuckle, the high pitch noise they can’t put their finger on, the incessant cricket chirping under their floorboards – brings me unprecedented feelings of accomplishment.
Why was it so much easier during Obama’s first run for office? The game has changed. We’ve all felt the shift, the quake from beneath our feet as the Founding Fathers spin in unison. We’re at war with ourselves. One side is hellbent on preservation, the other on completely reinventing the GOP into the unrecognizable mix of Hee Haw meets Mean Girls. I have a theory that might explain some of the most obnoxious around us.
You can take the girl out of the country, but you can’t take the country out of the girl. The same rule tends to apply to political parties and their tactics, to a certain degree. I fully support political conversions, and the doors on our side are wide open. However, just as we expect immigrants to learn the language of the land, we on the right should have some higher behavioral standards for those we put on a pedestal.
Before I go on, I’d like to take the opportunity to call out all of the lifelong obnoxious Republicans, as well. Maybe it’s the lifelong GOP scabs who are to blame for attracting such fruitless advocates, maybe not, but like every family has that crazy uncle, so does every movement. While this article isn’t geared towards them, they do exist. This post is merely a cry against the feeling that the sane are now being outnumbered, and the urge to bring conservatism back to its core.
I have plenty of friends who were previously members of the liberal ilks, and many are sensible conservatives, but I’ve found that more often than not, the same tactics they used while in their left leaning days of befuddlement have been carried over to their right leaning advocacy. Since birds of a feather stick together, and since every party has their own radicals, the former liberal radicals tend to migrate towards the established radicals in our own party. It’s similar to how I immediately form an emotional bond to anyone who can quote Dirty Rotten Scoundrels or Monty Python and The Holy Grail.
The Democrat Party left many in their coterie disappointed, and rightly so, and those who took to fleeing from their leadership were desperately searching for someone with a different message, but with the same vitriolic appeal. Since crazy people have an ubiquitous presence in this world, find them they did.
For example, I present to you Katrina Pierson. After voting for Barack Obama in 2008 and having a leftist leaning lifestyle, Katrina switched parties. Now she can be seen on Donald Trump’s team, portraying almost as much tact as her leader. (Please use Sarah Palin’s voice to read the next sentence.) She’s got her bullets draped around her neck like a princess patriot, ready for the revolutionary ball. She busted into the spotlight in 2012 while working on behalf of Ted Cruz’s campaign, and we later learned that she was collecting unemployment benefits while helping to hoist Cruz into a position of power…ful speeches.
Katrina claims that she suffered love loss after Obama’s refusal to wear a flag pin. Just in case you didn’t fully digest that, with the laundry list of Obama’s issues, including support for socialist healthcare, overreaching government programs, and full-stop abortion support, it was the refusal to don a pin that broke the camel’s back. Then there’s her work history, where she felt she was talked down to like a child, and she ended up suing them for what she perceived to be the emotional pain as a result of “racial bias.” It was eventually settled out of court, and the suit was dismissed. And now, when talking about Muslims, she uses lines like “You know what? So what? They’re Muslims,” and when talking about the Middle East it’s “why have nuclear weapons if you don’t use them.”
The world revolves around Katrina. She’s a genuinely self-entitled individual with an unstoppable attraction to all the glitters and incessantly repeats the word “China.” Her beliefs are about as deep as a mud puddle, and it’s not about the issues, it’s about the shock value. She embodies every obnoxious power-hungry tactic of the modern feminist movement, but with a different message. They make outlandish points with vagina decorated cookies, and she flaunts nuclear war heads. They have a disrespect for life, and it’s the base of their beliefs, and so does she. They’re connected to money hungry organizations who profit from fear, she has a past with the Tea Party Leadership Fund.
Let’s just lay this out there: Anyone who talks about using nuclear weapons with the same calm demeanor one might discuss Nerf guns, has a low level of humanity in general.
Matthew Boyle is another shining example of this phenomenon. The Washington Political Editor for Breitbart News also voted for Obama in 2008, and he also has a zealous hatred for whatever he labels to be the “establishment.” I assume this has to do with the fact that by the time he came along – and threw the “conservative” label on his patriotic soul – the actual “establishment” had already been put in its place, and the pitchfork and torch bearers had begun to scramble about, lighting random politicians on fire without a trial.
Boyle portrays the attitude of someone who doesn’t embrace a revolutionary ideal, but mainly a tantrum-like hatred for both political parties, and it just so happens that the bitter “conservative” media was ready and willing to shove his temperamental square ideals into their mangled and round narrative and force a fit. Like Katrina’s flag-pin tipping point, Boyle’s squabble with the leader of his previous party has more to do with his lack of action than the principles themselves. In regards to his vote for Obama, he said, “I don’t regret that decision. It was based on what he said he was going to do. He said he was going to change the country. He didn’t do that, though.”
Boyle has frequently played the dedicated water hauler for Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, and is allegedly an outspoken Nationalist. With articles like “Exclusive–The Donald Trump of Guatemala: Jimmy Morales Surging To Presidency,” where he brings positive attention to a populist/nationalist. Drawing a positive comparison to Donald Trump, a candidate he has frequently defended through his Twitter account, “Trump isn’t a movement conservative. But he is a conservative. A populist/nationalist conservative.”
Katrina and Matthew are not conservatives, they’re angry at both political sides, and while they like the current rebel movement on the right, they’re still advocating for a big and overreaching government as if they’re still on the left. They’re willing to lie, deceive, and unite themselves with those who do the same. Why? Because you can take the liberal out of the tactics, but you can’t take the tactics out of every liberal (exclusions do exist).
Exclusions do indeed exist, hence my love for many conservatives who were once on the left. Part of the issue is that when we find a witty ex-liberal with a flamboyant “warrior” mentality, we tend to want to show them off. Similar to how we recently hoisted a young man into the spotlight for speaking out against the President, and after bouncing around GOP candidates he finally landed on… drum roll… Bernie Sanders. Sometimes we get ahead of ourselves and celebrate an exciting voice without actually listening to what that voice is saying.
The next example has to do with someone who hasn’t united herself to any particular candidate as of now, though I’d assume the name of her candidate of choice begins with “T,” and ends with “ed Cruz,” but she is another former Democrat. I wrote an article over a year ago about Dana Loesch, and after some hateful replies, I learned that the conservative princess was an untouchable gem in the crown of many conservative circles; “God save the queen” and all. Deemed above reproach, Dana has a large number of legitimately good arguments in her quiver, yet to gain attention she often resorts to mean girl leftist behavior. I decided to bring Dana back up in this post due to the fact that she’s different from Katrina and Matthew in that she truly does ascribe to conservative positions, but once again, the leftist tactics remain.
The following video was the subject of my original post, and while many found it to be funny, I was revolted.
My feelings today match my feelings back then:
“Have we crossed the isthmus? Are we no longer able to voice personal opinions without juvenile Mean Girl-esque attempts to personally attack someone? More importantly, did being called a “bitter hag” really offend Dana that deeply? Or was it a convenient way to get the “attaboy” accolades from the masses? If she was offended that deeply, I’m forced to reconsider my personal opinion that she is a strong conservative woman. If it was the latter, I’m forced to reconsider my opinion that she is a strong conservative voice of reason.”
“My elderly family members are, shockingly, not supermodel candidates. I’m guessing that this reality is shared by, well, everyone that doesn’t have a 50 year old supermodel Grandmother. Imagine that, people get old and unattractive, and if your daughter calls someone a “bitter hag,” your photo can be paraded and mocked on TV by a woman with an Ichthys tattooed on her wrist.”
I felt in a way that it was belittling to women. Is this how we see ourselves? As sniveling beings in need of pointless vent sessions using various accents for theatrics? Maybe I’m on my own little island when it comes to that view point. Or, maybe I realize that if I wasn’t grounded in my opinions, and I was looking for a side that was speaking the truth, I would pass up the theatrics and look for the adults with facts. Sarcasm and wit lighten the mood, or get your point across in a more direct manner, when used in the right context. But when they are used to attack a person extraneously, as she has done sporadically in the past, they only serve to demonize the views of conservative women everywhere.
I mean, is this the picture of conservative females we want to portray?
No. No it’s not.
This new infusion in the conservative political movement is disturbing, and it has created a safe space for many obnoxious conservatives who flourish and rise to fame on baseless attacks that do absolutely nothing to invite level headed left leaners looking for a logical place away from the mess of the Democrat Party. Steven Crowder, someone I usually agree with politically, is another conservative voice who has destroyed his own arguments more times than I can count by jumping into the mud with the opposition. With article titles like “Dear Fat Feminists: Being Naked While Unattractive is not ‘Brave’…” Crowder sounds more like a chauvinist frat boy who decided to write a hit piece after crushing a beer can on his forehead.
“The conflict is only created because you thrust your naked, gelatinous, amoeba-like body in my face, which conflicts with my desire to not see you naked.”
The attack on women went on, and on, and on…
“Women don’t have to be funny, because men want to get naked with you anyway. Unless you look like Lena Dunham. Then, we simply want to end the pain.”
And on, and on, and on…
“So ladies who are unattractive but want to be naked. Fine. Be naked. Be gross. Sit on a toilet and eat cake (Lena Dunham, I’m looking at you). Celebrate yourself for… well, only yourself if that’s what you need to do. But don’t expect me (nor any men behind closed doors) to praise your bravery.”
Crowder was trying to attack Amy, but all he did was prove to women everywhere that he sees them as items, embracing the view of the majority on the left. Crowder and Dana are the result of paid childishness, celebrated immaturity, and impassioned – yet substance free – rhetoric that many up and coming conservatives crave. I’m a millennial, and the party of class I’ve always aligned myself to needed to learn how to speak to my generation. I knew this, I embraced it, and I even celebrated it when we began to do as such. However, it ended up being that friend with zero sense of fashion that you give a makeover. They’re excited, they look great, and then they start shopping on their own. Suddenly they bring home neon pink overalls and you start scheduling an intervention.
But I’m horrible at interventions… I don’t have the emotional balance of a seasoned counselor, so I tend to just cut to the chase.
I’ll end this by making two requests:
- If you know a recently converted liberal, introduce them to the classier side of the Republican Party. Preferably the side that isn’t currently pandering to racists, nationalists, and jackwagons in general.
- Stop celebrating the obnoxious. I’m not saying we need to be the Cleavers… I mean, read my posts and you’ll find that there’s no shortage of lightheartedness, sardonic comments, and movie references. However, if we want to attract class and individuals who think beyond the tar and feathers, people who are willing to dig in and understand the issues before gathering the lynch mob, we need to start requiring the same from those we hoist upon a pedestal. We need to fill our party with conservatives who care about the LFP, foreign policy, and genuine issues. Be edgy, be funny, but please be a grown-up.
They’re just suggestions, of course, because it’s a free country. However, if you intend on preserving the party of compassion, inclusion, and commonsense, it helps if we avoid becoming the enemy.
I have faith that cool heads will prevail, and I ask my fellow conservatives to keep up the fight. If you’re overwhelmed, step back and take a breath, but remember to come back to the party… because we’re awesome.