Washington Post blogger. Jennifer Rubin is the perfect example of what a conservative writer should be (if conservatives were supposed to be liberal).
Rubin is the type of writer who delights in bashing conservatives in the name of saving them. Kind of the way progressives bashed the medical field during the Obamacare* debate. The progressives claimed to have the medical people's best interests at heart as they worked on a piece of legislation that would cause them all to leave the field.* Please Note: the word Obamacare used in the above paragraph has been declared obscene by Congressional Democrats--if anyone is offended by that harsh word, I sincerely apologize.
The president gets a deal through 2012; the House gets its cuts; and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) gets his commission. And the GOP extremists don’t get their balanced budget amendment passed and sent to the states or the satisfaction of blowing up the deal. As for the country, if it passes, the agreement will take us from the days of automatic debt-ceiling raises to the first, tentative steps toward fiscal sanity.I supposed it didn't matter to this "conservative" that a balanced budget amendment is a key policy pushed by most conservatives and it is supported by the majority of voters. In another post about the debt deal she criticized those who opposed the Boehner plan as:
...hard-core obstructionists who refuse to say yes to anything and were willing to sink their own speakerPer my friend and Bigs contributor Dan Riehl, Rubin is a Berkley graduate and former labor lawyer who became a Republican because of the Democratic party's terrorist-appeasement oriented foreign policy. But conservative positions go way beyond supporting a strong military and favoring a strong response to terrorism. There are other positions such as fiscal responsibility that are important also. Rubin also has a habit of relentlessly bashing conservative candidates. She was downright nasty to Sarah Palin and is even more nasty to Rick Perry. Criticism is fine, in fact I have criticized each of the leading GOP candidates in separate posts since the campaign season began, but always in the back of my mind remembering, that any one of them (except Ron Paul) would be better than Barack Obama.
Rubin seems to have made Rick Perry her own personal whipping boy calling him, among other things a buffoon. It almost makes me wonder if the Texas Governor used to beat her up and take her lunch money in kindergarten. But I checked, and can say for sure they did not grow up together.
Jenn Rubin, when not pushing out Romney talking points is in favor of freeing traitors, claims to be a conservative covering the conservative movement, though she has nothing in common with conservatives other than hating terrorists. A conservative friend says she’s best understood as ‘Likud’ rather than Republican or conservative. There’s nothing wrong with being Likud, but one ought to be honest about it.I agreed with that paragraph when I first read it during my morning commute. Erickson was basically saying the same thing as me, being for a strong military, and a strong response to terrorism does not necessarily make someone a conservative. During the commute home, to my surprise, I learned that many people branded Erickson an anti-Semite. Apparently his "Likud" comment was interpreted as a charge of dual loyalty. Not knowing Erick personally (met him a few times) but being a pretty regular Red State reader I can attest to the fact that nothing in his writings have ever struck me as Antisemitic
Erick is not the most subtle person around. If he were to make a charge of dual loyalty, the reader would be hit over the head with it. Kind of the way Media Matters' Senior Fellow MJ Rosenberg does when he calls Jews who support Israel "Israel-Firsters," or the way Sirrus XM sports jock Chris Russo and his parner at the time WFAN's Mike Francesa did right after 9/11 when they called for Americans of the Jewish faith to take a loyalty oath.
Erickson is not big on subtle but he is also not an anti-Semite and his criticism of Jennifer Rubin was 100% on the money. More despicable than the mus-interpretation of Erickson's comment was Jennifer Rubin's arrogant response to it which not only slammed the Red State big shot, but the entire blogging profession which pays her salary.
"You want a Washington Post journalist to comment on an anti-Semitic screed by some blogger?" Rubin asked. "My arms are not long enough to punch down that far."Even though she ironically just did what she said she was too good to do. Allow me to remind Rubin what it says right under her name with every post:
Jennifer Rubin writes the Right Turn blog for The Post, offering reported opinion from a conservative perspective.You see Jennifer Rubin is one of those "some blogger" types. And maybe to the readers of the very liberal Washington Post she is a conservative, but to the rest of us conservatives she is nothing more than an arrogant "not conservative blogger" who is not a big fan of either conservatives or bloggers.
If Rubin believes bloggers are so low that she could not reach down to punch one in the nose, she can get the hell out! There are plenty of bloggers (like me ) working a regular job during the day, coming home to write all hours of the night, and waking early to write again. We would kill to get a paid gig, but take any story. Most of the time we are writing because we feel passionate about our chosen subjects. Most of the time we do not get paid for toiling at all hours but our tip jars are always open (see upper left-hand column).
Rubin should quit the j0b she disparages, or maybe its time for the Washington Post to hire a real conservative to blog from the "right side" of the issues. Dave Weigel is not a conservative and neither is Jennifer Rubin. Why not hire someone like Ed Morrissey of Hot Air or since he has a mega-sized blog to run, maybe they should pick someone else. I understand that Yid With Lid guy is pretty good.
3 comments:
I will not dispute your take on Rubin's conservatism. I try to read her "Morning Bits" on a daily basis. You are right, she is not authentically conservative in the sense we define conservatism. Not on social / ethical issues. She is pro-abortion rights, pro-homosexual rights, etc. I agree, she is unfair to Sarah Palin. I think she is pretty solid on national security and the U.S. alliance with Israel.
As far as Erick Erickson, I would be careful. Erickson is a part of the Dr. Paul faction / wing of the Tea Party movement that concerns me. Erickson is not so much a Ron Paul supporter as he is a Rand Paul supporter. I cannot speak for his readers and followers.
I am all for Israel weaning herself from U.S. aid - I think it would be good for the U.S. and good for Israel - but I don't think that is what Senator Rand Paul is about. Clearly his father, whose dangerous foreign policy he (Rand) supports, is sympathetic to Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc.
I was banned from posting on his Red State site not too long after I commented on Erickson's piece on convicted spy, Jonathan Pollard. In it he took Jennifer Rubin to task because she supports commuting his sentence to time served. Erickson wants Pollard shot or hung. He made some assertions that were questionable about Pollard. The South African connection for example has been credibly disputed I think. Then Erickson caught my attention with the following: "I realize there are people who believe our alliance with Israel outweighs every other consideration and they are forced to make logical leaps to defend or mitigate Jonathan Pollard’s actions."
This is an slanderous charge. I do not hold the position that our alliance with Israel outweighs every other consideration. I don't know any American -- that thinks Pollard got an inordinately severe sentence for his crime -- who holds that position. How does American support for Israel and her security harm American interests?
I would not be too quick to judge Rubin's instincts on Erickson. As you know, there are degrees of anti-Semitism. Like one prominent Jewish leader wrote, "Not every anti-Semite wakes up in the morning saying, today I'm going to get a Jew."
Rubin is not a Conservative, but so are many Republicans, me included. WE hold to the Republican view of a strong self-defense and a pro-Israel foreign policy but do not buy everything else that conservatives have to offer. We tend to be socially liberal and foreign policy wise conservative. We want a limited government that uses our tax dollars wisely, constructively helps those in society who need help and ditches the graft, cronyism and remembers that they serve us not vice-versa. I think Rubin is the type of republican that speaks for those in the middle, like me- Someone who feels like they are part of the no-man's land of US politics. Unfortunately we have been forgotten by both parties and we are also taken for granted. We are the Independents and we are also the majority of Americans.
Now as far as Erickson and Rubin...Erickson is constantly making questionably antisemitic comments. This is not the first. For someone who is a journalist/blogger and words are his business, he knew exactly what he was saying and he understood the implications.If he didn't then he is too insipid for the position he holds and should be let go.Personally I think he should be let go either way.
As far as Rubin dissing bloggers...oh well. She's not the first "payed" blogger to consider themselves above the rest of us and she won't be the last. (Check out Tablet Magazine if you want stuck up self-important journo/bloggers) Everyone needs to think they are more important than others or why bother doing what you do? Does that change her message or invalidate her points? I think not.
I dunno, "Likudnik" used to be a pretty common, nasty little nick used by lefties and Andrew Sullivan circa 2004-2005, back when I still read their drivel. It was used to bash on Jewish neocons, suggesting the dual-loyalty slur.
I don't even know what the hell Erickson was talking about, calling Likud economically left-wing. Isn't the Netanyahu-era Likud basically a free-market Liberal party these days, in the European sense of the word?
And really, I'd classify Rubin as a Kristol-type establishment neocon. She's a natural fit for Romney. I don't read her much, but she's never struck me as particularly economic-left, at least not by Beltway standards.
Post a Comment