Wednesday, May 30, 2018

il miglior fabbro

I missed this piece from Richard "Belmont Club" Fernandez when it first came out, but it's spot-on:
What could explain the relative durability of Donald Trump in the face of the 24x7 media denunciation of his peccadillos is the fact that he, like the man in the rubber monster suit, is too front and center to be genuinely frightening. It is not that the public has ignored his shortcomings or faults so much as they have made adjustments for them. Trump is a definite quantity and many prefer him to what they imagine to be worse.

While Trump’s defects have been “priced in” to the political equation by contrast the liberal heroes are often pitched too high.  The future villains, ignored or flatteringly covered by the media until the moment of their sudden exposure, prove psychologically more menacing because they were supposed to be the Good Guys. Portrayed as kindly television personalities, avuncular talk show hosts, square jawed news anchors, patrons of feminism or crusading district attorneys until exposure they fulfill the condition of betrayal and a surprise of the classic horror boogeyman. They are the tigers who stalk us from behind, the anacondas that wait coiled in ambush from an overhead branch, or little old ladies quietly eating at a diner who turns out to be possessed.
Anyone who observes the scene long enough knows the Good Guys aren't very good at all. But in a world where traditional faith is denounced and mocked on a regular basis, those doing the denouncing and mocking face the task of providing a substitute. And so we are regaled with tales of brave Sir Schneiderman and his contemporaries. And the tales, almost invariably, turn to ash. As always, click the link.

6 comments:

John said...

I had similar thoughts when I read this a couple of weeks ago. We've gotten to what I think of as the Red Riding Hood syndrome, where we see Grandma but have to wonder if there is a wolf under the covers. Ugly in plain sight it far easier to deal with than the self-righteous deception of those who are supposed to be the "good guys."

Bike Bubba said...

It's an interesting article, but it strikes me that the reason I pulled the lever for Drumpf over Hilliary is not because of uncertainty about what Hilliary would do, but rather because of certainty about what she would do. She's been looking past the sins of her husband for 40 years, and past the sins of Democrats for over 30 years, and she'd continue that pattern while the Russians showed her exactly what was on that server and she put pro-abortion judges on the bench. Add to that a certainty that 34 Democrats in the Senate would back her even if she were caught with the severed heads of Boy Scouts in the Oval Office, and you would have a perfect storm had she re-entered that room.

Mr. D said...

Thanks, John. Well said.

You’re certainly right about more politically knowledgeable voters, Bubba, including yourself. I think the question Fernandez is getting at is why the attacks aren’t working – we have enough of a sample size now to determine that Salena Zito’s advice remains operative – take what Trump does seriously, but don’t take what he says literally.

3john2 said...

This G.K. Chesterton quote cycled up in my feed yesterday, and seems more apt than ever.
“The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."

Bike Bubba said...

Regarding "informed voter", I'm wondering if a lot of the guys pulling the lever for Trump actually understood some of the stakes better than we'd ordinarily give them credit for. I personally wonder whether watching a few James Bond movies gives a person a better grasp of the importance of handling information than does a 30 year career at State or Justice, sad to say.

3john2 said...

For the Deep State, State Dept and "elites", information is not sacred, it is a commodity, and is to be deployed to suit the current need, regardless of how this might come back on the nation or the deployers (as opposed to the deplorables) in the future.