Patterico's Pontifications

9/7/2022

Allahpundit’s First Dispatch Post

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:26 pm



Today I became a lifetime member of The Dispatch in celebration of their hiring of my favorite blogger: The Blogger Formerly Known As Allahpundit. (His real name is available at the post I am about to link; I have known it since I met him in New York some 15 years ago; now you can know it too.) His first Dispatch post is up, and you can read it here.

It’s more of a mission statement than a comment on any recent news, and it is reminiscent of the last post he wrote at Hot Air. It’s more of an introduction to people who don’t know him — but if you do know him and his writing, the tone and the conviction are a cool drink of water for those of us under the Heat Dome:

If you value commentary to the extent it satisfies your partisan bloodlust, if you believe left-wing authoritarianism can only be fought with right-wing authoritarianism, if your first impulse upon encountering political criticism is to issue a threat, you’re in the wrong place. Although, good news: There are many, many sites in this great big country of ours that cater to someone like you.

But if you want a better conservative media and a better politics, if you think the right has slid far too far toward banana Republicanism, if you’re willing to entertain thoughtful opinions with which you’ll sometimes disagree, please join us as a paid member and help us offer an alternative. The only way to get the Republican Party and its enablers off the track that they’re on is by proving that a different model can succeed. This country needs more principled writers—and principled readers.

If you’re not a member of The Dispatch, now’s a great time to join. If you are, but you don’t know Allahpundit, er, Nick, then a) what the hell is wrong with you? and b) you’re in for a treat. If you’re already a member, consider ponying up for the lifetime commitment, as I did today. There’s never been a better time to do so.

49 Responses to “Allahpundit’s First Dispatch Post”

  1. “Heat Dome”

    Come to New Mexico.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  2. So, I have a bit of pushback on what, ah, Nick writes. I understand his two tiers of

    1) Trumpie stalwarts who believe whatever Pig Brother says.
    2) Those who know better, but blindly vote GOP and keep their head down. This also includes the majority of the GOP Caucus in Congress.
    3) Those who don’t like Trump but vote for the GOP because the Dems are worse.

    Well, they are worse.

    Except for one terrible, no good, Trumpier-than-Trump candidate, the GOP here in NM is fairly sane. Ronchetti isn’t going on about The Steal, or begging for crumbs off Trump’s table, and I will vote for him and all the other GOP candidates I can.

    And they are all going to lose EXCEPT for the #StopTheSteal guy who’s fairly close in the pols. Why? That fraction of the GOP that worships Trump and tells everyone that there are only two choices and you have to vote for Team R, is not going to vote for any GOP candidate that doesn’t kiss Trump’s ass.

    So I can, with a clean conscience, vote to Team R, knowing that the Trumpies will not.

    Does that make me a bad person?

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  3. ok, three tiers.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  4. Nick is singing my tune focusing on the media and the consumers enabling it. Patterico is not exactly a Red Meat site, but some here seem committed to making it one….and remain shocked when there is not more hyper-partisanship. To them, it’s almost a slap in the face for a conservative-leaning site to not be ultra-skeptical of Trump’s critics and laser-focused on Biden ridicule. It’s almost like, how dare there be Never Trump?

    AJ_Liberty (0891ba)

  5. Can someone remind me where he stood during the Kavanaugh episode?

    mikeybates (bbbaf0)

  6. @2

    3) Those who don’t like Trump but vote for the GOP because the Dems are worse.

    Preach. *holds hands up in reverence*

    Welcome… the water’s warm and we have snacks!

    whembly (b770f8)

  7. @5 Pretty sure he was universally appalled at the Democrats during that sordid saga, which is a low bar imo.

    whembly (b770f8)

  8. Can someone remind me where he stood during the Kavanaugh episode?

    He took Kavanaugh’s side.

    Trump rips Kavanaugh: I saved his career, and for what?

    The Trumpiest part of this isn’t him turning on an ally after that ally failed to do him a favor, although that’s extremely Trumpy.

    The Trumpiest part is that he said it to Michael Wolff, the author of “Fire and Fury,” known for defending his sloppy sourcing by saying things like, “If it rings true, it is true.”
    ….
    Is Trump incapable of turning down a request from someone who’s keenly interested in hearing him speak?
    ….
    Trump put him on the Court and Kavanaugh declined to put him back in the presidency. It was supposed to be a quid pro quo. And you know how much Trump likes quid pro quos.There are even better bon mots at the link.

    nk (83202f)

  9. Everything from the link on down, except the very last sentence, is a quote from Allahpundit’s post.

    nk (83202f)

  10. I hope Nick’s future posts have comment sections. The other contributors do and they usually dip in and reply, not a lot but enough to engage some. Also, the comment sections aren’t toxic like at Hotair, far from it.

    Paul Montagu (753b42)

  11. congrats AllahNick on making it to double A

    keep Scolding Republicans (TM) and you might just get called up to The Show

    JF (0f3b45)

  12. AllahPundit was on Kavanaugh’s side.

    Paul Montagu (753b42)

  13. #8 & #12

    JF’s question remains fair. #12 isn’t Allahpundit’s piece. #8 isn’t really a Kavanaugh support piece — it’s a bash Trump for a typical Trump maneuver.

    My googling couldn’t find anything other than a thumbsucker before the circus began on what the Trump administration would do if Kavanaugh had a #metoo issue.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  14. My mistake. Wrong link.

    Paul Montagu (753b42)

  15. Thank you, Patterico. I need posts and websites that give me hope.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  16. JF had no question. He had something else.

    mikeybates at 5 had a “question”.

    I answered him according to Proverbs 26:4. Paul answered him according to Proverbs 26:5.

    If neither answer is responsive, it’s obviously that rigged and stolen enemy of the state Google search form’s fault.

    nk (b17ddb)

  17. R.I.P. Bernard Shaw, CNN anchor, 82

    Dutifully recorded by ‘Your network of record.’

    DCSCA (f4fe32)

  18. @8

    Did he? I thought he said that disbelieving the allegations was a sign of “partisanship” or whatever, writing: “We’ve reached the stage of the Trump era, I guess, where we’re required to promote accused rapists to the most powerful positions in public life to “own the libs” even if there’s proof that they’re guilty.” Um, okay…

    mikeybates (dd20f5)

  19. Yeah, so what?

    That’s a pretty good assessment of Trump supporters, I think. They wouldn’t care if Kavanaugh got away with attempted rape any more than they would care if Trump shot someone on Fifth Avenue.

    It doesn’t mean that Allahpundit himself thought Kavanaugh was guilty of attempted any more than he thinks that Trump shot someone on Fifth Avenue.

    nk (b17ddb)

  20. I genuinely enjoy reading Allahpundit and have for years, but…

    But he suffers from the same gaping blindspot as so many republicans feigning to be reasonable these days- he refuses to acknowledge that he and his group of “good” righties were absolutely involved in feeding the base the diet of lies that got them where they are. His tolerance for outright fabrication is lower than say Jim Hoft’s but it’s a difference of degree.

    Just look at Allahpundit’s wildly inaccurate reading of the student debt forgiveness bill as an example. He has no problem shoveling rightwing garbage when it suits him.

    Until people like him and David French and Eric Erickson and on and on actually admit to their culpability in trumpism I lack any sympathy when the mob they fomented for YEARS turns on them.

    Tlaloc (7dd8a2)

  21. If there is a rule against promoting ‘accused rapists’ to powerful positions, I was unaware of it. It hasn’t been observed in current circumstances, as far as I can tell.

    I would say that the utter lack of evidence, rather than hyper-partisanship, affects one’s view of the Kavanaugh allegations. But never mind. It has more to do with the inability to read/understand polls than anything else.

    mikeybates (dd20f5)

  22. “Trump, 2024!”

    Now ‘spend-a-penny’ for the opinions of an outcast class who rail against him.

    It certainly ‘pays’ to recognize rascals.

    “As my dear old grandfather Litvak said–just before they sprung the trap– he said, “You can’t cheat an honest man. Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump.” – Larson E. Whipsnade [W.C. Fields] ‘You Can’t Cheat An Honest Man’ 1939

    DCSCA (c6e4b8)

  23. RIP Anne Garrels (71). As an NPR war correspondent, she was for a time the only American reporter reporting from Baghdad during the “shock and awe” bombing campaign. She also reported both Chechen wars and, following 9/11, from the front lines of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  24. I joined the Dispatch. I didn’t even get $20 off but I still got a good deal because it has the Allahpundit/Nick.

    DRJ (25ba99)

  25. I see the usual characters here are predictably unchanged.

    DRJ (25ba99)

  26. I think more frequent posts on current events would help commenters not get so stuck in their ruts. FWIW.

    DRJ (25ba99)

  27. Patterico is not exactly a Red Meat site, but some here seem committed to making it one….and remain shocked when there is not more hyper-partisanship. To them, it’s almost a slap in the face for a conservative-leaning site to not be ultra-skeptical of Trump’s critics and laser-focused on Biden ridicule. It’s almost like, how dare there be Never Trump?

    I would agree with this. More and more, people hold politics and views therein as binary and with no middle ground allowed: You’re either with us or against us, they dictate to the rest of us. I reject that wholeheartedly. People (and life) are far more nuanced and multi-layered than that. However, from what I’ve observed here, that is unacceptable and the Trump supporters appear determined to force any centrists into their stifled configuration of conservatism. Anything less is, well, wrong. While this can be annoying because it typically comes with a Trump influence, I believe that it speaks volumes about our host who encourages an open format of comments, which in turn allows political views that even run counter to his own.

    Dana (1225fc)

  28. He’s not a conservative. He’s a libertarian leaning, social leftist that’s a devout atheist.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  29. And you know how much Trump likes quid pro quos.

    Well that depends on who owes the quid. If it’s Trump he may forget he ever knew you.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  30. You might get a nice horse though.

    Davethulhu (aec6bf)

  31. R.I.P. Bernard Shaw, CNN anchor, 82

    When Shaw was chief anchor at CNN is was a LOT better news source than it is now. When you hear “This is CNN” in the early 90’s it was a trusted brand. It has fallen far.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  32. R.I.P. QUEEN ELIZABETH II

    The Queen is dead. Long live the King.

    DCSCA (9e2430)

  33. 3) Those who don’t like Trump but vote for the GOP because the Dems are worse.

    This is not without reason. I spent years in the 90’s in the LP, trying to find a third choice. There isn’t one. So, absent particular knowledge, I wlll vote for the Republican.

    Here in NM, all position are partisan. If I want a procecutor or judge who doesn’t side with criminals (we have catch & release policies in place) or a legislator who sees the enormous state income from the oil industry as a good thing (and doesn’t want to use the temporary income to fund permanent new programs), then I have to vote for the GOP candidate. I might get a Trumpist loonie, but if I vote the other way I will surely get a socialist loonie.

    Anyone who says that there isn’t a dime of difference between the two parties isn’t looking very hard.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  34. ‘I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service.’

    On her twenty-first birthday, in a speech broadcast on the radio from Cape Town, The Queen (then Princess Elizabeth) dedicated her life to the service of the Commonwealth.

    Well done, Your Majesty.

    DCSCA (9e2430)

  35. @28: What is a “conservative”?

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  36. Kevin @ 33:

    Please. Actual socialists make up less that 10% of the Dems party. Trumpists are more than half of the republican party. And claiming Dems are softer on crime ignores all evidence. Republicans are EXTREMELY soft on crime…committed by Republicans which to be fair is the majority of serious crimes (gun violence, vote fraud, financial fraud, insurrections…)

    There’s only one recent major party presidential candidate who openly called for his voters to be violent towards the other party and media, and it wasn’t a dem.

    Tlaloc (b41784)

  37. #36

    Biden’s blanket forgiveness of student loans comes closer to what Trump did than what you might think. He basically appropriated 1 trillion dollars without Congerssional approval. That’s pretty fundamental. It’s a great precedent for a second Trump term. Think of how beautiful he can make that wall with a stroke of a pen and that precedent.

    That said, I am still in the no GOP while Trump is its leader camp. But door #3 is not an unreasonable position no matter how many pearls are clutched. Given the Dems are happy to see Republicans nominate foaming Trumpers — I question a lot of their seriousness on the whole Democracy issue anyway.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  38. She has a canny sense of humor, too:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AS-dCdYZbo

    DCSCA (8752c4)

  39. BTW, if you want to continue have exchanges with Beldar, a subscription to The Dispatch is the ticket. Their comment threads are pretty good.

    Paul Montagu (685e38)

  40. Actual socialists make up less that 10% of the Dems party.

    I think we see different boundaries. Anyone who wants to take more than 50% (state & federal) of someone’s earnings is a socialist to me, and that includes our president, who would take up to 80%.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  41. My term “socialist” is not the technical term that Brezhnev used.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  42. That said, I am still in the no GOP while Trump is its leader camp.

    There is no third choice. None. All you can do is allow others to choose for you.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  43. Biden’s blanket forgiveness of student loans comes closer to what Trump did than what you might think. He basically appropriated 1 trillion dollars without Congerssional approval.

    I am confused here. “He” refers to whom? And what did Trump do that this is close to?

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  44. And claiming Dems are softer on crime ignores all evidence. Republicans are EXTREMELY soft on crime…committed by Republicans which to be fair is the majority of serious crimes (gun violence, vote fraud, financial fraud, insurrections…)

    I’m sorry? Who commits a majority of homicides in this country? Actually serious crimes, not paper crimes?

    mikeybates (dd20f5)

  45. @27

    Patterico is not exactly a Red Meat site, but some here seem committed to making it one….and remain shocked when there is not more hyper-partisanship. To them, it’s almost a slap in the face for a conservative-leaning site to not be ultra-skeptical of Trump’s critics and laser-focused on Biden ridicule. It’s almost like, how dare there be Never Trump?

    I would agree with this. More and more, people hold politics and views therein as binary and with no middle ground allowed: You’re either with us or against us, they dictate to the rest of us. I reject that wholeheartedly. People (and life) are far more nuanced and multi-layered than that. However, from what I’ve observed here, that is unacceptable and the Trump supporters appear determined to force any centrists into their stifled configuration of conservatism. Anything less is, well, wrong. While this can be annoying because it typically comes with a Trump influence, I believe that it speaks volumes about our host who encourages an open format of comments, which in turn allows political views that even run counter to his own.

    Dana (1225fc) — 9/8/2022 @ 9:48 am

    I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly.

    Where I differ, I think, is that I’m more interested in efforts to prevent Democrats from holding office (ie, advocating to vote down-ticket GOPers).

    Me voting for Trump (hypothetically), or any other Republican candidates seen as a “MAGA” candidate isn’t me endorsing them as some virtuous individuals.

    If anything, it’s more an indictment against Democrats, as they can’t even field a worthy candidate for me to active vote for.

    whembly (b770f8)

  46. 42 & 43 —

    When the Democrats attempt to overturn an election by claiming phony fraud and then gin up the rioters to see if they can kill and maim some legislators, then the choice is different. That is a line for me. It isn’t yours. The GOP won’t stop it unless it causes them to lose, and keeps causing them to lose. That’s my calculation as a voter.

    That said, if Stacy Abrams claims (like in 2018) that she was robbed and encourages the BLM folks to intimidate people (implausible, but not impossible), then the line is crossed here in Georgia.

    Appalled (03f53c)

  47. What a great post. He seems to have answered my question to Haiku in the previous Weekend Thread. Which is nice, since Haiku didn’t deem it worthy of response. (Admittedly I was being kind of snarky, so I don’t really blame him.)

    I only have one question. Why did he abandon the pseudonym. I’d think there’s a lot of capital in “Allahpundit.” Why toss that away? Does Hot Air own the name?

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  48. Maybe The Dispatch doesn’t like handles.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  49. When the Democrats attempt to overturn an election by claiming phony fraud and then gin up the rioters to see if they can kill and maim some legislators, then the choice is different. That is a line for me. It isn’t yours. The GOP won’t stop it unless it causes them to lose, and keeps causing them to lose. That’s my calculation as a voter.

    Well, fine and when they take your home for back taxes, you can be solaced by the fact that the forms were obeyed.

    Imagine that there is a space between “supporting a crazed man-child” and “supporting crazed socialists.” Well, anyway, I claim to have found one.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

Leave a Reply


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1334 secs.