But Peggy Noonan seems to be warming up to The Donald.
At some point conservative intellectuals are going to take their energy and start thinking about how we got here. How did a party that stood for regular people become a party that stood for platitudes regular people no longer found even vaguely pertinent? During the Bush administration, did the party intelligentsia muscle critics and silence needed dissent, making the party narrower, more rigid and embittered? What is the new conservatism for this era? How did the party of Main Street become the party of Donors’ Policy Preferences?
Peggy hails what she calls a break from "enforced conservative orthodoxy" with a plug for a new website called Journal of American Greatness. Who is behind the Journal of American Greatness? They'd rather not say. Here is what they will say on their Who Are We? page.
Who are you?
You mean in the Samuel Huntington sense? We are American patriots aghast at the stupidity and corruption of American politics, particularly in the Republican Party, and above all in what passes for the “conservative” intellectual movement.
No, literally—who are you guys?
None of your damned business.
Why won’t you tell us?
Because the times are so corrupt that simply stating certain truths is enough to make one unemployable for life.
That’s a bit dramatic, isn’t it?
Ask Brendan Eich.
Do you really support Trump?
We support Trumpism, defined as secure borders, economic nationalism, interests-based foreign policy, and above all judging every government action through a single lens: does this help or harm Americans? For now, the principal vehicle of Trumpism is Trump.
Is this journal pro-Trump or anti-conservative?
So you admit that Trump is not conservative?
That Trump is not “conservative” in the conventional sense defined by pundits, we regard as a feature, not a bug. Trump, or at least Trumpism, is more conservative in the decisive sense of actually seeking to conserve the American nation and what is good about it and within it.
Any who have followed Libertarian Leanings over the past year or so already know that I started out supporting and endorsing Ted Cruz. I opposed Trump, since I was convinced that his job in this election cycle was to assist Hillary in her White House bid, just the way Ross Perot made Bill Clinton's election possible 1992. Perot, running on a third party ticket as a populist conservative, split the Republican vote allowing Bill Clinton to win the White House with just 43% of the popular vote. I saw Trump's entry into the race as a brilliant stroke in the grand Clinton strategy to elect the monumentally dishonest, unprincipled, and incompetent Hillary, who in my view would otherwise have no chance.
But Trump has been attacking Hillary with gusto, obliterating any notion I had that he was on her side, all the while staying on top in the Republican primaries. And Cruz, who was my guy, has faded. I liked Cruz because I saw him as the most likely candidate to upset the Washington establishment, to wrest power from Washington bureaucrats and professional politicians. But even before Cruz dropped out the race, I was beginning to see Trump as somebody who might challenge the Washington establishment as well. Now Cruz is gone, and the only candidates left are Trump, Sanders, and Hillary. Sanders is an avowed socialist, a purveyor of socialism's institutional dishonesty. Hillary is personally dishonesty. This is not a tough choice. I am now with Trump all the way. There is no question about his challenging the Washington establishment.
And to my great surprise, Peggy Noonan, whom I have always considered Republican establishment, seems to be coming over to the dark side, too. She is most welcome. I urge you all to join me over here as well. To get a perspective on Donald Trump from a thoughtful conservative website, check out the Journal of American Greatness.