So, An Uninformed Jennifer Rubin Is Now The Self-Appointed Arbiter Of The Right?

By
April 10, 2011

Honestly. I've never seen one shred of documentation as to what the Washington Post's alleged conservative Jennifer Rubin did as a Los Angeles labor lawyer for 20 years. There's nothing at all quickly available via a Google search to speak to her background, or previous political leanings. I tried to look tonight, not to attack her, but only so that I might be better able to understand something of where the hell she's coming from with her latest self-infatuated nonsense. It's nonsense, as her link claiming broad Tea Party support for Boehner's deal quotes Matte Kibbe and the Club for Growth President as somewhat positive, while any genuine Tea Party types are very upset. So, yes, that makes it a foolishly ignorant claim, especially for a lawyer and now supposedly serious journalist. She must not have even read the WSJ item she linked; that, or she has no real idea of what the Tea Party is and isn't. But it gets worse.

The budget deal as a Rorschach test

But there is silliness on the Republican side as well. … These are the voices of the perpetually aggrieved on the right who will oppose any deal because their aim is not conservative governance but confrontation and incitement of an anti-Washington base.

Nevertheless, we also know that the cranky voices are a very small minority …. Moreover, Tea Partyers whom the Democrats were setting up to take the fall in the event of a shutdown were overwhelmingly positive about the deal. Perhaps the anti-dealmaking right is largely a creation of liberal media and of a few sour conservative pundits.

… those on the right who whine about any deal should not be taken seriously. After all, the CR shows how little credibility they have.

So, she moves to Virginia, gives up law to, according to her, spend time with her children and invests a few short years doing some decent blogging, but mostly making nice to establishment Republicans, while demonstrating herself to be a Neo-Conservative, at best. Yet, today, she evidently feels entitled to sit at the Washington Post as a would be "conservative," while claiming that if you aren't simply raving about Boehner's performance and the deal he made, you have no seat at the adult's table?

She certainly seems pretty full of herself, or full of something. Representative Mike Pence is far from certain the deal's worth supporting. Bachmann's not sold, as I'm sure many others aren't. I'm no fan of it, Jedediah Bila sees through it. Mark Levin reponds by speaking to the dangerous times we're in.

These beltway folks are blinded by their camaraderie or something. Obama is not playing catch up and the GOP is not united. The Tea Party is very disappointed, and rightly so. And without the Tea Party the GOP cannot win majorities.

But we should all go home because we're silly, unhinged and irrelevant? And we know this all because the Washington Post's newest useful idiot and newcomer of a Neo-Conservative says so? The WaPo employs ideologues on the Left in Sargent, Klein and whomever. And the Right gets this? Yes, these are dangerous times, indeed, my friends – all the moreso if we continue to allow establishment hacks and Neo-cons to continue to co-opt the conservative brand, especially with pundits with no serious record of achievement to make them leaders, or serious voices of much of anything, let alone a serious conservatism.



AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
Comments:
  1. mark l. says:

    “The budget deal as a Rorschach test”
    wouldn’t it be fair to say that the ‘interpretation’ of the budget deal is also a rorschach test?
    all those who believe that the current deficit is NOT a crisis, please stand up.
    everyone else, bend over.
    i for one would like to congratulate the gop for voting for the largest budget deficit in US history.
    it segues quite nicely into the ryan plan to cut 6 trillion of our projected spending.
    any gop pol who used the the reference to obama/dems as “punting” on their responsibilty…yada-yada.
    on ‘first and fifty’ the gop managed to gain half a yard on a qb dive.
    second and 49.5 yards to go. awesome.

  2. mark l. says:

    “Moreover, Tea Partyers whom the Democrats were setting up to take the fall in the event…”
    somehow, i think the tea party could take the heat. they were the ‘issue’ that the dems tried to run on in the 2010 midterms. that worked out well.
    fwiw…
    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/polls/#val=USH00p2
    of 84.2 million people who voted:
    roughly,
    34.5 million supported the tea party.
    25.3 million opposed the tea party.
    20.2 million were neutral.

  3. mark l. says:

    same poll, page 3…
    “Highest Priority for Next Congress”
    cutting taxes, 18%.
    Spending to Create Jobs, 37%.
    Reducing Deficit, 40%.

  4. gary gulrud says:

    The whole idea of the deal was that it would be palatable to Dimmis, both some in the Senate and the majority House.
    Looking at the provisions requiring an audit of Obamacare and a vote on repeal in Reid’s playpen, I’d say it ain’t over ’til it’s over.

  5. barfo says:

    “while any genuine Tea Party types are very upset”
    Who didn’t see the Tea Party purity tests coming?
    Put a fork in it…

  6. gary gulrud says:

    “the perpetually aggrieved on the right who will oppose any deal because their aim is not conservative governance but confrontation and incitement of an anti-Washington base.”
    Perpetually as in a quarter century of disenfranchisment.
    Conservative governance: Because we did not get Stimulus III Helicopter Ben, an unelected bureaucrate, is printing an additional $1 Trillion, will be raising rates in the near future and before QE2 is forgotten this summer will find the bankers screaming “Murderer!” and will launch another round with the presses.
    Beltway is just another name for firebreak.

  7. KLSmith says:

    Jennifer used to write for Pajama’s Media and then on to Commentary (Contentions blog). She’s actually pretty good on some issues – like the President; she goes after him pretty hard. On immigration and a few other things – not so much.

  8. jakee308 says:

    1) WHO is saying Rubin is a conservative? WaPo? That’s not an overwhelming recommendation to me. Sorta like the NYT saying David Brooks is a conservative. And for the same reasons IMHO.
    2) Seems she’s doing EXACTLY what WaPo is paying her for; giving WaPo cover whenever anyone brings up their liberal/leftist slant. They can point at their tame ‘Conservative’ and go “See! See! We got Balance! She’s a CONSERVATIVE!!!111111!!!!”
    Whenever liberals make a claim about some one, some thing or some event, I always assume the opposite. Works about 99% of the time.
    (Oh, and I’m guessing Jennifer was either a pro bono lawyer working on ‘poor’ people’s legal problems for some community organization for peanuts or one of a hundred worker bees burrowing through tort case law for some huge liberal/environmental/class action litigator law firm and got tired of doing a lot of work and getting little pay and no recognition (or advancement) and/or realized that her liberal legal ‘pals’ were actually making things worse for folks. That’s usually when folks decide to spend “more time with their families” and such. That or an indictment was pending.)

  9. bishop says:

    She’s pretty good on foreign policy and the law, certain aspects of economics and social policy less so.

  10. Dan Riehl says:

    “She’s actually pretty good on some issues”
    What she is, is a very average neo-conservative. Make war around the world for Democracy and let America go mostly to hell in a handbasket thanks to the establishment GOP. They are in for a rude awakening and they’ve invited it by undermining traditional Reagan conservatives like myself, who are very pro-Israel.
    At this rate, we will end up throwing in with more isolationist Libertarians and eve some Paleo-cons to take back the GOP. If they had more sense, they would have been more mindful of the traditional conservatives largely in support of their goals.
    Unfortunately, as they are now against us on domestic policy and we are in so much trouble there, the future for neo-conservatism is not bright, not bright at all.

  11. mark l. says:

    the problems of 02-06 were never really addressed. we did get some apologies before the midterms, but now, it seems to all be forgotten. i worry that the post mortem on this is going to follow the pattern of blaming the leadership, ala delay, and everyone else forgets about the votes.
    i’m sure the gop staffers gave the wiki entry on the govt shutdown of 95-96 a thorough read. wiki even provides the ‘results’. no mention of the economic argument, just 100% interpretation as a popularity contest.
    by the numbers…
    deficit as a % of gdp:
    94, 2.87%.
    95, 2.21%.
    96, 1.37%.
    97, .26%.
    now we have,
    08, 3.19%.
    09, 10.01%.
    10, 8.92%.
    2011 offers a 1.65 trillion dollar deficit. if current gdp is used, 14.12 trillion, it would represent 11.7% of gdp. of course, to draw even with the deficit to gdp ratio of 8.92% for this year, our economy just has to grow to 18.5 trillion dollars, or b y 31% in the next year.
    anyone who is pretending this is a great victory, for ANYONE, is a sorry ‘pos’.

  12. mark l. says:

    “Conservative governance: Because we did not get Stimulus III Helicopter Ben, an unelected bureaucrate, is printing an additional $1 Trillion, will be raising rates in the near future and before QE2 is forgotten this summer will find the bankers screaming “Murderer!” and will launch another round with the presses.”
    my personal theory…
    bernanke knows that our debt to gdp ratio is now working against our near term solvency and crippling our growth. the only possible path, especially given the admin’s unwillingness to cut spending is devalue the dollar and bring about massive inflation. it can NEVER be a stated policy; as soon as the plan was verbally expressed by anyone in govt, the dollar collapses, instantly.
    the two choices are to cut spending, or to devalue/inflate our gdp. by the very rejection of BOTH parties to the former, we are destined for the latter.
    I’m 14% gold, and moving another 10% to silver. I know that oil and gold have normally run togehter, but when oil collapses on anemic growth, the new normal will be an independent explosion in metals.
    they are the last real things left and real estate is destined to collapse, further, on massive rises in interest rates leading to a very restrictive scenario for buyers.

  13. mark l. says:

    i’m certain equites will do well…maybe 1-2% legit yearly growth, and 25% due to inflation, over the next three years.

  14. ER says:

    “hear, hear!”
    you expressed my thoughts exactly

  15. dennis d says:

    I have found her conservative in issues pertaining to Israel and terrorism very similar to Joe Lieberman. On other issues she is suspect. I personally found this budget deal insulting.

  16. AngelaTC says:

    Well, take come consolation that she totally agrees with both you and the Democrats about the ability of the king….I mean, the President to be the only person who can declare war.

  17. Jamie says:

    Dan, I thought you were the self-appointed arbiter of the Right.

  18. Tennwriter says:

    I don’t generally pay attention to Miss Rubin. In fact, I usually go out of my way a tiny bit to avoid her.
    Dan, as to your comment about Paleocons….well, if I could get a deal where we stay friends with Israel…y’know I might take it.
    As to the budget deal….49.5 yards to go and second down sums it up pretty well as mark put it. It is a step in the right direction which is about as kind as I can get (maybe a really weak cheer too could be tossed in.)

  19. Marge says:

    That’s way the bestest awnser so far!

  20. […] with actual conservative writers such as Red State’s Erick Erickson. Not only does Rubin not have a journalist background, she was an extreme Leftist Berkley graduate and Los Angeles labor … She only became a Republican later in life because she wasn’t happy with the Democrats’ […]