For a decade, I have enjoyed reading National Review. The conservative standard-bearer in print has been the go-to guide for policy and process for decades.
Last month, I could not believe how far the magazine strayed from its conservative credentials.
The William F. Buckley-founded publication--which restored limited government, individual liberty, and constitutional rule to political respectability—praised RINO Governor of Massachusetts Charlie Baker as a conservative.
But continues to disregard Trump!
A few years ago, I could have held my peace about this Governor. After all, he is a Republican in a deeply blue state. But so is Maryland’s Larry Hogan, and he has not annoyed or enraged conservatives. Massachusetts residents told me they liked him because “He’s a numbers guy.”
His embrace of the Cultural Left is mind-numbing. During his 2010 run for Governor, Baker proudly announced that (at the time) he was to the left of Obama. He still is.
Haven't National Review editors followed Massachusetts politics, and what conservatives have endured?
Well, here is the first part of the fulsome article praising Charlie the Fake GOP Baker:
The Massachusetts governor resembles an older variety of conservative Massachusetts governor Charlie Baker is the anti–Donald Trump.
Right away, we can see why the National Review is making nice about aker.
He is the anti-Trump, and if you aren’t aware by now, NR has an anti-Donald Trump fixation. Frankly, how is this Not sure how this anti-Donald agenda going to help the NR to broaden their appeal? They have been requesting donations for the last six months, and now readers know why.
Contacts of mine in Massachusetts stopped reading NR because of this anti-Trump obsession. The editors need to get over it: their candidate lost (Ted Cruz), and the best candidate running for President is Donald Trump.
The populist heartbeat of the Trump campaign has also picked up the Republican Party and instilled in voters of all backgrounds a new love of country. This grounded populism clashes with the champagne conservatism of Washington DC/Beltway think-tanks and politicians.
He is even-tempered, skilled at working with his political opponents, compassionate, and quite possibly the most wonkish governor in America.
“Even-tempered”? Baker is pro-choice, 100%. Not only does he embrace gay marriage, but he signed off on the most comprehensive, obtrusive, and pervasive "Transgender bathroom" bill in the country. This legislative travesty is the worst yet.
The new law will force all public places to accommodate men who think that they are women to enter into the women's bathroom.
Sadly, Republican leaders across the country have not risen up and denounced this RINO for endangering the lives and well-being of millions of Massachusetts residents. North Carolina’s governor gets media hell for standing for women, children, and biology, but not a word from the press about Baker? And didn't the RINO in the Corner Office get the memo? There are two sexes, male and female. There is no divorcing or ignoring this very basic yet necessary distinction.
Governor Baker, shame on you!
And there are more reasons to despise his leadership …
He is certainly the most popular, a remarkable accomplishment for a Republican in one of the bluest states in the Union.
He is popular with a wide swatch of Democratic voters.
How popular will Baker be when women and children are assaulted in restrooms throughout the Commonwealth?
That Baker should be going so strong in the age of Trump attests to the strange varieties of American federalism and should encourage Republicans who still believe that the path to power runs through serious policymaking.
Serious policy-making, like a "transgender bathroom" bill, or suggestions about allowing illegal aliens to live in public housing?
Or appointing pro-homosexual justices to the Massachusetts Supreme Court?
Or fundraising $1 million to attack fellow conservatives in races for the Massachusetts Republican state committee instead of campaigning to remove Democratic lawmakers?
Elected in 2014, Baker is now halfway through his second year as governor, though he’s been a familiar face on the state-government scene since the late 1980s. He got his start as co-director of the Pioneer Institute, a center-right think tank in Boston.
Fiscal discipline is important. Standing up to labor unions is a must. Enhancing public safety is a basic requirement of governance.
But let's declare the facts: Baker is no conservative.
National Review blasts Trump, but loves Baker? Is anyone besides me confused at these misplaced priorities?
In 1991, on the strength of the research he oversaw on safety-net policy, Baker was appointed undersecretary of the state’s department of health and human services by newly elected governor William Weld, a Republican. The context was the early-1990s recession, which hit Massachusetts hard and necessitated cuts to health-care programs then overwhelming the state budget. Baker would later become head of the department and eventually take control of the state’s budget office.
William Weld was another RINO who hurt the Massachusetts GOP. Now he’s a leftist masquerading as a Libertarian Presidential Party ticket.
In the entire article, NR leaves out references to Baker’s left-wing capitulation to the cultural left eating invading Massachusetts.
For example, Dr. Paul Church was fired from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center because he opposed homosexual conduct, and explained to his patients that such behavior is dangerous to their well-being. He also refused to participate in the "gay pride" events at the hospital, because such conduct is contrary to sound health.
Professional employees in the Massachusetts state prison system face discrimination because they do not believe that biological men should share locker rooms with women. They can face "re-education" for voicing opposition to such insane, immoral, and evil folly.
Instead of defending individual liberties, Baker has capitulated to the tyrannical LGBT agenda.
National Review holds up RINO Baker as a testimony to conservative, but routinely rejects Donald Trump?
No wonder some conservatives have declared that conservatism is dead. The current leaders of the movement are capitulating to some of the most regressive agendas of our times to make a point against a political outsider!