Skip to content

Fear And Loathing: The Deadwood Summit

25 January 2013 @ 19:59


America’s favorite Gonzo Reporter, Robert Stacy Beauregard Stonewall Forrest McCain, is in the Devil’s Den, the nation’s capital, this weekend covering the National Review Institute Summit.

-Stacy filed his first report, before he left, here.  As will see when you read it, his Gonzo Mojo is working just fine, as he is trying to incite several brawls.  He’s doing this because, well…let’s let him explain it:

When I told a certain investigative journalist friend of mine I was coming to town for the NRI Summit, he said, “You mean the one with the panel on ‘what’s wrong with the Right,’ where the answer to the question is, ‘The people on stage’?”

Panel: What is Wrong with the Right?
Moderator: Reihan Salam, National Review Online

Bill Kristol, The Weekly Standard

Yuval Levin, National Affairs

John Podhoretz, Commentary Magazine

Joe Scarborough, MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’

Ross Douthat, New York Times

Notice — and I hate to be the one to point this out — that there isn’t a single female or Latino on that panel? So there’s one answer to your question: “Intellectuals who are clueless about optics.” This is not to endorse a tokenistic system of affirmative action among the rightward intelligentsia, but when you exclude key demographics and the closest thing to a “youth” presence you can offer is 33-year-old Harvard classmates Reihan Salam and Ross Douthat . . .

Finish that sentence however you want.

It get’s even worse when you read the whole of the agenda.

Except for a few of the true bright lights of NRO [Mark Steyn, Mark Krikorian, and Andrew McCarthy] it’s the same tired old dim bulbs, most culled from that bloated consortium known as The Conservative Beautiful People and who are either, as it were, too old to rock and roll but too young to die or Quislings Incorporated.

I really do hope Stacy can liven things up, but it’s a monumental task — although, perhaps, hitting his tip jar may help, ah, fuel his efforts.

-He filed his second report a little bit ago.  A highlight:

No sooner had I walked into the lobby of the Omni Shoreham Hotel than I was accosted by John LaRosa, Republican campaign consultant and originator of the #UnsustainableBarTab. “What? Are you stalking me?” LaRosa said. “Did you follow me from the airport?”

We immediately went to the room where his fellow consultant Brad Marston was waiting. We then headed back down to the smoking area, on the way encountering National Review reporter Rob Costa, who’s prepared for the riot I’ve been trying to incite at this weekend’s summit. Costa’s not a smoker, so we bid him adieu and headed out to the front of the hotel where the snow was being whipped around by a cold wind.

Do take the time to read the rest here.

-Stacy is also sending Tweets, so you should follow his Twitter feed here.  Here are two:



  1. M. Thompson permalink
    25 January 2013 @ 22:14 22:14

    Mitt Romney was the perfect candidate for 1996.

  2. njartist49 permalink
    26 January 2013 @ 11:25 11:25

    The pseudo-Conservatve movement is merely a stand-up, cardboard cutout of no use to any serious conservative. It is merely a ruse to defuse a real philosophical conservative movement.

  3. 26 January 2013 @ 15:14 15:14

    Did you know that Rich Lowry is there? Did you know that Rich Lowry is a coward, poltroon and popinjay?

  4. indyjonesouthere permalink
    26 January 2013 @ 21:44 21:44

    I think I have to consider Sarah Palins recent move. Back away from Fox news and the rino party. The Judge is the only one I care to listen to other than Gutfield and all the rinos are karl rove knockoffs. There is little of conservative values in Fox or rinos.Time to throw the tube and the party out the window. Leave them to the dumpster divers.

    • Rosalie permalink
      27 January 2013 @ 16:22 16:22

      I’m glad she’s out of there. She will be doing our party a lot more good in another capacity. She’s smart and has good instincts. I’m looking forward to see her in action.

  5. sdferr permalink
    28 January 2013 @ 15:42 15:42

    Is there any reason to teach the origin and intentions of those who invented the term value(s) as a substitute for the older terms good and bad, or right and wrong; the role this quasi-scientific yet disguised political rhetoric has played in the loss of political philosophy; or is it simply too much trouble for otherwise thinking people to have to undergo? Insofar as Science has become worship, I sometimes guess it may be pointless after all.

    Still, just as the fellows on the stage discussing ‘what is Wrong with the Right?’ cannot see themselves fishes in the sea, so political discourse in general in America cannot be seen to incorporate its own denial in the terms of progressive thought which make up its substance. And what cure for that?

    • 28 January 2013 @ 19:52 19:52

      The Left has been so smart in the ways it has corrupted the languages it had touched.

      The example you cite is one of it’s great triumphs. Once fold-up the terms right and wrong, good and evil in the neutral term ‘value’ then you can (1) pour any other term in and (2) you can claim that relativity applies to all the values in the mix because they all are different things. In other words: by having meanings that are not compatible being classified under the same term, you force the terms to become neutral [ie: relative]. I’m a bit tired, so please forgive me if the above is a bit muddied.

  6. sdferr permalink
    28 January 2013 @ 22:45 22:45

    I don’t think that’s muddled Bob. On the other hand, the infolded rub is the strange idea (a pretense) that there is in fact a genuine neutrality in the choice of value . . . or perhaps better to say, the pretense that value itself isn’t a choice of a good. As Leo Strauss puts it, scientists have (already) chosen, which we see because scientists cannot answer scientifically the question “Why science?”.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: