Whatever kind of conservatism is arguing that we should invest the president with sole, secret, unreviewable authority to order the assassination of U.S. citizens because the alternative is unworkable (!) in the considered view of John Tabin, because war exists (!) — I am not that kind of conservative, I suppose. I propose we call that school of thought ahistorical, morally illiterate conservatism.
Perhaps we should call Williamson’s school of thought plain old illiterate conservatism, as in incapable of reading, because I don’t see how one could read my entire post and come away with the belief that I think the President should have “sole, secret, unreviewable authority” when I propose a mechanism of review to check the President’s authority a few sentences after the bit that Williamson quotes.
If Williamson would like to respond to the points I actually made, I’ll be happy to engage him, but it ought not be too much to ask for him to refrain from charging me with depravity on the basis of positions that I don’t hold.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.