Morono-con populism

You read, I hope, John Schwenkler's excellent essay from The American Conservative in which he laid out a conservative case for taking food seriously as culture. Well, here's a ridiculous response from a right-winger who basically says to Schwenkler, "You're a fruity CINO who hates real food that real Americans like." I swear, I'm not making this up:

Try as you might into making people think you favor traditional American meals, you just can't make the leap to actually eating it yourself. Instead, your inner Berkeley liberal forces you to remain wedded to your diet of marinated beet salad and wilted chard. Please don't grimace too much while the rest of us continue to enjoy our pizzas and spare ribs slathered in distinctly non-Berkeley barbeque sauce.

Now, obviously I agree with Schwenkler, but there are certainly good arguments to be made against his (our) position. But that would require actually thinking, instead of moronic populist posturing. From Schwenkler's most excellent response:

Apparently I, a married and consistently churchgoing father of one who would like nothing more than for the federal government to crawl off into a corner and leave me and the market well enough alone so that I can homeschool my children and eat my sustainably-grown produce in God's peace, am by virtue of my love for the finer things nothing but a liberal con on a "rebranding" project. (Why any liberal would want to share an appellation with people like this is entirely beyond me.) It is not enough, in other words, to attempt to disprove the claim - not mine, by the way - that "Food Choices Can Make You 'Conservative'": rather, it must be carefully shown stated baldly and without any support whatsoever that the opposite is true. Into good food and farmers' markets? You, my good man, have exposed yourself as a liberal. Liberal, liberal, LIBERAL. Now go back to Berkeley and sip your commie lattes with your commie friends. Liberal.

Later, Schwenkler says:

What we eat, and where it comes from, and how we choose to eat it, are things that matter: for we are not merely bodily beings who can feed ourselves like so many horses at a trough, but spiritual ones as well. And so the cultivation of the proper sorts of relationships to our food, to its sources in the earth, and to the people who grow it and sell it and those with whom we eat it, is obviously the sort of project that conservatives ought to go in for.

Well, obvious to all but the Moronocons, for whom there is no need for rethinking, or thinking at all, only blacklisting any conservative who doesn't fit a cartoon version of what conservatism is supposed to be. It's tribalist, anti-intellectual, moronocon populism. If that's what conservatism has come to, then ... who cares? Honestly, who cares?