Send in Palin
[Guest post by DRJ]
Earlier today, Hot Air linked an NRO post by Kevin D. Williamson suggesting the GOP replace Chairman Michael Steele with Sarah Palin:
“Re: Steele and the RNC: Allow me to chime in with my usual observation on this subject: This is a job for Sarah Palin. Palin would be a much better RNC chairman than presidential candidate or freelance kingmaker. She’d raise tons of money and help recruit good candidates, i.e., she’d excel at doing the things Steele should have been doing instead of appointing himself Republican pundit-at-large.”
Williamson concedes Palin is polarizing but “these are polarized times. And it’s one thing to have a polarizing party chairman, another to have a polarizing candidate.”
I think he’s right, although I doubt she’d take it if she wants to run for President. What do you think?
— DRJ
UPDATE BY PATTERICO: Let me get this straight: Steele makes too many gaffes . . . so let’s get Sarah Palin?
It is bad enough that Steele is “the story” rather than driving the message — can you imagine how the press would be all over Palin? Horrid idea. Instead let Palin go down to the Gulf and heckle Obama.
Kevin Murphy (5ae73e) — 7/3/2010 @ 10:50 pmThis will drive Andrew Sullivan (further) into frothing insanity. How do we make this happen?
pdb (9cf098) — 7/3/2010 @ 10:58 pmI think Sarah is more a family-oriented mom who, while she would like to be president, would not put her family through that terrible ordeal. Short of that, she is able to influence who IS chosen, and can raise tons of money. RNC chair is an ideal position for her. In that place, controversy only helps her.
ManlyDad (060305) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:19 pmI liked this comment at HotAir:
Steele was hired to raise money for GOP candidates & enunciate the consensus Republican position, not his personal opinion. He is clearly either unwilling, or unable to carry out these tasks and so should be shown the door.
I think part of the problem is the GOP’s position on matters is unclear and there is division within it’s leadership over said positions. Are we the big tent or are we purists? Because before you can enunciate the consensus, you have to actually have a consensus.
With that, Palin has a fairly rigid, and I would say narrow view of GOP positions, I wonder if she would be able to voice the consensus rather than her own positions?
I don’t think she’d lend gravitas or a renewed seriousness to the position (especially post-Steele) and bolster the standing and relevance of the GOP… (but then again, the media has had a field day with Steele and they have never stopped having one with Palin, so perhaps that wouldn’t be a big deal…)
Nonetheless, I vote for Liz Cheney.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:28 pmI like Liz. Sarah has too much baggage… a big part of which is she’s even more crassly self-promoting and opportunistic than this Steele loser.
Plus she’s a dimbulb.
Also, it would be really bad optics to hand the reins of the party over to a low-wattage cable news babe what seems to actually believe in her muddled blinkered head that Team R is in desperate need of six more years of Meghan’s useless daddy in the Senate.
Sarah quit the governorship to cash in on a little kaching ching not to actually do anything or she would have run for that useless Murkowski hoochie’s Senate seat. I think you’ll see her be very reluctant to hop off the gravy train she’s found in the political TMZ what she’s made her home. She knows what side her bread is buttered on.
(That would be the not-being-actually-accountable-for-anything side.)
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:43 pmI need a drink.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:54 pmSteele is an embarrassment and will only get worse. I’m growing weary of people who say Palin’s stupid yet a great moneymaker. She injects enthusiasm wherever she goes. Maybe the folks who are too smart to respect her are better off voting Democrat.
trentk269 (ee047d) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:55 pmMaybe the folks who think Palin’s super smart are better off voting Republican.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/3/2010 @ 11:56 pmLiz would be better. Though, together, they could tag-team a whole lot of folk from both sides of the isle, while talking nice to the tea party.
htom (412a17) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:00 amLiz Cheney?
Why?
I thought we were talking about why we DON’T want a pundit at large.
Liz Cheney is the best pundit we have. Do we know she can fire and restaff the right people at RNC? Does she have the ability to make the kind of bold, sweeping, and forward thinking political plans Howard Dean did?
I know she has the intelligence. She’s brilliant. But this is nitty gritty stuff that might require someone with experience that I just don’t think Liz has.
I think we should just admit we were doing a pretty good job with Gillespie. Karl Rove also knows some of this stuff, though I don’t love him.
Mitt Romney knows how to bring in money and set right a broken organization.
I think Sarah Palin is very intelligent, and I think she could do a good job. She really did do an impressive job in Alaska even before she was Governor. She would make the GOP more credible to the Tea Partiers. But like Liz Cheney, Sarah Palin may not have experience enough with national nitty gritty politics and the long term strategy that Howard Dean turned the Democrats around with. And she also doesn’t have the connections to fill the RNC with leaders we need right now. Someone could step up and help her, and her main asset is that she’s trustworthy, unlike Steele.
I know I’m wasting my pixels, but Palin was hundreds of thousands in debt on ethics charges. Ethics charges brought on by crazy democrats, many of whom were Obama 2008 campaign staff who needed work. She came through the process showing charge after charge was either completely baseless or silly, mostly baseless, but she couldn’t afford to defend herself.
Worse, her state administration was overwhelmed with this crap. By quitting, Alaska was able to be governed.
I think you already knew that.
Maybe she’s dumb. I thought her book was pretty weak. I don’t like her Fox News appearances. I think she’s show a lot of success as a leader, but I am really just saying you’re out of line to claim she quit because she simply wanted to get rich and didn’t care about her state having her leadership. That’s just plain unfair.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:27 am“replace Chairman Michael Steele with Sarah Palin”
Good Idea.
I want to see the liberals’ heads explode.
Dave Surls (b62d72) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:31 amgood point about Liz being an unknown in many ways but her dad would have her back … he knows how to kick Team R ass and take names like nobody’s business. He’s Dick Cheney, and he’s the mostest America guy in the whole world.
oh. I just read earlier today that Angelina Jolie is thinking of retiring from movies… maybe she’d be willing to take the job. She’s everything Palin aspires to be and more.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:34 amDick Cheney is a great leader, and I fear he called the Texas governor’s race correctly and I didn’t listen to him in time.
but he’s just not healthy enough. I don’t think he’d make much different on Liz. That sounds a lot like people really adore the few really well spoken and clearly sincere Republicans we have. Chris Christie, Paul Ryan, Liz Cheney. These are people who simply understand and have that sense of urgency.
It takes a lot more than that to organize hundreds of races, prioritize them, hire and fire operatives.
In fact, Steele sounded pretty good on TV most of the time before he turned out to be pretty selfish. He sounds like an idiot now, but my point is that this isn’t the way to pick a leader.
Palin succeeded as governor and in other roles. Many of the things she did with oil companies or entrenched crooks in her own state were difficult… actually unprecedented. Does that mean she’s a genius? Nope. Just means she is smart and a good leader.
Happyfeet always bashes her, and sometimes I think it’s pretty funny. I admit, Palin is working hard to present an image to the country. I don’t know why Happyfeet has a problem with that… it’s a sign of intelligence. Palin was bashed so much in 2008 that the only way she could be a factor again is by making a hardcore effort like this.
There’s perfect examples, people who never run into adversity to rise from. And then there’s real human examples. People who own their family’s flaws and mistakes with responsibility. People who proudly show up in public after nasty slurs are painted on every wall about them.
Part of why people love Palin, though, is that she *is* the culture war. We want to repudiate the democrat’s core evil they directed at Palin for daring to be this attractive, happy, working mom who isn’t even from Harvard and doesn’t hide her screwy kids but loves them.
We want to defend that. I prefer lots of people to Palin, and yet I really want to see her succeed on this ground.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:50 amWhat about Bill Kristol?
AD - RtR/OS! (712fff) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:52 amJindal/Christie in 2012!
(too early?)
gahrie (ed7a50) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:52 amits always too early for Jindal….
and feets? they have medication to help you with your Sarah issues. you and Andy really need to take the cure.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:12 ameven if I take a pill she’s still the devil
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:43 amAnyone who says Sarah Palin is a dim bulb has been drinking too much Kool Aid and can’t be trusted to make any rational decisions.
In short, they’re unrefined idiots.
John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:19 am6.I need a drink.
Comment by happyfeet — 7/3/2010 @ 11:54 pm
— Sorry. You’ve already had enough.
Icy Texan (fb843e) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:05 amSarah quit the governorship to cash in on a little kaching ching not to actually do anything
This makes me unable to take anything you say seriously from now on. Maybe that was the idea but it sure harmed any image I had of you being amusing while well informed. Maybe you should apply for Steele’s job. You have similar talents.
Seriously, Romney would be a great choice. He saved the SLC Winter Olympics, just as Peter Uberroth saved the 1984 LA Olympics. It would also rescue his image as a squishy self promoter that will bar him from the nomination.
We have a serious problem in 2012 finding a nominee.
Mike K (82f374) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:45 amDoes she have the ability to make the kind of bold, sweeping, and forward thinking political plans Howard Dean did?
Oh, my God, I hope not! ROFL. I’d love to see Liz Cheney in that spot, but she may be more effective showing how ridiculous the Democrat policies are in other venues.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:37 amSarah Palin would certainly bring energy & enthusiasm to the job of RNC chairman; but, the Party really needs some discipline & focus. The shambles in Nevada is one example. Sarah is such a rebel; so, how would she contain other rebels?
Randall Thorpe (849bf2) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:37 amLiz is better off in her current role in driving Juan Williams batsh-t on their Sunday morning stints on Fox. I would prefer a guy like John Kasich take the job, since he perfectly embodies the Big Tent philosophy to a tee. But he’s already running for office, so Romney would be OK.
Dmac (93e7cb) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:04 am…or Paul Ryan, but I hope he’s got much bigger fish to fry in the near future.
Dmac (93e7cb) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:04 amThe question isn’t whether Palin could raise money or represent the face of GOP in public. She could.
Her appointment would be a major media obsession, and it could revitalize the Republican Party, which just happens to be in desperate need of a shake-up in the inner sanctums.
Remember Dede Scozzafava? You get idiot candidate selections like her, and policies like TARP, when the blood creeps cold in a political party about to find itself etherized, and left to wither away on the margins of national relevance.
The real question is would the GOP establishment actually let Palin inside the inner circle. The danger is if they try to keep her standing out in front like a pretty receptionist, or a social hostess, while actually maintaining the establishment dinosaurs in-place and holding all the strings of consequence.
In which case Sarah Palin may decide that she can’t work within the GOP and take her show on the road.
(FOX is just now reporting Jerry Emineth will challenge for Steel’s seat in November.)
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:24 amPalin succeeded as governor and in other roles. Many of the things she did with oil companies or entrenched crooks in her own state were difficult… actually unprecedented. Does that mean she’s a genius? Nope. Just means she is smart and a good leader.
Happyfeet always bashes her, and sometimes I think it’s pretty funny. I admit, Palin is working hard to present an image to the country. I don’t know why Happyfeet has a problem with that… it’s a sign of intelligence. Palin was bashed so much in 2008 that the only way she could be a factor again is by making a hardcore effort like this.
And that’s the problem with Palin. At this point it’s all image and no substance. And what I see of the image makes me think of her as the sort of woman I’d be happy to have watch my kids for the day (if I had kids) and have the neighborhood BBQ with, but in a position of power, not so much.
And what we did see with all those ethics charges is a woman who is ethically challenged. No, she didn’t do anything illegal or in violation of anyone’s regulations. But she showed herself to be no better than any other politician who is happy to grab what they can from the public trough. And what she did as governor may have been unprecedented in Alaska, but hardly unprecedented in the lower 48. There’s no special genius there.
Would she be a good choice as GOP chairman? Depends on her ability to choose good staff and get people who can help her mark out the best strategy; and I’ve seen no evidence either positive or negative of her abilities there. Would she shake up the GOP and move it firmly in the Tea Party direction? Possibly. But it’s equally likely that she’ll be comfortable with the GOP establishment as it is now, and only make gestures to con the Tea Party into supporting the GOP, like the GOP establishment is now trying to do, with very mixed success.
What the GOP really needs is for the establishment to get kicked in the rear. At this point, it doesn’t matter who the RNC chairman is, until you change the RNC membership itself into something that is less GOP establishment, and actually believes in the Tea Party ideas; until you change it from a group that is mostly concerned with getting and keeping a grip on the levers of power, and for whom mouthing conservative ideas are a useful tool to that end, into a group that is concerned with putting conservative ideas into practice first and foremost.
kishnevi (894e4f) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:34 amThe real question is would the GOP establishment actually let Palin inside the inner circle. The danger is if they try to keep her standing out in front like a pretty receptionist, or a social hostess, while actually maintaining the establishment dinosaurs in-place and holding all the strings of consequence.
In which case Sarah Palin may decide that she can’t work within the GOP and take her show on the road.
That assumes Palin isn’t concerned with becoming a member of the GOP establishment herself. In which case she won’t mind being the pretty girl at the door because she can figure on working her way inside and up from there.
In my view, that’s an open question at this point.
kishnevi (894e4f) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:38 amThat’s GARY Emineth.
The following is from the Bismark Tribune:
“GOP chairman resigns; Gary Emineth cites business demands as reason for leaving”
by Dale Wetzel, AP writer, July 2, 2010
“The chairman of North Dakota’s Republican Party resigned Thursday, less than five months before the fall elections, saying the demands of his business ventures don’t allow him the time he needs to oversee party operations.
Gary Emineth, 51, has been the state GOP chairman for three years. Emineth said he resigned Thursday night at a meeting of the state party’s executive committee.
North Dakota’s state GOP committee, a larger group of about 60 people that includes local Republican district chairmen, will pick Emineth’s successor later. In the meantime, the party’s vice chairwoman, Carma Hanson of Grand Forks, will serve as chairman.
Emineth and a group of investors recently bought a New Mexico business that makes burritos for convenience stores. The group is attempting to set up a manufacturing facility in North Dakota, he said. A former supermarket and convenience store owner, Emineth also has helped develop computer software used by those businesses.
“My business interests are just taking too much of my schedule,” Emineth said in an interview before Thursday’s meeting. “I don’t have the bandwidth to take care of them and be the party chairman, too.”
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:38 amThe ethics charges were not because she is “ethically challenged”, or because she violated the law (which she didn’t), but because of Alaska’s unique Ethics Law that allowed the Democrat/Progressive cadre to tie up the Executive Branch of Alaska’s Government in responding to a constant series of bogus charges, without paying any penalty for their malicious actions.
As to whether or not the “insiders” would allow her into the “council of power”, me thinks that after November that might be moot, since she will have contributed to the election of quite a few new GOP office holders, and it is the office-holders after-all, that have a great amount of influence in determining who is selected for a seat on the National Committee.
She’s out on the stump collecting chits, and eventually, she’ll want to cash them in (see: R.M.Nixon-1966).
But, I still think that someone like Bill Kristol, who has a national name-ID, who knows all the players, knows how the inside game is played, and is a competent executive without any perceived ambition for elective office, would be a valuable asset as National Chairman.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:47 amAnd that’s the problem with Palin. At this point it’s all image and no substance.
At some point, people need to put the lie to this sort of blather. Palin has a list of real accomplishments. She is not a politician who has nothing to claim, other than a couple of self-aggrandizing auto-biographies, a sense of entitlement, arrogance and a keen ability to read from a teleprompter.
In other words, she is no Obama. And dollars to donuts, I’d wager that you cast your vote for the man.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:53 am“And what we did see with all those ethics charges is a woman who is ethically challenged.”
kishnevi – Actually what we saw is a series of baseless ethics challenges manufactures by a cabal of Democratic operatives designed to bankrupt her personally and zero out her effectiveness as governor. If you can point to any of the charges that had merit I would be very interested. My understanding of Alaska law is that the state does not pay for the defense of its employees, so even for blatantly risible complaints, defense expenses still come out of the employee’s pocket. The transparency of the strategy employed bt rhe Democrats is apparent to any thinking person.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:58 amMitt Romney would be an excellent choice to take the chairmanship on. Superb leadership and organizational skills, business acumen and even-temperament.
But I would rather he run for the presidency in 2012.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:58 amI think that the chairmans position should not be held by any potential candidate –
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:11 amthe chairman should essentially be a neutral arbiter between competing factions –
after all, we wouldn’t allow the manager of a baseball team involved in a game to be the home-plate umpire, would we?
Sarah is too effective doing what she wants where she is.She does not have to answer to any of her critics (mostly dems and self serving rinos) unless she wants to.She can mute many cheap shots by ignoring them and many of her supporters are quick to refute other libels and slanders on her behalf.The position calls for an organizer not an executive leader.Obama missed his calling,he should have been dnc chairman not president.
dunce (3ef93a) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:26 amI think we should talk about rape kits, book burning and tasergate again, because you can never get enough of that crap.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:30 amYou’re right Daley. The Dems and media did an Alinsky on her before people even knew what was happening. Overcoming that is almost impossible. Her being RNC chairman would start it all up again. Palin is both highly effective and doing right by her family in her current role as fundraiser, TV pundit, and perennial go to scab-scratcher-offer on “sacred” Liberal issues.
elissa (b8be1a) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:43 amYes, let’s do that, exactly what is the RNC’s strategy going forward, anybody tell me, they proferred a whole series of candidates like the losing candidate in NY 20th, Specter, Crist, Hutchinson, et al, and they didn’t give De De nearly as much rope, as needed. Their communication is Team Romney which was confuzzled about fundamental principles like the idiocy of Obama care, and he still thinks that cap n trade is a good idea, Rest assured with the USS Mitt flounders they will gravitate to Daniels, who shot his foot off twice in a friendly audience, by the wrong choice of word. Plus he was W’s budget director, if memory serves
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:44 amI’m actually not kidding out having Sarah go down to the Gulf and “inspect” the damage. Maybe get herself arrested for taking pictures or getting too close (along with the media gaggle). Talk about how little the Federal government seems to have learned since Exxon Valdez.
Break the cover-up and get the spill back on page one. Break Obama’s balls while she’s at it, you betcha’.
Kevin Murphy (5ae73e) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:02 amgah, “ABout”
Kevin Murphy (5ae73e) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:03 amWe have a serious problem in 2012 finding a nominee.
Team R can’t pick an RNC chairman what doesn’t fall on his ass on a weekly basis … the idea that the losers what nominated Meghan’s useless coward daddy for the highest office in the country can pick a president beggars belief, and that the vapid wench from Alaska what has forever silenced any credible criticism Team R could ever make of a politics/media revolving door is the front runner this year suggests that Barack Obama can take a second term to the bank I think.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:05 amAnd what we did see with all those ethics charges is a woman who is ethically challenged.
You just have to be smarter than this. Others have explained it so I won’t repeat their points but if people who claim to be Republicans buy this DNC crap, what chance do we have to take the country back ?
Mike K (82f374) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:09 am______________________________
It’s a joke for people to say Palin is stupid when someone like Joe FDR-spoke-on-TV Biden is one step away from the Oval Office. And if Palin is stupid, then the guy now in the White House is just about mentally retarded when it comes to basic wisdom and common sense.
More importantly, most of the people — not all, but most — who dismiss her intelligence or acumen actually don’t like her ideology. They’d be more honest if they simply said “we don’t like Palin because she’s too rightwing!”
By contrast, I don’t care for the leftism of Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton, but I also really don’t care for what appears to be the former person’s honest-to-goodness dumbness and the latter person’s dishonesty (“As First Lady, I dodged sniper fire in Bosnia!!”) In a similar vein, although I think Newt Gingrich is philosophically okay, the controversy over his ex-wife makes me think he’s too much of a low-life schemer.
One reason I’d be cautious about giving Sarah Palin a lot of prominence is because an overly large percentage of Americans lean left—as far as I’m concerned THEY are the ones who are stupid. Most of them, therefore, will give the benefit of the doubt to screwed-up liberals like Biden or Hillary/Bill, but will not be so easygoing on a conservative like Palin. But it is what is is, and one has to live with such a defect. So Palin, if only from a tactical standpoint, may be too inflammatory for too much of the electorate.
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
Mark (411533) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:10 amBecause, feets would rather whine about what a screwed up country, in the final analysis, employing all the stupid memes that got us to this point. Look we didn’t have much of campaign in ’08, in part because Guiliani who brought a city back from the brink where Bloomberg is taking it back to, was slimed from the start, then we had Romney, who chose to quick after the first primary, because Lacrosse was in season, then the Huckmeister, Fred was too lethargic, it was decided by committee, and we ended up with McCain, who had ticked off every faction in the party, in search of satisfying ‘his base’ in the press, which had found another spring fling in Obama, as they had done with the ever so acerbic
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:11 amDole, a dozen years earlier
I was for Blackwell, truth be told, for RNC chief, but he couldn’t get enough votes, so he endorsed Steele, who didn’t seem so clueless then, however
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:20 amCornyn’s performance at the NRSC, examples listed above, who voted for Geithner, lord have mercy, and Sessions that other genius have more of a mess on their hands, so they won with Brown and Djou, out
a dozen races, outstanding
Actually Mr. ian I would rather not whine about what a screwed up little country we are living in. But the cowardly Boehnerhomos and their daffy and whimsical prospective 2012 presidential nominees are not possessed of the character what our screwed up little country so desperately needs.
Palin should take her name off the table because she is a huge distraction from the sort of focus Team R needs to be having right now, and she’s milked enough cash off the Palin for president rubes I think. Romney should take his name off the table cause he’s already been told his services are not wanted and the not-wantedness will be even more so in 2012 because Romney he has no credibility on issues involving rolling back dirty socialist takeovers of health cares.
Neither of these two hapless low-wattage narcissists have an iota of presidential appeal beyond their tribes.
Pawlenty Huckabee Gingrich?
Be serious.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:39 amhappy, who in 2012???
Dana (1e5ad4) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:49 amIs ‘feets’ a deepcover operative?
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:53 amMitch Daniels is the bestest governor in the whole world and he has demonstrated a grasp of the seriously grave plight in which our little country is so desperately mired. He is a serious successful governor what is not likely to be hounded out of his office anytime soon and he’s not at all prone to prancing about passing dirty socialist health care takeovers in his state or any other kind of dirty socialist takeovers for that matter.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:58 amTo those that say Sarah Palin would be to polarizing as RNC chair, I have but two words for you. . .
Howard Dean.
tD
p.s. Howard Dean was DNC chair during the ascent of one Barack Obama.
tahDeetz (6dc883) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:59 amRest assured feets, since you allow for lies to sway there’s no end of garbage that they’ll throw at any candidate, facts not required
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:15 pmIt’s depressing Ian the sun is setting on America and frivolousness does not pertain yet we are awash in it.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:20 pmobama the ONE
ColonelHaiku (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:24 pmno single accomplishment
but tell great fable
like the frivolous claims against Sarah that you so happily regurgitate?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:28 pm__________________________________
To those that say Sarah Palin would be to polarizing as RNC chair, I have but two words for you. . . Howard Dean.
But, again, you have to take into consideration that modern Western society, which includes the US, has tilted increasingly left over the past 60-plus years. So there is a lot more idiocy among a larger portion of the electorate today than there otherwise would be.
That means in our current era the tendency to judge people and situations incorrectly is more likely to happen. Left-leaning individuals have a knack for being ass backwards, and so good people or good situations become bad (“Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Arizona, anti-unionism, anti-ACORN, etc, are signs of heartlessness, meanness, unsophistication!! Phooie!!”). And, in turn, bad people or bad situations become good (“Howard Dean, Obama, NAACP, illegal immigrants, ACLU, unions, Palestinians, Hugo Chavez, etc, are such kind and caring underdogs!! My heart bleeds — BLEEDS!! — for them/him/her or it!”).
Why large portions of Western civilization have shifted left over the past several decades probably is one of those peculiar phenomenon not too different from the peculiarity of large portions of the world gravitating towards a religion founded by a ruthless, bloody, vengeance-seeking warrior (ie, Mohammed and Islam).
Mark (411533) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:36 pm
I do not regurgitate a lot of them I make up all by myself.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:36 pmI was for Blackwell, truth be told, for RNC chief, but he couldn’t get enough votes, so he endorsed Steele, who didn’t seem so clueless then, however
Cornyn’s performance at the NRSC, examples listed above
While I, enjoy, your comments, I think, you have, a tendency, to use, way too many, commas, in your, run – on sentences.
Dmac (93e7cb) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:40 pmLet’s review, shall we, Obama has rarely any competition in his various campaigns, he had no opponent in his first race, because he had all the challengers disqualified, we were left with Keyes
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:41 pmbecause his newspaper buddies outed Jack Ryan’s
rather mischievous intentions with ‘Seven of Nine’
yes the Borg gave us Obama, in part.
That still indicates that too many independents have their brain slug tightly fastened, This guy is Chavez with training wheels snd they really don’t get that. hoochie, wench, that all suggests promiscuous, unfaithful and there has been none of that. There is a certain naivete of the Jimmy Stewart variety, but some of that has worn off over time. Perhaps a little more guarded, I don’t where she might have gotten that silly notion
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 12:55 pmian here’s my song from my friend geoff it’s a song about constancy and also about inconstancy it reminders me I don’t want no pop tart Palin she’s too flighty and stupid.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:06 pmThis is the caliber of the chttp://www.therightscoop.com/lt-col-allen-west-gives-amazing-4th-of-july-speechandidates she is supporting,
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:30 pmthese ones are also reflective of the caliber of vapid feckless no-account loser she is supporting…
Sarah supports whoever will be best for Sarah Palin I think. It’s always about Sarah with her.
here is that link about Mr. West
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:39 pmI’ve liked what I’ve heard from Blackwell.
How about Fred Thompson for RNC chair, he’s a great communicator- though I don’t know how his health is these days. (And I will ignore comments about him being a friend of meghan’s daddy)
The thing about Palin is they’ve Alinskied her and she is still alive. Any more claims about her will need to be of the level that her great-great uncle came to Alaska from Russia after helping lead the Boshevik Revolution.
Anybody else who looks like a serious Republican candidate better get used to the idea, or release an autobiography of how they did pot in nursery school, cocaine in elementary, mainline heroin and crystal meth in high school, worked their way through college as a prostitute, reads the New York Times in the library in disguise, and never, ever called their mother on Mother’s day. That will pretty much take all the ammo away.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:42 pmDaleyrocks et al who objected to my use of the term “ethically challenged”.
Go back and read what I said.
The facts, when they came out, showed that she didn’t violate any rules or laws, and to that extent the charges were baseless.
What the facts did reveal, however, is that she went as far as she could within the limits set by those rules and laws to her own personal (=financial) advantage.
IOW, she fed at the public trough as much as she could get away with. She acted like your everyday politician in that respect. She’s like all the others who have let us get into this mess.
To me, that’s ethically challenged.
kishnevi (b56000) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:46 pmShe’s like all the others who have let us get into this mess
I’m not her biggest fan, but I call bullsh*t on this one.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:48 pmYeah, Fred would be OK, I’d like to know who decided
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:48 pmhe was too sedentary, but thought Biden was whip smart, and Dean was sane. I can’t think of anyone with that kind of c.v.
Oh, another thing.
I think the majority of people are more conservative than liberal if asked about their views going topic by topic, but the Left has won the PR wars so people don’t want to be called “Conservative” because those are the mean people who like to see children go to bed hungry.
The population has shifted to the left in some ways, but I think the political spectrum has shifted more to the left without people realizing it. Bill Bennett, for example, states he was a Democrat but the party left him. Most people do not think through things near as much as Bennett, so they keep voting Dem like good ole JFK, their hero, even though the actual ideas are no longer those they recognize. People can make noise about whether Reagan would be electable as a Republican candidate today, but the more interesting question is whether JFK could get elected as a Democrat, and I bet not.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:52 pmI supported Fred but yes then he bailed and threw his support to Meghan’s daddy. He’s brought shame upon himself and his family for generations to come.
I want my $25 back Fred.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:53 pmShe ain’t exactly my cup of tea either, but as long as she causes the far left and MFM’s heads to assplode every time she even breathes a sigh, it’s OK by me. But no, she shouldn’t be RNC Chair – methinks she’s been done overexposed at this point. I also think she’s been overdoing the “just plain old mom from middletown Alaska” act – one more listen to her and I could swear she was challenging Marge from Fargo.
Dmac (93e7cb) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:54 pmI think the majority of people are more conservative than liberal if asked about their views going topic by topic, but the Left has won the PR wars so people don’t want to be called “Conservative” because those are the mean people who like to see children go to bed hungry.
I think recent polling indicates just the opposite, MD.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:54 pmGeneral M–
kishnevi (b56000) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:57 pmYou mean she didn’t feed at the public trough while Governor?
I disagree with you. And I think she did it enough to make her no better than anyone else on offer.
Nor do I think her accomplishments, such as they were, in Alaska showed any special ability.
Look they made all sorts of crap about Newt, they filed phony indictments against Delay, they invented
false evidence against Stevens, the Times ran with a nonexistent affair that McCain had with a lobbyist
Libby was convicted yet they let Armitage alone because he ws Powell’s best bud, so expect anything
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 1:58 pm55.I do not regurgitate a lot of them I make up all by myself.
Comment by happyfeet — 7/4/2010 @ 12:36 pm
— Truer words were never spoken.
Icy Texan (48fe98) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:11 pmI don’t want no pop tart Palin she’s too flighty and stupid
— So are you, but we keep you around.
Icy Texan (48fe98) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:15 pm“she went as far as she could within the limits set by those rules and laws to her own personal (=financial) advantage.”
kishnevi – How about providing some specific examples and explaining why you believe they make somebody suspect ethically rather than just making insinuations about somebody’s character?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:21 pmComment by GeneralMalaise
Are you referring to the data at #54, or elsewhere? All of the data at #54 is about perceptions, not questions on specific issues.
What I mean is:
– how many people think it is good for the Fed government to take over large industries?
– how many people like the idea of making private health insurance unavailable so everyone has government sponsored insurance?
– how many people want government to have more control over our daily lives, such as what kind of car you can buy, what kind of food you can eat?
– how many people think the world has been a worse place over the last 100 years because of the United States?
Maybe I’m wrong, but I’d be surprised if any of those questions get near 50%. I’d be happy to see data that tells me otherwise.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:22 pmmethinks she’s been done overexposed at this point. I also think she’s been overdoing the “just plain old mom from middletown Alaska” act – one more listen to her and I could swear she was challenging Marge from Fargo.
Heh. Until she gains more foundational knowledge and substance, she’ll remain a pretty face. On one hand it’s unfair, on the other, that’s the way it is. She owes herself and the GOP a good solid year or two absorbing, learning and digging deep into econ, history, foreign policy. If she did that she’d a be a whole lot better and less vulnerable in any capacity – whether GOP frontwoman, or pundit, or candidate. It’s really necessary.
That’s my two cents…now back to the Mango Salsa. I’m adding 3 avocados this time and fresh pineapple because even Mango Salsa deserves a new twist. The Libertarian kids are coming over, with their arty tats, veganesque ways (which sort’ve put a crimp in any ‘barbeque’ plans), and their mid-20’s casual charm and chutzpah.
Dana (1e5ad4) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:24 pmI’d be happy to see data that tells me otherwise
Well, I wouldn’t actually be happy about it, but I would like to know the data, if it is there in this format.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:25 pmkish…the establishment creates the rules, and as long as you don’t cross the line, you haven’t done anything wrong, or unethical (personal moral codes apply – what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander: ie, I live my life to my code within the law, don’t expect me to observe all the dots and crosses of your code even if they are within that same law – just as I do not expect anyone else to observe my limits to personal behavior except in their relationship to me, and vice versus).
Those are the rules…except in NASCAR…
Where, if you’re not cheatin’, you’re not tryin’ hard ‘nough!
And, it’s only cheatin’ if you get caught.
(I am/was involved in racing way too long)
BTW, there is an interesting take on “The Lightworker” over at Imprimis by Charles R. Kesler…”The New New Deal“.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:26 pmHe has some interesting takes on our President, and the melieu that spawned him.
daley–a solid instance is her charging her kid’s travel expense to the state. It was allowed.
It might be legal–apparently it is legal–but to me a person of real integrity would not do that.
AD–
I guess this is where you and I might part ways. What is legal and what is ethical are two different things.
Just because the rules the establishment put in place (and naturally they made sure those rules would be flexible in their favor) allow something, does not mean they are ethical. May I remind you the rules the establishment put in place gave us abortion, TARP, the stimulus, Obamacare and Justice-presumptive Kagan?
I don’t expect everyone to act according to my views of what is ethical; but I do claim the right to think they’re not worthy of my respect, or, in the case of people running for office, my vote.
kishnevi (b56000) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:48 pmBTW, thanks for the lead on the Kesler. Looks interesting; will give it a proper read this evening.
kishnevi (b56000) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:53 pmThe following is what I had in mind, MD…
“According to new numbers from Gallup, more than four in ten Americans describe themselves as conservative, significantly more than the 35 percent who describe themselves as moderate, and more than double the 20 percent who describe themselves as liberal. If this holds for the rest of the year, the 42 percent of self-identified conservatives would be a record high for Gallup in its nearly 20 years of asking the question, which seems to hint at a conservative revival.”
http://washingtonindependent.com/88453/a-plurality-of-americans-self-identify-as-conservative-whats-new
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 2:54 pmYou mean she didn’t feed at the public trough while Governor?
I disagree with you. And I think she did it enough to make her no better than anyone else on offer.
Nor do I think her accomplishments, such as they were, in Alaska showed any special ability
Please cite specific examples of what you believe constitutes “feeding at the public trough”.
Palin governed a state. People having experience governing a state are considered the ideal, “electable” candidate for national office… far more than members of Congress. Do you not believe this to be the case?
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:02 pmGeneralMalaise
Thanks for the info. It is based on perception, though, rather than details of “what does it mean to you to be conservative, moderate?”
If 75% consider themselves conservative or moderate, how do we have Obama, Reid, and Pelosi running the country??? Apparently many of those moderates were voting for someone far to the left of JFK, whether they realized it or not.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:02 pmThey self-indentify as “conservative”, which seems to indicate they don’t run from the appellation…
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:07 pm“daley–a solid instance is her charging her kid’s travel expense to the state. It was allowed.”
kishnevi – Thank you for the example. It seems your position is that even though she was cleared of any(?) law breaking or rules violations in the ethics violations complaints brought against her that you still find her to be an ethically challenged person based on your personal moral code – whether it is perceived “feeding at the public trough” which Alaska has not yet seen fit to outlaw or some other transgression. More specific examples would be helpful to further understand your position.
I have similar feelings about scuzzbuckets such as Harry Reid who has used his public position to enrich himself personally through a myriad of shady land deals. He has not been prosecuted over any of these transactions, but I feel the nature of his transgressions are of a scale and type completely different from those you are attempting to point out regarding Palin.
I feel the
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:09 pmMD, I honestly think that many people voting for the current POTUS were doing so because of how it made them feel about themselves: that they were not racist old fogies. The MSM pushes that meme pretty hard—that disagreeing with POTUS is a sign that you aren’t cool and are probably a racist.
Unless you are a good racist, like the late Robert Byrd.
Because the current occupant of the Oval Office is not precisely following his campaign promises in a wide variety of areas, and is currently doing things that were really, really awful when GWB did them.
Nope. It’s all about how voters want to feel about themselves. That way, they don’t have to read anything, think much about policies, have long term memories. It’s all alphabetism.
Heck of a 4th of July, when I think about it.
Eric Blair (02a138) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:09 pmOh, and as for the Palin bashing, well, one of the bashers has an…um…special problem with the former governor, as well as seeing how closely he can skate to sounding like a sexist on the general topic.
At least I haven’t read “hoochie” yet in this thread.
But as usual, people just pick up “bumper sticker” memes about public figures.
And folks like Axelrod are counting on it.
These are the same people who couldn’t stand GHWB, voted for that lunatic Ross Perot—knowing he couldn’t possibly win—and giving us Clinton, which led us to today.
If these people feel as strongly as they claim to feel, I hope that they are seriously involved at the grassroots level with Republican politics. Because is they are sitting back have a beer and kvetching, why, that is easy. It’s always easier to do that than to do actually work toward something better.
Unless they want another Democrat-controlled Congress, and four more years of the current POTUS.
Eric Blair (02a138) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:13 pm“It might be legal–apparently it is legal–but to me a person of real integrity would not do that.”
kishnevi – Any idea what the governors of other states who travel with their children do?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:13 pmHey, daley, this is just more “Purity of Essence” thinking. And we know how well that worked out.
Eric Blair (02a138) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:15 pmShe owes herself and the GOP a good solid year or two absorbing, learning and digging deep into econ, history, foreign policy. If she did that she’d a be a whole lot better and less vulnerable in any capacity
Amen to that, Dana – but I don’t think she really is going to do that necessary work. Too much of a celebrity now, and those adoring crowds just won’t wait.
daley–a solid instance is her charging her kid’s travel expense to the state. It was allowed.
It might be legal–apparently it is legal–but to me a person of real integrity would not do that.
Oh, for Chisssakes. That’s the lamest and weakest tea I’ve heard yet regarding her alleged lack of integrity. Good grief, she was being chased by hundreds of Dem operatives and trial lawyers, all crawling through her trash and making all kinds of smears and disgusting insinuations about her marriage, her daughter’s sex life, and so on (after they found NOTHING on her). And this was the best they could come up with? A minor technicality? Are you aware that Palin was the first Governor to get rid of the state – sponsored jet? That’s an actual instance of real integrity. Save your Goo – goo crap for the fantasy world of politics you apparently live in.
Dmac (93e7cb) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:18 pmRick Perry in 2012 Allen as VP
EricPWJohnson (cedf1d) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:24 pmA party chairs job is to raise money and energize the base, Palin is a natural for this position.
james (633fbc) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:25 pmGeneralMalaise your specifc point of disagreement is understood, and you are correct with the info you show.
Perhaps it would be good for Palin to take a year and study those things, but what she needs to study most of all is how to avoid snares when answering reporters.
She knows more about energy than Obama. She knows enough about Constitutional Law that she is for enforcing it instead of undermining it. She knows enough about being an executive to get people who know what needs to be done so it gets done.
She always was better prepared for the job than Obama and it shows. If you want to point out that is not saying much, you’re right, but you’re asking her to be at a level of preparation higher than the current President.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:32 pm“Hey, daley, this is just more “Purity of Essence” thinking.”
Eric – Exactly. It betrays a lack of real world experience. When the first family of a state is expected to represent the state at various events in a state as large as Alaska, it is not ethical for the state to expect the governor to suck up all the travel expenses of his or her family to attend those events. To think otherwise is just retarded.
[note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:38 pmSo what “gaffes” has Sarah Palin commited?
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:40 pmComment by happyfeet — 7/4/2010 @ 11:05 am
Sweet Jeebus on a pogo stick, hf, you Palin Derangement syndrome is getting tiresome.
Give it a rest, willya?
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:44 pmSo what “gaffes” has Sarah Palin commited?
Are you serious?
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:47 pmjeez you act like it’s my fault… maybe stupid Sarah might should work on honing her appeal to me… she could at least make an effort I think.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:47 pm“Are you serious?”
Patterico – C’mon, she didn’t apologize to BP.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:49 pmshe’s so divisive
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:50 pmHer biggest gaffe was giving piece of Arizona deadwood an 8/% percent boost in the electoral polls. Any others? (Letting her daughter get pregnant and Joe McGinnis moving next to her don’t count.)
nk (db4a41) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:52 pmPatterico – C’mon, she didn’t apologize to BP.
Right. I forgot. Sarah Palin never made any gaffes, and neither did Joe Barton.
There’s your 2012 ticket right there!
Let me know how that works out for you.
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:53 pmI’m not looking to Sarah Palin as my savior, but she’s done much more good than harm to a very big bunch of self-serving politicians whom nobody should vote for and they all have an “R” after their names.
nk (db4a41) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:55 pmShe handled the Katie Couric interview perfectly. Anyone who disagrees is an unpatriotic pussy.
Where I came up with that “gaffes” thing, I have no idea. Forget I ever said it.
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:55 pmCIVILITY NOW!
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:57 pmYes.
Give us an example.
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:58 pmShe should have started her TV personality at least two years earlier, that’s a fact. (Sarcasm)
nk (db4a41) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:58 pmYeah, speaking your mind and telling the truth is now “divisive”.
Screw that.
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 3:59 pmNo thanks. The examples are well known; if you don’t see them as gaffes then we simply disagree. I’m not interested in debating it. Nobody’s mind will be changed.
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:01 pm“She handled the Katie Couric interview perfectly. Anyone who disagrees is an unpatriotic pussy.
Where I came up with that “gaffes” thing, I have no idea. Forget I ever said it.
Comment by Patterico — 7/4/2010 @ 3:55 pm ”
Oh. please an ambush interview with a political rookie.
It’s all Sarah’s fault, I guess, not the reactionary leftist press.
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:01 pmHappy 4th of July everybody even Sarah Palin I will see you all later
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:04 pmOh. please an ambush interview with a political rookie.
Who made no gaffes, and won over the public with her gaffe-less performance in that interview.
I’m not interested in moving the goalposts to the issue of whose fault it is. The goalposts will remain where they were: has she made gaffes?
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:04 pmNo, it’s not too early…
pitchforksntorches (888cb1) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:19 pmJindal/Christie 2012!!!
Yes and they ended up with Joe Biden, the Al Bundy of national politics, who thinks Hezbollah is out of Lebanon, 36 years in the Senate, and he hasn’t a clue. It’s all a matter of emphasis
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:24 pmThe GOP can’t win in 2010 or 2012 unless it can attract the disaffected conservatives who left over McCain’s nomination. As one of those conservatives, the Republicans will not receive my vote or other support until I have proof that they are more interested in principles than power. Otherwise, no deal.
One indication would be to replace Steele now and with someone who is more interested in fighting for conservative principles than cowtowing to moderates. If Liz Cheney, Santorum, or Thompson were to become head of the RNC, I might even return to the party.
Luthien (2f6891) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:35 pmHey, Luthien? That was the spirit that gave us two terms of Clinton. And, I believe, what gave us the first administration of the current occupant of the Oval Office.
And with lots of people like you, a second.
Hope you are happy with your purity. Axelrod has your comment taped over his computer right now.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:56 pmA person interested in Purity Control writes:
Of course, the folks who carry on like this aren’t divisive at all.
That’s another snipped Axelrod has over his computer screen.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:58 pmBy the way…
See what I meant earlier?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 4:59 pmShe gave up the jet and started charging the airfare to the state….the principle remains the same: the taxpayers paid for her trips. Yes, that it’s legitimate for her trips to be paid for, but it’s not an example of political integrity that makes here better than others. And then, of course, ferrying her kids around when they could have easily stayed home at taxpayer’s expense–or is there a law in Alaska that the governor’s family has to appear for a certain minimum of public functions a year?
To the best of my knowledge, Jeb Bush didn’t ferry his kids around Florida for public appearances.
There is no difference between her and Reid, except his acts of enrichment were for larger amounts of money. She has no more integrity than any other politician. She’s in it first and foremost for what it can bring her personally.
And until you find a candidate who is not in it first and foremost for themselves, you are only to get more of the same politicians who are keeping us in the mess we have now. I’m not looking for a politician who is electable. I’m looking for a politician (if such exists) who doesn’t think politics is a nice way to make a living. If you get one, I can guarantee you he or she will be electable.
kishnevi (b40a74) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:11 pmBTW, her supposed gaffes were nowhere near as idiotic as Steele’s. .
kishnevi (b40a74) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:13 pmI’m with Luthien. “We’re not as bad as the other guy” is no longer a convincing argument after their fiscal irresponsibility when they were in charge. I’ll vote the person, not the party.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:15 pmI’d like to see Sarah Palin step up to her next speech in a bathing suit made in the traditional Wonder Woman costume. It takes a lot of self-assurance to wear such a thing, but I think she’s up to it!
dchamil (869d6e) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:23 pmLook Jeb is light years above the current occupant in the Governors mansion, but wasn’t there that small matter of the 19,000 in duty free shopping
that the Mrs. did one day.
Now one asks why is her unpopularity such, specially in her home state, Well there’s a real life analogue to feets,Dan Fagan, who has the most
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:29 pmpowerful radio station in the state, who tears her down 24/7. The local paper the AD News ‘Friends don’t let Friends read McClatchy is
virtually an Axelrod meme depository, despite having celebrated her till Aug 29th
“To the best of my knowledge, Jeb Bush didn’t ferry his kids around Florida for public appearances.”
kishnevi – Different situation. Bush’s two oldest children were at least 21 when he began his first term as governor. His youngest was 15 or 16. Nice try going from knowledge.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:32 pmStashiu3, you are an honorable guy. I don’t mean to disagree so vigorously, because you genuinely walk the walk, unlike most people. But politics is about what is possible, not ideal.
And you can certainly come up with people to be nominated who would make you—or anyone else— sit on your hands and not vote. But I look at the people who said how much they hated McCain, and I know very well (though they claim otherwise) that they sat out the last election.
So here we are.
The perfect is the enemy of the possible. And the Perot Lesson™ should have been a wake up call. It seems it wasn’t to many people (and I am not pointing fingers, I am worried about 2010 and 2012).
If the folks who think they might sit out the next election because of the final choices are all involved in local politics, and working hard to promote a positive choice for office (instead of snarking at people they don’t like), I have no objection.
But you have ask yourself one question, to borrow from Harry Callahan. Do you want to see another Obama adminstration? Another Pelosi House and Reid Senate?
Because that is what we are facing.
The response is usually that the RNC pushes the “wrong” people. Fair enough. Again, are the people who want to sit out elections—and therefore handing their vote over to people like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid—working hard to promote and push the candidates they do like?
Or do they just sit it out, and are thus bipartisan complainers?
Just my opinion. But my parents were Perot voters. I told them what they were doing at the time, and they thought they were sending “a message.” Indeed they did, but not the one they intended.
The stakes are far higher now.
Anyway, I am tired of hearing myself argue this point; it seems to have little traction. But I know what will happen if this current crew stays in power.
I guess we get the government we deserve.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:34 pmI understand the reasoning and have no problem with those who follow it. We certainly do get the government we deserve. But unless we stand by our principles, why would we deserve better? I’m not saying sit out, but if neither party represents me, what incentive do they have to start doing so if they can count on my vote anyway? They take our votes as support of their behavior, not their platform, which is wrong. If they behaved according to their platform it would be different.
I’ll continue to vote (I did a write-in the last Presidential election), but never for a party that doesn’t represent my values and interests. I don’t ask for perfection, just honesty and consistency. The leaderships of both major parties don’t give us that. I’ll vote the man or woman and that will usually be a Republican, but not because they’re a Republican.
If it helps, I think your view is more prevalent than mine. 😉
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 5:55 pmWell I certainly haven’t gotten the government I deserve.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:03 pmAppreciate your response. But consider what 2000 and my own state of Washington has shown: even small numbers of votes matter.
You can say that the candidates aren’t standing up for what we want them to stand up for—and you would be right—but there are a LOT of progressives who are ready to vote for anything with a “D” after it. Purity of Essence is an expensive thing, particularly right now.
Too often in life, it isn’t a choice between good and evil, or bad and good. Too often, it is a choice between awful and slightly less awful.
It would have taken a lot of McCain sitter-outers to keep Obama from the Presidency in 2008.
But Dino Rossi, for Senator in this state? About 300.
Every vote genuinely does count. And I’ll take McCain over Obama any day of the week. Heck, I would take almost anyone over Obama. Especially right now. Oh, the McCain haters would tell me that he would be “just as bad” as Obama. Really? The fact is, no one knows. We do know what Obama is doing, and he said he was going to do it. We had plenty of warning.
Of course, people have to vote the way they think best. But then, honestly, I don’t believe that they should complain when someone far, far worse wins, particularly when their vote helped make it possible.
To each their own.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:10 pm“No thanks. The examples are well known; if you don’t see them as gaffes then we simply disagree. I’m not interested in debating it. Nobody’s mind will be changed.
Comment by Patterico — 7/4/2010 @ 4:01 pm”
So you got nothing.
Lazarus Long (9adfb0) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:12 pmMy perception is that for a variety of reasons there are not a lot of political fans of “Meghan’s daddy” who comment here. But to all those who voted for Obama, instead, because “at least he admits he’s a Democrat”, or who wrote in a Presidential candidate “to send a message” do y’all think we’d be looking at soon to be Justice Kagan if McCain had received just a few more votes? Elections have conseqiences.
elissa (b8be1a) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:13 pmAt the parade I went to today in heavily left leaning Evanston, the marchers for Alexi Giannoulias for Senate were booed by some folks along the section of the route where I sat, causing some commotion, which was fun to see from across the street. I did not see Alexi or Jan Schakowsky, who’s people were next in the parade, although I did get a Jan fan. I shook hands with Pat Quinn the governor and managed to keep a civil tongue so as not to embarrass the friends I was with. Dick Durbin was not there this year, although I have abused heckled him in this parade in prior years.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:15 pmWell I am well familiar with that aspect, Eric, 537 votes in one state, had a big impact, in tipping the balance in 2000, after discounting discarded
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:20 pmabsentee ballots. With Rossi the margin was narrow enough, that they had to cheat when they lost the count. 2008 was a wider swing, but not that big in
the scheme of things, only 30% of the unmatched registrations in Ohio, swung that state
“Purity of Essence is an expensive thing, particularly right now.”
Eric – I think it’s too early to argue about 2012. Steele is a screw up with a chip on his shoulder. He should step down or get fired. We need an RNC chairperson primarily to raise money and fire people up, not somebody with designs on running for office.
Additionally, I wish people would be honest and just say they dislike Palin, and even point out a reason or two why, instead of fabricating memes out of whole cloth that have no basis in reality. Honesty and disagreement are fine, fabrication is not.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:23 pmYes, that it’s legitimate for her trips to be paid for, but it’s not an example of political integrity that makes here better than others.
Have you looked at a map ? Juneau cannot be reached by land! There were certain occasions when she had to be there. The rest of the time, she governed from Anchorage where the capital should be but Fairbanks hates Anchorage and will never agree. There have been two statewide referenda trying to move the capital to Wasilla. It is 30 miles north of Anchorage on the road to Fairbanks but still wasn’t enough for the Fairbankers. It’s ridiculous.
Previous governors flew around in the state jet. She got rid of it and flew commercial but she can’t satisfy people like you. She has small kids. Big F Deal. Maybe you should visit the state and try to get to Juneau from Anchorage.
Mike K (82f374) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:25 pmA very wise commenter here frequently mentions the evils of being an alphabetist. 😉
I think we’ll largely end up voting for most of the same people, however we reach that conclusion. If the RNC puts up McCain again though, all bets are off. I’d vote for Hillary (but not President Obama) before him and would probably do another write-in. I won’t vote for someone I absolutely do not trust.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:27 pmOh, Stashiu3, you wound me (grin)! Alphabetists don’t even think. They cheerlead for whatever “their” person says, even to the point of contradicting themselves (like the “close Gitmo” folks who are strangely silent about the President’s inability to, well, close Gitmo as he promised during his campaign). I have been very critical of people I might end up holding my nose and voting for…yet I find endless numbers of progressives who will never, ever criticize “their” person.
I will vote to keep a worse person out of office before I will ever vote my conscience, such that it is—because I want to keep the “worse” person out of office. And this is only because of realpolitik.
I am really steamed about the RNC. It’s bad when I think I could do a better job running it, and I am no egotist.
So I view my job as keeping the “worst statists” out, again, and that is hardly a mirror held to the alphabetists we have seen around here. “Rock solid support,” anyone?
I am reminded of Alan Simpson’s great bit (paraphrased): America has two political parties—the Evil Party and the Stupid Party. Like Mr. Simpson, I vote with the Stupid Party.
Do I wish I could vote with the Smart and Good Party. Absolutely.
But like when there gets to be too much Palin bashing and overuse the loaded term “hoochie” (which culminated, I believe, a California candidate being called a “cancer hoochie,” which was a bit much), I simply ask: who do you like better, and what are you doing, personally, to push for their prominence?
Otherwise, as I have said way too much, we just make Axelrod smile.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:44 pmSpeaking of which, get prepared for trollery as seen on other threads in a moment….
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:45 pmWhat I disliked most about the 2008 campaign is that somehow McCain became the overwhelming front-runner early on in term of delegates when he was no way the overwhelming front runner in the eyes of the majority of non-Democrats voting. Guiliani had a strategy that was a dud, Thompson wasn’t sure if he wanted to run or not and apparently thought McCain would be a good enough choice, Huckabee was simply a spoiler of sorts, Romney just got trapped in the midst of the chaos.
The RNC needs to do something to prevent D’s and I’s from picking the Republican candidate in New Hampshire.
Nobody is going to be the perfect candidate, and even if they were, they wouldn’t be the perfect candidate for everybody.
I think Palin should have spoken to her audience and let the networks gripe about her not doing interviews until they were ready to do it live. She certainly made her mistakes, which were magnified, and many people still think she said things that she never did, but rather came from Tina Fey out of thin air. She beat her own entrenched party and had over an 80% approval rating until she became the target of all hell breaking loose. Can you imagine where we would be if 1/10th of the work digging up stuff on Palin was spent on Obama? We might even know what his college grades were!!!
Yes, holding out for some perfect candidate is a losing proposition, but voting for Hitler because he killed fewer people than Stalin doesn’t go over too well either (yes, it was hyperbole).
The main thing about McCain in my opinion was he was out of touch with reality (and I did vote for him). You would have thought that the essence of being a good politician and President was to … (everybody together now) reach across the aisle. He somehow didn’t realize that for the previous 7 years the only reaching across the aisle the Dems did was to smack conservatives in the nose. He was the ultimate “Obama Lite” candidate (except for the war in Iraq, he get’s credit for that). Remember, he wanted to help push through a middle-of-the-night immigration reform bill that was bipartisan, too. Being willing to defend national sovereignty with a secure border is about as elementary as one can get, and McCain couldn’t be trusted with that before.
At some point we will need to start talking about who are the stronger candidates and why instead of why we think certain people are lousy candidates.
And we should all realize that the main candidates and their families might as well volunteer to go through hell with a dozen of the meanest prosecutors that every lived questioning every detail of their lives, and if they can’t find enough dirty laundry they will make it up. That alone will make 90% of the decent people who would make a good president stay home.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:50 pmkishnevi has been negative on Palin from the start and is just manufacturing excuses to justify his position:
“Palin has been saying the same things the GOP has been saying for years–and at the party level, at least, not delivering on them. Why should I believe another Republican politician speaking the same cant? (Particularly when much of her speech seems to be simply a stand up comedy routine compiled from Greatest Snarks on Obama by the Dextrosphere.)
She is, as far as I can tell, just another Religious Right/Republican who thinks they have the right to tell us what to do and the right to spend our money for us. I can detect nothing libertarian about her. Presumably she is staunch on the Second Amendment, but nothing more.”
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:51 pmWithout being opaque, MD, I know some of the people who had the gentleman in class many years ago. And they speak very, very differently about him now then before he was a national figure.
We’ll know when the grades will be leaked. About a week beforehand, there will be a flurry of MSM articles about how grades don’t matter.
I mean, GWB had better grades than Kerry or Gore. But that didn’t stop the “stupid” label, did it?
It’s all about Teh Narrative.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 6:55 pmMike K–
if the government of Alaska is in Juneau, then that’s where the governor should be.
Jeb Bush was living in Miami, but he managed to stay up in Tallahassee most of the time. In fact, he actually lived in the Governor’s Mansion, although that may sound strange to you.
(You do know how Tallahassee was picked? Supposedly one guy started riding from Pensacola, and the other guy started riding from St. Augustine, and where they met was the spot picked out for the territorial capitol. Of course in those days, the main thing in Central and South Florida were swamps and Seminoles.)
And if she wants her kids with her, that’s her choice. Why should the taxpayers of Alaska pick up the bill?
Do you know what a governor of integrity would do? He or she would not fly their family around the state. And he or she would not fly around the state unless it was for specific goverment business. Not for making speeches and getting photo ops and face time on the local TV stations. Was Palin like that? If so, I retract my bad opinion of her. But otherwise, she’s no better than the usual run of politicians, something that at least some people here don’t seem to understand.
If you keep voting for the people the GOP establishment offers, you’ll get more of the same. That’s why it’s important you don’t vote for GOP candidates. The whole system is broken, and simply hoping for a better kind of candidate doesn’t cut it anymore.
(For the record–I voted in 2008 for Barr, not because I like him or the Libertarian Party, but because I wanted to make a vote that said I didn’t want either party. Same in 2004.)
kishnevi (b40a74) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:00 pmExcept that she vetoed an anti domestic partnership referendum, angered the local prolife crew by appointing a member of PP to the State Supreme Court, yes the ‘purity of essence’ crew is riding
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:02 pmthe bomb down to the ground like Slim Pickens
All of the data at #54 is about perceptions, not questions on specific issues.
My hunch is that decades of growing affluence and rising creature comforts, combined with decades of ongoing secularization, attached to a media more loaded down than ever before with college-educated people and their college-bound philosophy, affixed to greater Starbucks-type urbanization, infused with gee-whiz, feel-good modern technology, connected to changing demographics — in which the politics of Mexico become the politics of the US — make liberal sentiments seem so wonderful, so kind-hearted, so civilized, so hip and sophisticated.
I think a lot of people fall for that stereotype, and even though they’ll claim they’re conservative, or certainly “centrist,” there remains a streak of foolish liberalism in many of them. This applies double to the people of Western Europe, quadruple to the people of the Third World.
I’d vote for Hillary (but not President Obama) before him and would probably do another write-in. I won’t vote for someone I absolutely do not trust.
Sorry, but unless you’re a liberal or very squishy, I don’t know how you can say things like that. I can at least understand my-way-or-the-highway voters saying they won’t vote at all if the candidates on the ballot aren’t 100% to their liking. But to claim a vote for a leftwing Hillary is better than a vote for a leftwing Obama, and that the former is preferable to voting for a John McCain, is puzzling to me. And to imply one trusts Hillary — sort of the “Bonnie” of the Bonnie and Clyde (ie, Bill) of recent political history — more than McCain??!
People like McCain are ideologically squishy — if not closeted “lefties” — on certain issues. But in the real world I can’t and don’t expect perfection. I may be generally an ideological purist, but I’m also aware that tactics — and harsh reality (referring to unavoidable, idiotic left-leaning sentiment percolating throughout much of the electorate) — are just as important as anything else.
Mark (411533) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:09 pmUm. I don’t want to fight, but when I read this, I kind of have to respond:
It’s just not true. That vote was a vote for the winner.
Barack Obama.
Sorry, but that is true. That is the lesson Ross Perot taught us.
Best of luck with that Purity of Essence business. And remind yourself how great that POE feels with every Supreme Court nominee, and every new spending bill. You know, all the things that the President said he was going to do on the Left side of the agenda.
You can blame the RNC, but I suspect you know better.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:12 pmFunny…
That is what the DNC says, too. Imagine that.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:13 pmThe DNC Chair ALWAYS is a flame thrower and OUR idiots stand their with their hands out for money and give the base NO reason to donate! Palin might make gaffe’s but she FIRE’S up the base and pisses off the left, that is a winner!
JadedByPolitics (1f19fe) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:15 pmMark,
I.do.not.trust.John.McCain. Period. If you think I’m a progressive or a squish, you’re mistaken. Don’t take a lack of massive cut&paste walls of text as being squishy.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:17 pm“Do you know what a governor of integrity would do? He or she would not fly their family around the state.”
kishnevi – You keep saying this but offer no evidence except Jeb Bush and his adult children, a different situation. You’ve got nothing. You don’t like Palin, but stop making stuff up.
B. Obama (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:19 pmI can understand that, Stashiu3. I like him better than Barack Obama, though.
Who do you like and would like to see run? I mean, someone with enough appeal to be a candidate who has a shot?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:27 pmIt’s all about Teh Narrative.
Comment by Eric Blair
And for some the narrative is Palin is an idiot (ignore her accomplishments).
I think Hillary would be better than Obama because she would be less naive in foreign policy issues and, though she would like to see similar changes in the US, I don’t think she detests what America has been in the same way.
Even though I am Pro-life, I would have voted for Guiliani over McCain, because I would trust Guiliani’s promise to nominate originalist judges irrespective of their abortion views, where I don’t trust McCain.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:27 pmShe gave up the jet and started charging the airfare to the state….the principle remains the same: the taxpayers paid for her trips. Yes, that it’s legitimate for her trips to be paid for…
THAT is the best you have? THAT is funny! Thanks for the chuckle.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:29 pmI will admit, MD, it makes me irritable to see folks on the Right do the Left’s work for them. I think we agree on that.
It’s like the GWB thing. The Left successfully pushed this meme that he was nice but stupid…and he was neither.
But hey! No problem. My fellow academics have decided that Mr. Obama is one of the top, what, fifteen or so Presidents in US history.
Hmmm.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:29 pmI.do.not.trust.John.McCain.
But you’re willing to trust.Hillary.Clinton.more.than.McCain?
If you’d give more benefit of the doubt to Hillary sniper-fire Clinton than John McCain, than something is seriously amiss there.
I’ve chuckled at Democrats, Republicans, leftists, centrists and rightists who do back flips in order to convince themselves or others that Hillary is somehow less leftwing than an Obama or Nancy Pelosi. Sure, Hillary may be a tad bit different from Obama, etc, when it comes to certain tiny areas of ideology. But those differences are too insignificant to take seriously.
Mark (411533) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:30 pmI very much agree w/your post #93, MD.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:32 pmkish…if she’s supposed to be in Juneau, why has the Government of Alaska kept a set of offices in Anchorage for the Governor and other top officials for years?
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Anchorage and Fairbanks are the economic centers of the state?
And, have you compared the travel distance between Miami-Tallahassee and Anchorage-Juneau?
My map tells me it is approx 180nm for FL, 480nm for AK…and then there is the weather factor, and the fact that there is no road connection.
Yes, she did a $hitty job with Katie, and there is no excuse for it since McCain called her two years in advance of the election and she just didn’t prepare herself for the national exposure.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:36 pmJ.C. Watts Jr., Joe Lieberman, Fred Thompson, Sarah Palin, Zombie Reagan (okay, okay), Glenn Reynolds, Paul Ryan… to name a few. You might argue that some, most, or all have little chance to succeed. Most people would have said that about President Obama before the 2008 election cycle (and did). Rush Limbaugh probably wouldn’t take the pay cut.
It’s less about the politics than integrity. I believe those people would honestly try to do what they should, rather than what they personally want.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:39 pmYes, Katie vouched for Obama, and she didn’t blink when Biden said FDR had been on TV in 1929 as President, and he wasn’t joking. Look I liked Jeb
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:47 pmas Gov, but did you miss the million dollar S&L
collapse he was tied to, jiminy cricket. If he were
ever to run, there would be a certain reporter at
the St. Petersburg Times who would remind the nation at great length
Eric–just to clue you in: when I stood in line (the longest line I can remember standing in for an election, at a time of the morning when generally there are no lines at my precinct)to vote in 2008. I was, as far as I could tell from overhearing remarks,etc. the only person not voting for Obama. And while there were some blacks in line, most of the people there were Anglos or Hispanics. I could have voted ten times over for McCain and it would have made no difference: I live in an heavily Democratic area in a state that Obama was clearing winning in 2008.
And while you may think that there were important difference between McCain and Obama, I don’t think. Instead of Kagan we would get a statist justice who favors statism of the Right variety.
Daley–why do you have a problem with me being consistent? I think Palin is essentially another GOP standard politician. Thought that way since the beginning, and I thought the reaction from many Republicans to her when she was picked for VP was pitiful. They seemed to think she was something special. I didn’t see anything special about her, and I don’t see anything special about her now. I wouldn’t dismiss her as GOP chairman, but she’s not going to move the Republican Party in the direction most people here want it to move.
I’d like to think that at least one of the current crop of “Tea Party” favorites turns out to have staying power. We shall see…
kishnevi (b40a74) — 7/4/2010 @ 7:56 pmUm. Kishnevi, you are trying to convince yourself. Did you actually, a person who is supposedly all about personal principle, trot out the “my vote doesn’t count” meme?
Especially when you out and out stated that you wanted to vote other than D or R to send a message?
Hmmm. That doesn’t seem, well, consistent, does it?
All you did is help Obama. Sorry. That’s what that was. You can, ahem, put lipstick on that pig all you wish.
As for who would have been appointed to SCOTUS by McCain, all you have is what you guess. We have n =2 for the guy in office, and was it a surprise?
Nope, you just want to feel better about assisting the DNC. Which is okay.
Just keep it in mind in November. And two Novembers after that. Purity of Essence, dude.
At least my parents now admit how wrong they were about Perot. You’ll get there too.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:03 pmian: wasn’t that his brother, Neil who was involved in the S&L collapse–you know, the brother who isn’t in politics.
Beyond his wife’s shopping trip–a single incident–I don’t remember anything in the way of a scandal touching Jeb.
Which can’t be said of either Crist or Rubio, btw.
kishnevi (b40a74) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:03 pmRe: the back and forth between Stash and EB, with a bit of elissa at #130 included.
You go to your church , and I’ll go to mine.
The fault lies not with the voters, but with the process of candidate selection. Conservatives are simply not going to vote for RINOs, not enough to win anyway. And the devil take the hindmost. That statement is as true as the sky. The most recent presidential election should be adequate to convince anyone willing to examine the evidence.
The RNC has to change if they want to win at the polls. Give us men and women who deserve our votes and they will be rewarded with landslide victories and an embarrassing abundance of financial and physical support.
Republicans can whine and complain till the cows come home, but so long as the RNC puts people the likes of Dede Scozzafava up for office they’ll be in the minority in perpetuity.
My vote isn’t up for negotiation, it’s not subject to anyone’s approval, and it’s not going to anyone I can’t respect. Bottom line, I’m not going to vote the lesser of two evils. Give me a candidate who deserves my vote, nothing else will do.
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:06 pmFirst of all, you probably live in Broward or Palm Beach, yet you voted to further make your vote, irrelevant, second,http://www.nytimes.com/1990/10/14/us/a-savings-and-loan-bailout-and-bush-s-son-jeb.html
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:09 pm“Daley–why do you have a problem with me being consistent?”
kishnevi – I have a problem with your intellectual honesty. You throw a lot of crap up there and when pushed on it, it turns out to be completely unsupported garbage, exactly like this Palin travel meme. It’s not an ethics violation but it does not meet your high standards of integrity, yet you have no idea what common practice is for other governors around the country or other Alaskan governors. Without that, you have no frame of reference to even make a point, it is faux moral indignation.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:20 pmWell, ropelight, this comment merits a response, without rancor.
Which only means you are going to get the worst of two evils. And each time people like you hold your breath and vote for Bob Barr or Ross Perot, guess what we get?
Have fun with that purity of essence. Again, the Perot vote was supposed to send a message. You may be one of the Samson type people who want the whole machine to fall apart to bring about “true” purity, but that will hurt many, many people.
Again, we don’t seem to learn. And that “…rewarded with landslide victories and an embarrassing abundance of financial and physical support….” isn’t really backed up very much by polling data. It didn’t happen after Perot. Look at what happened to Palin, courtesy of the MSM. And POE types are going after her as well—from her own side!
And Axelrod and his cronies are loving it!
I’m happy to vote for conservative people. And I am certain you are out there working hard to push them through the machinery, instead of just waiting for the machinery to change on its own?
As it stands, we are in trouble because of POE. We’ll see if it continues. You have high standards, and I hope you won’t mind your helping the second administration of Barack Obama come about. Helping Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. You can blame the RNC, but if you aren’t out there canvassing and working for change, then your vote is helping those characters. Apologies if you are out there working the system from within.
I’m getting all irritable and I don’t like myself when I do this. Everyone has a right to vote as they choose. I just don’t want to see more “Perot Victories.”
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:25 pmAD, it’s not about Palin flying back and forth. It’s about her getting the state to pay for her kid’s travels. I didn’t know about the separate offices in Anchorage, but that doesn’t mean justify flying the kids around to be with her at taxpayer expense.
Please give me a legitimate reason why the state should pay the travel expenses of those kids. I can think of none. If she wanted the kids to be nearby when she was in Juneau–fine. But she should have paid for the trips, not the taxpayers of Alaska.
I repeat: she no better than the usual run of GOP politicians, and that means while she may do a good job as RNC chair, she won’t shake up the GOP the way the GOP needs to be shaken up if it’s to successfully implement a real conservative program.
BTW, you need a better map of Florida. The distance between Tallahassee and Miami is about 400 miles (rough approximation). It’s a full day trip by road–Turnpike to I-75 to I-10 and then west an hour or so. Same atlas indicates Juneau-Anchorage is about 500 miles.
kishnevi (fb9343) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:36 pm__________________________________
The fault lies not with the voters, but with the process of candidate selection.
However, if the system — and society — ends up even more leftwing than it otherwise would be, voters like you shouldn’t complain.
If you don’t adjust your tactics based on what’s pasted below, then your my-way-or-the-highway sentiments may be fine and idealistic, but the nation you’ll be residing in may very well have — by your standards and preferences — a long, rocky road for you to travel on. Be prepared to witness a cross between a Greece, Mexico, Venezuela and France/Spain.
I’d have more sympathy for your POV if the US were more like Britain. That would be where the mid-point of the political spectrum has become so left-of-center that the UK’s Labor Party is ultra-liberal, the UK’s Liberal Democrat Party is ultra-ultra-liberal, and the Conservative (or Tory) Party is squishy-squishy. But, so far — and believe it or not — there remains a somewhat better ideological divide between the 2 main political parties in America.
As for bad judicial appointments, it’s not just Supreme Court justices that can be like a president’s gift that keeps on giving. There are lower-level judges throughout the federal court system appointed over 30 years ago by Jimmy Carter who remain active, handing down idiotic rulings ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
Mark (411533) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:37 pmbut it does not meet your high standards of integrity, yet you have no idea what common practice is for other governors around the country or other Alaskan governors.
You are right, It doesn’t meet my standards of integrity. Nor do I care what the other 49 governors do. If the other 49 outright embezzled state funds, would that justify her embezzling state funds?
In fact, if she simply did what the other governors did, that merely proves my point–she’s just another politician, in it for personal power and profit, and that means she doesn’t deserve my vote.
Eric–if you keep voting for RINOs, then the Republican Party will be glad to keep giving you RINOs.
Nor in the end, is there much difference between a Republican who wants to use your money for themselves and boss you around and a Democrat who wants to use your money for themselves and boss you around, other than the fact that the Republican will try to pretend he is not in favor of bossing you around. All I see in DC are two cliques of crooks fighting over the swag.
kishnevi (391c85) — 7/4/2010 @ 8:46 pmComment by kishnevi — 7/4/2010 @ 8:36 pm
I stepped-off air-miles btwn the two cities on my Rand-McNally using the Latitude scale on the edge: 1-degree of latitude = 60nm.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:09 pmA Nautical Mile is a tad more than 6076ft.
Kishnevi: you want to snark at me, let me reply in kind, and far more accurately than you:
You keep voting third party, and Democrats continue to win.
What side are you on, again?
But then, it is all purity with you. Sigh. POE.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:13 pmNo, Eric, it’s not about purity. It’s about to refusing to support a political organization that cares more about maintaining power than implementing non-statist programs.
You think it makes a difference whether Republicans or Democrats win. I don’t. As I said above, all I see is two different groups who want to tell me what to do, and use my money to do whatever they want to do. The fact that one group pretends otherwise does not change the situation.
Remember, every time you vote for a Republican establishment type, you’re telling the Republican establishment you don’t really mind if they pervert or ignore actual conservative principles and ideas. You are telling them RINOs are okay.
kishnevi (fb9343) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:29 pmAD– I was using a Hammond atlas, and standard miles. But the AK distance was only slightly more than the FL distance–definitely not 2 1/2 time as much!
kishnevi (fb9343) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:31 pmI think it’s great that Palin has her kids come along on trips. I think she paid for it eventually, but I totally understand why you’d have them come along. It’s pretty damn common. I know municipal employees who bring family to conventions at city expense. It’s not unusual.
In fact, Obama does it far more often, and far more egregiously, than Palin, already spending millions to go on trips with family at taxpayer expense that don’t even serve a public function. Remember that date night? That wasn’t isolated.
Palin’s trip with family was completely kosher in my book. If that’s below your standards, I don’t have a real problem with it, but it seems awfully selected to bash Palin for a very minor example, that she paid back, of something a lot of people do.
just strange. Palin has said many times that all politicians will disappoint you in some way. You’re never going to be satisfied if you’re honestly writing Palin off for this, so you’re probably irrelevant. Either because you are lying and don’t really care about this, or because no politician can ever hope to be good enough for you.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:32 pm“…You think it makes a difference whether Republicans or Democrats win. I don’t. …”
Wow. Just wow.
Well, good luck to you. I just hope that you put a big poster of Axelrod up. You just made his day. His year. Well, four more years!
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:37 pmAnd let me fix something for you, Kishnevi. You write:
But the genuine result is this:
Fixed that for you.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:40 pm“Oh, my God, I hope not! ROFL. I’d love to see Liz Cheney in that spot, but she may be more effective showing how ridiculous the Democrat policies are in other venues.
Comment by GeneralMalaise — 7/4/2010 @ 7:37 am ”
I just want to reiterate this point.
Howard Dean is the architect of the Democrats becoming such a frustratingly powerful force. And I’m not talking about Obama. They would have won the white house without him.
I’m talking about every little state election issue we run into. Dean knew that these close races, in a closely divided country, often can be ‘massaged’ if you have the right people in the right places. Under the guise of a 50 state strategy, he really worked this idea to perfection. And they picked up a lot of seats the GOP would have never bothered with. And they picked up a lot of volunteers and now active donors they GOP never would have bothered with.
It goes on and on. We need a Howard Dean, and his personal politics may be stupid, but his leadership skill compared extremely well against Steele.
And Dean would have made a terrible President. And he’s a lousy pundit. We need to consider this. We need someone who is more aggressive than a serious presidential contender. We need someone who is experienced in the details of campaigns. We need someone who is a forceful and fast thinking leader. Do you think it matters who popular the chairman is? It doesn’t. Not a single person voted for Mccain because of Howard Dean being the dem Chair.
I think Mitt Romney is still a strong choice. his involvement in so many elections makes the point. But I would go back to Gillespie or even Rove. We don’t need the policy wonks. We need people who can plan and tip the scales on elections.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:43 pmRobert Barr wasn’t he against Gitmo, the Patriot Act, Iraq, he made McCain seem like Attila the Hun
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:43 pmon that score,
kish..you’re right about that FL distance, I made an error in transposition (whatever) and it is more like 350NM.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:46 pmBut the big point is, that you can’t drive, or take the train, or bus, from Wasilla to Juneau, and those options are available from Talahassee to Miami. In fact, there are only two ways to arrive in Juneau: by air, and by sea.
Dustin, so it’s Dean we can pin the ACORN/SEIU mess on?
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:47 pm#164, Eric, we differ on a range of issues. You began well enough but your comments are not devoid of rancor. The slights are numerous and uncalled for. However, the topic is close to my heart so I’ll continue. I wrote, “… I’m not going to vote the lesser of two evils…” And, I’m not, and I don’t give a damn if you like it or not, or if my decision fits your model of appropriate political participation. I have my own ideas.
Nor does my position necessarily result in your forecast of doom and gloom: “Which only means you are going to get the worst of two evils.” It might result in better candidates. If the GOP wants my vote they can earn it, or they can continue along their present course and get along without me. The choice is theirs. I’m doing my best to urge them to take the high road.
You assume to much when you say “…people like (me who) hold your breath and vote for Bob Barr or Ross Perot, guess what we get? Well, Eric, I wouldn’t know, I didn’t vote for either of them.
And, please, knock it off with that “…purity of essence” crap. It’s unnecessarily offensive. So are the Perot and Samson cracks. And, so is the appeal to sympathy.
I’m satisfied with my level of political involvement, and it’s none of your damn business. I’ve been active since college when I ran for the student council. That was 35 years ago and I’m still at it.
Nor am I helping either Barack Obama or Harry Reid. You are. By accepting second-rate candidates you’re setting the stage for more voter apathy and GOP losses.
Finally, either address me in a civil manner or don’t expect the courtesy of a response. Capiche?
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:53 pm“#
Dustin, so it’s Dean we can pin the ACORN/SEIU mess on?
Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 7/4/2010 @ 9:47 pm”
OK, to some extent I have to admit that some of Dean’s philosophy is not exactly noble.
I was mainly referring to things like Secretary of State elections and other election related posts that he worked much harder to flip than normal. He overwhelmed the RNC by outmatching in many areas. This has really paid off for the democrats. Entire races may be decided sometimes by the right officials agreeing to appoint someone instead of hold an election. The law can be bent or massaged.
Do we want to get into that game? I know we sure as hell want to fight hard for some of these same positions, and recognize they have great importance.
And we need to determine what our counterpart to unions is. I think it’s the Tea party. That may be the only good reason to put Palin in this slot. I don’t really buy into Palin being this chairperson, though.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 9:59 pmBest of luck to you, Mr. ropelight.
I don’t see how likening what you are doing to Perot protest voting is insulting, but I agree that assisting Bill Clinton to the Presidency could be seen as offensive.
I have always said that everyone can vote precisely as they please.
But clearly, you and I have very different views. And regarding purity? Well, you are certainly all about purity, sir. That drive for purity in your candidates is certainly being used by the Democrats. Gotta accept that, even if your choices are designed to urge Republicans toward greater—okay, not purity…how about “a political agenda that fits your own viewpoint quite closely”?
And I honestly hope your approach gains you the candidates you wish. Instead of what we are both getting.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:01 pmFrankly, it’s not on the voters to come back to the GOP. It’s on the GOP to come back to the voters. I hope enough of them are shocked by Obama’s excesses to be ‘pragmatic’ and vote for the lesser of two evils, but the GOP’s pragmatics need to realize they can often be pretty dang stodgy.
One example: the Barton comment. So many ‘pragmatics’ made that into a much worse problem for us. A lot of times, I get the feeling some of them are simply purists who happen to be moderate.
And if that’s the case, the real need in my opinion is for them to compromise and vote for the lesser of their two evils, which is a sold conservative. IF they are the compromisers, and righties are not, it’s clear what the most realistic ticket to majority is.
We can bring back a ton of voters if we simply insist on a balanced budget and term limits. I know both feel unrealistic these days. I know term limits brings several problems and wouldn’t completely solve every problem, though I insist it would make a huge difference because more legit reformers would make it to the Hill.
And who are the pragmatic conservatives going to vote for in this case? Obama? (yes, some of them really would).
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:05 pmThat was the Secretary of State project, one of those other gifts from Uncle Soros that never stops
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:06 pmgiving, Brunner in Ohio was one of their most promising along with Guthrie in Minnesota, who ‘found’ just enough votes to get Franken elected
The SEIU/ACORN is part and parcel in the Secretary of State Project.
If you want to corrupt state elections, you need control of the SoS office, and Dean did this in WA, MN, and other states that were pivotal in the success of the Dems in ’06 & ’08.
Counterpart…The TEA Party is not going to be absorbed by the GOP as much as the GOP is going to be absorbed by the TEA Party. Once those elected officials endorsed and backed by the TEA Party take office as GOP’ers, they will have the authority to appoint RNC members, and slowly, the Cocktail Party GOP will be replaced by Mainstreet.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:06 pmEric, I didn’t make a dent, did I? It’s people like you who give the GOP a bad name.
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:07 pmUm. Quite a statement there.
I think we should agree to disagree. Since you seem to think helping Democrats win elections is a good thing.
Mind you, if you say you don’t like Republican candidates, you may notice that I agree with you. The difference between us is that I believe that there is no “good” or “bad” among politicians, just “bad” and “less bad.” But when I read things like “there is no difference between the parties,” well, I tend to think we aren’t talking about the real world at all.
Especially given how this administration has been acting.
Again, I am sure you are working hard at the grassroots level to change things. You may hear snark in that statement, but I am being hopeful: I hope you are doing exactly that.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:18 pmNo minds will be changed, I know, but I just have to say one more thing about candidate selection. And it begins with the realistic premise that there is no perfect candidate.
My parents were two very staunch Conservatives. They were very involved politically, and they helped me decide I am a Conservative, too, and to fully understand why I am one. My parents had a very firm rule which was: for the primary you worked your ass off for your preferred candidate, made calls, knocked on doors, talked up people in the grocery line and contributed as much money as you could. If your guy won the primary, great–then you rinse and repeat for the general. But if your guy did not win the primary, then later in the general election you always voted for the winner of your party’s primary rather than a Democrat or third party. The point to consider is that if the “good and near perfect” (to you) candidate couldn’t even make it through the primary then how the heck could he have won the general–and what do you honestly benefit by punishing the winner of the primary, only to help elect the *real* opposition, by not voting at all, or by wasting a vote.
I have followed this practice in all but two cases that I can recall, and both were local/state elections. In both cases I later regretted it. For sure I will never deviate from this practice in a Presidential election. Ever. The idea that lifetime appointment(s) to the Supreme Court can be made by an accidental President is way more risk than I am willing to take with my country’s future.
The spirited discussion captured among friends on this thread really does help explain why politics is so complex and why prognosticators are so often wrong about election outcomes.
elissa (b8be1a) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:18 pmAD, that’s making a lot of sense, as far as the need for a two pronged approach to corrupt elections. You need the legit side that simply turns a blind eye or just doesn’t scrutinize, and you need the crackheads flooding the registrations, voting twice or more, etc. I know one major facet of voter fraud is making so much chaos that a polling station is kept open. Or materials needed to verify someone already voted are left at a centralized location instead of distributed. I could go on and on, but you need one side to just ‘have a hard time getting it right’ on election day, and then another side that knows when and where to exploit this problem.
There are a lot of lawyers here. I hope some of you are willing to drive to a city in a swing state and help deal with this issue. The GOP asks for help with this every election. It’s educational.
I sure as hell like your vision for the Tea party overcoming the cocktail party. That’s the only way we’re going to bring voters I know who sound like ropelight does back into the fold. No offense intended to either Ropelight or Eric.
I’m not going to tell anyone to forgive the GOP when I’m having a hard time with some of these people right now. One example that I’m sore about if Perry’s former Chief of Staff running as a fake spoiler candidate. That is like stealing votes. And I won’t stand with Perry if he is OK with that. That could mean a democrat winning and making huge problems, but I just can’t bring myself to support any politician who screws with an honest election.
Somehow the GOP became very much the powerful party it was sent into power to thwart. The idea that we can dip our toes into K street to better fund our reforms just doesn’t make any sense. A truly limited government is not what GE and BP and a long line of other lobbyist funding companies really want.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:18 pmDustin, I can certainly appreciate people unhappy with the current RNC and crop of candidates. And I agree that the party has moved Leftward (or perhaps more accurately, toward more of a statist platform).
The problem is that the DNC and their candidates have moved even farther toward the Left.
Therein lies the difficulty. Does a person who is a conservative opt out, or vote Third Party, knowing that either of those strategies helps the DNC in these current times? Do they hold their noses a vote for the “lesser of the two evils”?
An adherents of each approach are angry with the other.
All the while, the far more statist and far more leftward DNC and their candidates gain more power, and do more damage.
Some want the system to hit rock bottom, so it can be rebuilt. Personally, I hope that can be avoided, considering the pain and suffering that would be part of that.
But how to get the kinds of politicians that people like voting for, on the Republican side? That would be nice indeed.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:25 pmelissa,
Well said. I’ve got the greatest respect for Eric Blair and have always been treated with respect by him, even when we strongly disagree. His (and your) pragmatic approach is certainly valid and more effective for the short-term. I would contend that in the longer-term, the only way to induce change within a party is to inject some pain. Hopefully, the recent pain felt by the GOP will be incentive to offer candidates acceptable to both views.
The question that a “principle-first” person might ask would be, “Is there a candidate that the GOP would offer up that you couldn’t bring yourself to vote for?” For example, Arlen Specter decides to jump ship again and somehow gets the GOP nomination. Joe Lieberman gets the nod for the DNC. Both are extremely unlikely, but possible… so say that those are your choices. Who do you vote for?
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:32 pmDustin, if you want a winning campaign platform for the 2012 general election, consider the purity of following:
A 20% reduction in federal spending in the first year in office, and 15% per year thereafter till all US debt is retired.
Reinstatement of the Bush tax cuts in addition to drastic cuts in personal and business taxes, including cuts at the state and local levels.
A complete ban on all public sector labor unions. 20% cut in federal employees in the first year and 15% per year for the next 3 years.
An impenetrable fence along the entire Southern border with no amnesty discussions to take place till one year after completion and thorough analysis of of the barrier’s efficiency.
Repeal of ObamaCare. Recovery of Stimulus money.
100,000 additional troops in Afghanistan. New rules of engagement with company commanders allowed to set the rules according to local conditions. No second guessing.
A task force on political corruption with full police and prosecutorial powers to root out criminal wrongdoing at every level of government.
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:34 pmHa, Stashiu, I am going to pretend I am being vetted for the Supreme Court and reply that I do not reply to hypotheticals! (Especially ones as improbable as Spector vs. Lieberman.)
Seriously, I do understand where you are coming from and I share your frustration about getting quality candidates. My hope is that more and more Conservatives will get involved in the party at the local committeman, precinct and CD levels to help groom and select candidates, thereby rebuilding and changing the party from the ground up rather than wait for someone else to do it and complain when they don’t.
Unfortunately, due to the high costs of running for office, I’m enough of a cynic that I am afraid K-Street snags just about everybody in national politics sooner or later and I am not sure there is an answer for that, which would also still be constitutional.
elissa (b8be1a) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:55 pmThe Illinois race for senator is a good example of the purity question this year. On the one hand we have a crooked mob banker Democrat machine politician in Alexi Giannoulias running for Obama’s old seat. In the other side you have Rep. Mark Kirk, who many, including myself, believe to be a somewhat squishy Republican. Kirk was not my first choice, but I am not going to vote for somebody else or avoid voting that line and give an added vote to the Democrats just because Kirk was not my preference.
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/4/2010 @ 10:59 pmI just wanted to point out, that it wasn’t Dean’s brilliance, although his cadre were the prototype
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:04 pmfor the Obama voter, but his psychotic nature was often characterized as just ‘colorful’. Maybe it’s crazy, butit would be good to be able to vote for
someone, instead of against. Someone with integrity and the right policies, on the fiscal and
domestic and foreign policies
Eric, why do you persist in ascribing views to me I don’t hold? Is it some underhanded debate technique, or is it a reading comprehension problem? Seriously, why can’t you deal with what I wrote? Only that and nothing more.
You wrote, “Since you seem to think helping Democrats win elections is a good thing.” I think no such thing.
And, I resent your attempts to consign my positions to your preposterous pigeon holes. If you want to know what I think, ask me. Don’t fabricate idiot positions and then lay them at my feet. That’s dishonest.
Please, open you mind and let a little light come in. I’m responsible for what I write, not what you assume I seem to think. That’s not only fraught with the potential for error, but it’s also presumptious in the extreme.
Additionally, don’t pretend that I think “there is no difference between the parties,” I reject that statement as ignorant blather.
Stash had kind words for you. I hold him in some regard, so I’m going to take your suggestion. Let’s agree to disagree. I just wish you had an accurate notion of what you were actually disagreeing with. Sheesh!
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:09 pmWell the actual question was, “Is there a candidate that the GOP would offer up that you couldn’t bring yourself to vote for?”, so pick your own candidate that crosses the line, if there is one. You don’t even need to give a name because it’s just a yes or no question. If there is, we’re just drawing the line in a different spot at worst. If there isn’t, how is that any different than EB’s alphabetists?
I know you understand this, but that’s my problem with the GOP elite. They expect your vote because it’s “Team R!” or nothing in their eyes. Specter and Scozzafava are great examples of what they’ll try to force on you if you continue to let them. I’m thinking more long-term, but I’ll readily admit that when it comes time to cast the actual ballot, it’s difficult to stick to principles (except when it’s McCain, no problem for me there) and possibly help the worse candidate. I’ll lean towards GOP, but they’ve got to offer someone that at least meets a minimum standard.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:16 pmFor the purity brigade, I would just mention that it seems to be an article of faith among Libertarians that ‘the good is the enemy of the perfect’.
AD - RtR/OS! (ed07ac) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:50 pmIt is also a historical fact that the Libertarians have only succeeded in electing Far-Left Radicals, by either voting for Democrat/Progressives as in ’08,
and/or by depriving a not-perfect-but-satisfactory conservative Republican of their vote.
There has never been a Libertarian who has attained significant office without flying a ‘false flag’ as a Republican,
and there probably never will be – except as a Free Doper Democrat.
Stashiu,
I suppose that (as I have occasionally done in the past) in a local or state election there might be a circumstance where I would cross the party line to vote in a future election. But, for a congressional race, or for the presidency, the past four years and especially the last two years have hardened my thinking that we can’t allow “progressives” any more power and the opportunity to alter our country forever. That means pragmatically keeping them out of Washington at all costs. And, I really do view that as the most essential, principled and staunchly conservative stand possible.
Bush disappointed fiscally and John McCain truly was a barometer for me, because he was about my fifth choice of available candidates. But, not a day passes in which I do not wish that he and Cindy were occupying the White House, and that the cabinet and advisors running our nation were of the right-leaning variety, and that the wise Latina was not our newest SCOTUS for-life appointment.
elissa (b8be1a) — 7/4/2010 @ 11:58 pmelissa #198 – you have learned (and accepted) the lesson that the President isn’t the only important person on this planet … and you are looking at history as well as the present, when you prepare for the future with your vote …
Many others are not yet willing to accept their responsibility for electing Barack Obama …
Stashiu3 has his own reasons for being so vehemently anti-McCain … and those reasons are *so* important to Stahiu3 that they are/were more important than the likelihood of the wise Latina on the SCOTUS or the US economy spiralling further and further downwards …
happyfeet has his own reasons for being so vehemently anti-Palin – and the end-result of such things is President Obama …
Some of us learn from history and we would have taken Ford over Carter in 1976, we would have taken Dole over Clinton, and we sure as %&^%& would have taken McCain over Obama (and Palin over Biden) because we realise that all the other ‘stuff’ that arrives with the choice would have served to temper the flaws of those individuals, just as those individuals would have tempered the flaws in others …
Those of us who learn from history aren’t trying to say “Vote R because only R is perfect” … we are trying to remind people that those things of importance to us in this country are better served by voting for current Rs in most cases when those Rs are in the better position to keep Ds out of Congress or White House … because the current Ds have no reason to stop what tehy are doing that is weakening the economy of this country more and more, the longer we vote to leave them in office …
Me – I look at what the Justice Department is doing, I look at what is being done with the Federal Budget, I look at what is being done with foreign policy, I look at what is being done with energy policy, I look at what could be being done with the economy by way of incentivising the creation of new and sustainable jobs which produce marketable goods that people want to buy (and yet the opposite is being done right now) – and I hope that all those and more will manage to overcome the propaganda of the Axelrods and NYT/LAT/WaPo and the limousine liberals …
Alasdair (205079) — 7/5/2010 @ 12:43 amYes Alasdair, everything would have been peachy-keen with McCain. No Amnesty, TARP II (and III, IV, or V), “wise Latina” pick for SCOTUS… possibly the same one, Camp Delta at GITMO actually closed, slightly different but still overbroad HCR law, or expanded CFR with further restraints on political speech. None of that would have happened even though there would have been no united GOP front to stop any of it. McCain would not have bent over backwards to prove his bipartisanship and Mavericky-ness. Most or all of those things would never have happened because McCain can be trusted to adhere to conservative principles and the GOP platform.
Put McCain on for 2012 with DeDe as VP. That’s the ticket.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:13 amWhat’s interesting is that the Stashius and Ropelights seem to be exploiting the reasoning of the ‘electability’ folks.
Now, it’s pretty clear to me that a bona fide conservative is more electable than a half assed one. And I bet the same was true in 2008 (but that was a very hard race to win).
Ropelight mentioned an impregnable border. That’s science fiction. I don’t blame him for the error. A lot of people are so tired of GOP leaders who barely try that they don’t even know what really great leadership would look like. Let’s see a sincere effort to control our border, and I bet Ropelight can tolerate a few hundred illegals making it through each year.
It’s hard to accept that Mccain would have been as bad as Obama, strictly looking at policy and not political ramifications. Obama’s completely silly on the gulf spill, and Mccain wouldn’t have been. Obama has insulted a lot of allies and shriveled or bowed in the face of other nations. I don’t think Mccain would have.
But I think Obama is defining the left with these terrible policies. This may be the wakeup call we needed to curtail the entitlement culture and get our government back on a sustainable path. Maybe we were shocked into it.
Mccain wouldn’t have gotten us off the doomed fiscal path. To my view, perhaps it’s better that we’re scared into sanity as a country. Had Mccain made these mistakes, the entire political spectrum would be out of whack.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:32 amStashiu3 #200 – now who is projecting words not uttered ?
I do, however, believe that a bunch of the worst of what has gone down would *not* have gone down with McCain in the White House …
What folk seem to forget is that once someone like McCain has been elected to the White House, there is no reason for him to prove his anything to anyone … and there is good reason to believe that he would have tempered the idiocies of the current Congress, starting with his promise to veto any bill with earmarks … whatever you may say/believe about McCain, his own track record on earmarks makes a poweful statement …
I know of no reason why a President McCain would have instructed his DoJ to dismiss the New BLack Panthers case …
Do you ?
Alasdair (205079) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:50 amSurely not to avoid accusations of racism. Until I saw the light, I would have probably disagreed about him tempering Congress or keeping any promises. Consider me in lock-step now while I’m still here. Don’t want to be called a coward or squish, so I’ll look into that Lifetime Membership with the NRA again too based on the other threads.
McCain/Scozzafava 2012. Start telling your friends now.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:10 amIf the RNC puts up McCain again though, all bets are off.
— You’re speaking metaphorically, right Stashiu? You’re referring to “a McCain type”; correct? Because if you’re actually talking about the possibility of McCain himself running again, then maybe you and happyfeet and kishnevi all need to see a doctor.
McCain will not run again. Consider the bet to be “on”.
Icy Texan (80d2e7) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:43 amNo IT, I was being literal in that I wouldn’t have put anything past the GOP elite and McCain, but I’ve now seen the light. I didn’t realize how much of a good thing that would be, so I’m on board. Let’s make it happen.
McCain/Scozzafava 2012.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:49 amFor what it’s worth, I was slamming happyfeet for the barely disguised sexism that informed his anti-Palin rants. I don’t think she’s the Second Coming of Reagan, but I damn well feel that she will be much better than a second Obama administration.
In the thread about the NRA possibly supporting Harry Reid, I wrote, “the lesser of two evils is still evil”. Sarah Palin isn’t evil. She might not be your ideal candidate; but at the end of the day BETTER IS BETTER.
Icy Texan (80d2e7) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:11 amI did vote for McCain even though I don’t trust him because I knew how bad Obama would be.
That said, we know how terrible some of the Republican appointees to the SCOTUS have been. I think McCain would not have picked Sotomayor and Kagan, and I hope he would have done better, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if he didn’t pick at least one that was unsuitable in a conservative’s eye.
I grew up more as an independent, going race by race, but the direction of the Dems for the last 15 years makes it difficult to conceive wanting to vote one in. That said, what turns me against a candidate is when I see them lying to my face and being intellectually dishonest. I would find it hard to vote for an R who I was convinced had no core principles and could not be trusted.
That’s why I would have voted for Guiliani over McCain even though he is not a Social Conservative, as I thought I could trust his promise not to make things worse on that front.
I think it is true that one can narrow expectations to a dgree that you’re unlikely to vote, and I think it’s possible for the R’s to try to take voters for granted and push someone the majority really do not like, which is arrogant and foolish.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:58 amMy vote for McCain in 2008 was a true “hold-the-nose” moment. But considering the alternative, it was one I could be proud of.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 5:48 amIT, you just pointed out half of the reason why the “lesser of two evils is still evil” argument is always wrong. Namely, that “lesser of two evils” is a figure of speech, which we frequently apply to people or things that are merely problematic or undesirable in some way, not truly evil. The other half is that even when we are talking about actual evils, no one talks of the lesser evil in contexts where both evils can be reasonably avoided. When faced with an unfortunate but inevitable choice between two evils, if the lesser evil is still evil, what does that say about the greater evil?
Xrlq (1cd5bb) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:13 amPalin would make an excellent replacement for Steele, of course at this point anyone would
EricPWJohnson (cedf1d) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:16 amNo, no matter how much you like her, there’s more people that don’t.
Used to be, women should be silent in church. Now it’s they should be silent in a Presidential election.
nk (db4a41) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:24 amnk
true enough, but Palin supporters play the sex card constantly
EricPWJohnson (cedf1d) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:28 amWell, hell, Eric, that’s being played since Wyoming gave them the vote. 😉
nk (db4a41) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:30 amBut seriously, some lady whose last name is McCarthy, said no woman could get elected nationwide. She was right.
nk (db4a41) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:33 amPlease with feets, calling her in not so many words, an ‘easy woman’ with kishnevi, insisting on a standard that even Caesar’s wife, much less Margaret Thatcher couldn’t live under. I had grave reservations voting for McCain in part because I had seen this movie with Dole, a dozen years before.
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:45 amacerbic veteran, with complex personal history, admired by the press. Back then, they said Jack Kemp was exactly the Republican they liked forward thinking, progressive, until it’s not
I really really really really hate it, but I think NK is right. I have talked to so many people and tried to sell them on Palin back in October 2008. There are a lot of people who do not want a woman in that position.
Personally, I just can’t even understand this. Maternal instinct and reformer attitude… I think women can be amazing leaders. What’s unfortunate is that many of the people who have a problem with women in the Oval Office (or a ‘heartbeat’ away), are women.
Maybe Ann Coulter was right about universal suffrage.
And you guys are going to be wishing for Mccain when we nominate Huckabee.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:03 am“But seriously, some lady whose last name is McCarthy, said no woman could get elected nationwide.”
Jenny?
daleyrocks (1d0d98) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:11 amSo, Huck will be torturing Fox viewers six days a week, before that, well there’s always Lindsey Graham (I curse myself for saying that)
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:14 amHuckleberry doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning the nomination.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:16 am“Huckleberry doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning the nomination.
Comment by GeneralMalaise”
There’s a part of me that badly wants… no… needs to believe this.
And then there’s the part that has consistently been given political realities that are basically like Hucko winning the nomination. He’s still polling pretty well and he clearly is running.
Anyone who thinks the GOP will pick a great nominee, for sure, is fooling themselves. This is a big problem in my opinion.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:19 amSadly, daley, it probably was Jenny, lol.
IMHO, a woman may have to have been VP before the fairer sex can close the sale on the top slot. Not a qualifier in my book (I’d vote for the right woman), but may be for the majority.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:22 amWe shall see, his record in Arkansas, on pardons and paroles won’t stay hidden forever, his pork spending, his ‘splunge’ foreign policy
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:31 amDustin… what those of us on the right need to ensure is that we don’t allow the media/punditry to select the candidate for us, as they seemed to do in 2008. They do this through stealth and by what they say and – in some cases – don’t say.
Does anyone else recall how embittered McCain came across in the debates and how he somehow rose from the ashes of his campaign (heroically, according to the media) to win the nomination? It made no sense.
I could never support a graceless, no talent man like Huckabee. The man’s a religious bigot and a born statist in Republican clothing.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:31 amI also curse Fox News for giving the snake a national forum.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:34 amDear God in Heaven, please please please do not let that mushy blob of meaningless drivel, Huckabee, run for and win the GOP nomination. Amen.
Vivian Louise (643333) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:34 amHe’s so bad that he made me a Romney supporter and I really don’t like Romney very much (he has done a lot lately that has been really constructive and we could do far worse).
I agree with Gen Malaise on the potential for a huge problem with the media. You can say Huck’s record will come out, but he already went through an entire primary and it didn’t saturate apparently.
Consider: democrats have every reason to decide among their 3 very beloved candidates, Hillary, Edwards, and Messiah. They will be assisting the GOP in their primary decision in 2012, since our chairman and friends have done exactly nothing with the primary process save endorse a couple of complete jackasses.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:44 amI meant “democrats had every reason.”
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:45 amVL, GM and others: You can put me firmly in the f@#k Huck category, as well.
elissa (ac6653) — 7/5/2010 @ 8:45 amjust strange. Palin has said many times that all politicians will disappoint you in some way. You’re never going to be satisfied if you’re honestly writing Palin off for this, so you’re probably irrelevant. Either because you are lying and don’t really care about this, or because no politician can ever hope to be good enough for you
I’m writing Palin off the way I write off the entire GOP establishment. Flying her kids around with her is just one indication that she’s just another average politician. (BTW, I was not aware that she repaid those. Thx for the correction.) A lot of people seem to think that she’s somehow better than the average politician, that she’s not part of the GOP establishment. That’s false. and that’s what I’m reacting to.
She probably would be a good RNC chair, provided she can pick the right people for staff, and I have no idea, good or bad, whether she can do that. How many people bother with Romney’s or Huckabee’s tweets? Her gaffes (such as they are)are not like Steele’s: they reinforce her image as a just plain folks kind of person. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them were actually calculated stunts. (Not saying they were, of course.) But a lot of that is image. And a lot of her accomplishments were overstated. And at least some of her foreign policy views are, IMO, plain wrong.
She is an average politicians, and average politicians fall into the trap of liking power and liking the ability to attract and control the flow of money; they end up liking K Street.
Which is why they will not fix the mess we’re in now, because the mess is not that we’re facing a Leftie agenda being imposed on us: the mess is that we are facing an elite that wants to stay in power because it likes being in power. Some of that elite is part of the Democratic party; but an awful lot of it is part of the Republican party. That’s why there’s no difference between the two parties.
To quote from Dustin upthread:
Somehow the GOP became very much the powerful party it was sent into power to thwart. The idea that we can dip our toes into K street to better fund our reforms just doesn’t make any sense. A truly limited government is not what GE and BP and a long line of other lobbyist funding companies really want
Here in Florida, Rubio is a good example of that: while Speaker of the [state] House, he got himself immersed in the local version of the K Street ethos. If he’s lucky the scandal will hurt Crist more than it hurts him, but it’s already got the former state chair of the GOP party facing criminal charges. But he’s almost certainly the sort of politician who doesn’t mind having power and spending other people’s money (although he repaid it when the facts got to be public knowledge). At this point I consider Crist to have more integrity and honesty than Rubio. (That’s a slam at Rubio, not a compliment to Crist.)
It’s not a matter of “cocktail party” versus “tea party” controlling the GOP; it’s a matter of getting rid of people who like to be in power, and replacing them with people who understand they have no right to be in power unless they do what they were elected to do.
And right now I classify the GOP as having almost all candidates and people in office (at the national level) who are at best weak conservatives, who talk the talk in order to con the folks back home but don’t walk the walk when it comes time to turn the talk into action.
When the Republicans start running candidates who don’t seem attracted by the idea of having power, but honestly want to get their ideas into practice, then I’ll start voting Republican.
It is also a historical fact that the Libertarians have only succeeded in electing Far-Left Radicals, by either voting for Democrat/Progressives as in ‘08,
and/or by depriving a not-perfect-but-satisfactory conservative Republican of their vote.
There has never been a Libertarian who has attained significant office without flying a ‘false flag’ as a Republican,
and there probably never will be – except as a Free Doper Democrat.
Last part is true; but I think you’re overstating the number of people who vote for the LP or the Constitution party. The only year that might have been true in Florida was 2000, and I believe the LP got less votes in 2000 (and in 2008) than it did in 2004. In fact, in 2000, the LP got less votes than Nader’s Green Party, so even there the impact was minimal.
kishnevi (2c3adb) — 7/5/2010 @ 9:05 amI’m with Stash, kishnevi, and ropelight. I’m done voting for Democrats. We need a system which allows a wider variety of political parties to flourish. Specialization promotes efficiency and competition promotes responsiveness to the demands of consumers. I tend to think that these principles hold true when it comes to representation.
This is obviously an overstatement, and I hope everyone will take it as such: the parties don’t own me. I own them. They won’t realize that if I continue to vote for them despite their distorted grasp of the constituent-representative relationship.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 7/5/2010 @ 12:49 pmLeviticus,
But your side has to win. It’s a moral imperative because the other side is foolish and/or evil. If you marginalize yourself by not aligning with a major party (the correct one of course, who are predominately good and righteous with only a few bad apples the worst of whom is 10x better than the best of your opponents), you are throwing away your vote and forfeit the right to complain about anything that happens anywhere in the country/world. And, it’s your fault anyway for allowing evil to flourish. Your vote is at least half-a-vote for EVIL!
Or so I’m told.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 1:11 pmWhat a revoltin’ development, lumped in with krazy kishnevi and supported by Leviticus. Two absurd situations I never thought could possibly occur, and in the same comment no less.
Truly, we live in interesting times. Stash is an altogether different kettle of fish. He makes sense and I respect his opinions. He can say what he thinks of the odd assortment.
As for the opinion of Leviticus, I disagree, we don’t need an assortment of additional political parties, we need some sunlight and grassroots representation in the candidate selection process. It’s where the intent of Primary elections is subverted and made subservient to the decisions of the few, rather that to the will of the majority.
That’s the bottleneck. That’s where the establishment insiders operate in the shadows, it’s where they substitute their preferences for those of the party members. And it’s the same place where the solution to our current conundrum resides.
ropelight (4b0868) — 7/5/2010 @ 1:54 pmBetween a rock and a hard place, as usual. Us pie-in-th-sky dreamers will just have to learn to live with ourselves.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think it’s unfair to expect a few basic things from politician’s as prerequisites for our support – honesty and responsiveness come to mind. You’ve already pointed that out, and I agree wholeheartedly. If the two parties can’t follow through on such basic principles, they can go fuck themselves – if they can’t represent me, I’ll write in the name of someone who could.
I regret my vote for Obama; I deeply regret that my first presidential vote was a vote for a lesser of two evils, for a “pragmatism” which I didn’t really buy but wasn’t able to shake off. I’ve shaken it off now: that’s at least one thing I could thank Obama for. And now I’m doing work in NM to try to force a switch in the state legislature from a two-party system to a multi-party one – a system where a multiplicity of options will force some semblance of accountability from those who make political promises.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:01 pm“It’s not a matter of “cocktail party” versus “tea party” controlling the GOP; it’s a matter of getting rid of people who like to be in power, and replacing them with people who understand they have no right to be in power unless they do what they were elected to do.”
I am pretty sure most people mean this when they say that.
But all politicians will screw up to some extent. Palin has actually cleaned house against partisan interests. I don’t consider her to be a savant or the perfect leader… I just think she’s shown quite a bit of resolve in the face of a lot of pressure. I think we need someone who can simply handle that kind of pressure cooker (don’t reply with her resignation, which bolsters my argument for her ability to make the right call in a tough situation).
She’s gaffe prone. Her family is weird. Not good things, but the way she handles it is good. I hope we can find someone better, but if we cannot, I’m going to vote for her in the primary. We need someone who is a true believer in actually limiting the damn government without being a dogmatic and thoughtless leader. Someone who can lead by the force of will, instead of personal genius (Carter and Hoover were far more intelligent than their administrations).
While I agree that Palin wants power, I think we’re going to have a tough time finding candidates for the White House who don’t. I think her efforts to repair her image make a lot of sense in the face of the unfair attacks on her.
I agree that we need to get career politicians out of DC. I don’t see who the competition to Palin is on this or how that relates, but if the choice came up, I’m with you on that principle.
I guess I’ll repeat that she doesn’t appear to be a strong option for chairman, though.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:02 pmThis is my major grief with the GOP. I believe they would follow their stated platforms more closely if they stopped playing good-ole-boy politics in the backrooms.
By the way, notice how you see that exact same argument I made above from both sides? And each side criticizes the other for making it, while applauding its effectiveness, and ultimately denying their own alphabetism.
I’m not slamming the pragmatists, especially the ones having a reasonable discussion on this thread. It’s the ones who keep attempting to shout down and belittle other approaches that deserve slamming. It’s been a while, but kishnevi and I had several discussions in the past and I’ve found him sincere and honest. We frequently disagreed on approaches and conclusions, but I’d have a beer with him any day. Same with Leviticus. And EB and elissa and many others who discuss topics in good faith.
Some of the alphabetists here posing as conservatives, not in a million years.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:26 pmThe important point, Stashiu3, is analyzing one’s own actions, as you urged me to do.
I think we all wish to debate or discuss with honor. But it is easy–too easy?—to get one’s own ego tangled up. It’s something I will watch for in myself.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/5/2010 @ 2:29 pmThank you, Stashiu. Although it would have to be a good whiskey, not beer. Beer does things to my digestive system that are not mentionable in polite company.
I think my main difference from most of the people here is that I think the corruption in our political system is more systemic, and runs far deeper, than other people do.
Deep down at heart, I’m an anarchist. I don’t believe that anyone should have power over anyone else. But since also I like to maintain contact with reality, I know that anarchism won’t work, because there are too many people around whose goal is, in one way or another, large or small, to gain and keep power over other people. And right now they are endemic, if not epidemic, throughout our political system.
kishnevi (e9a2a0) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:01 pm#235 Eric Blair:
If you would like, I can relieve you of that burden.
For a price, of course. Reasonable rates, and relatively effective at letting you know when your Stetson has outgrowed your carton of cow juice in the ‘fridge.
😉
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:04 pmI’ve always had confidence in your honor.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:07 pmStash, if you ever swing through Albuquerque, NM, I’d be proud to buy you a beer – provided that said hypothetical swing came sometime after next Monday, so I could do it legally.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:10 pmThat was originally directed at EB, but actually applies to all three of you. I got called away between writing it and hitting submit. Still works. 🙂
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:11 pmI will do that if I’m in the area, promise. The second one is on me (maybe literally, I’m a lightweight in my old age).
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:20 pmEW, that was a good one. Cue that “I got spurs, that jingle jangle jingle” business.
When I was growing up, my mother’s stepfather was a genuine cowboy (though in Utah, Wyoming, and Northern California—does that count?). Grandpa was foreman at a ranch in Northern California and he was a no nonsense kind of guy, but with honor to spare. He had strong opinions about Stetson hats and the people who wear them.
Um. I don’t have the right to wear his kind of Stetson!
Stashiu3, thank you as always.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:40 pmThe way I read it, she got into politics, not to seek power, from the PTA to the city council where she found corrupt practices, even among her sponsor, Carney, to the Mayorship, whose defeat was spun later as some ‘Christian right’ campaign, to running for Lt. Governor, ending up on the oil commission where she ferreted out the wrongdoing of the chief, and resigned, to where she challenged the unfair dealings of Murkowski re the pipelineand the PTT tax. And she made good on that promise as Gov
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:44 pmDoes someone think Palin didn’t do what she was elected to do in Alaska? I thought she closely matched her promises. Am I mistaken?
When we talk about throwing out the bums who broke the faith placed in them to reform, does it makes sense to add Palin to the list just because she is … I guess I don’t even know the basis for the comparison.
We don’t have to make these generalizations. While I said earlier that it was on the GOP to earn Ropelight’s vote back, that’s not a necessary calculation.
We can look at individual candidates who keep their promises instead of treating the GOP as a homogeneous mass of corruption. I think it’s kinda lazy to insist the GOP isn’t ‘there’ yet if there’s some corruption in it. Just don’t bother with candidates you don’t believe in.
Are all GOP candidates weak conservatives? I think that’s true of some ugly examples, but there are so many legit reformers who will never get off the ground if we don’t make a leap of faith. And there’s the other problem: this country is divided and that means in some places, we will need to support a Scott Brown type, who is no con artist, but is a weak conservative. A coalition that works depends greatly on the large margin between a Kennedy or a Brown… A Boxer or a Fiorina. I think that’s where my whole argument falls apart. Realistically, we have to support RINOs while we also clean house of the corrupt.
I note these aren’t the same thing. Things get pretty unworkable when we conflate corruption and ‘bad politician’ with ‘weak conservative’. Weak conservatives are an essential ingredient in saving our country because or our nation’s ideological divide.
I get that Palin is gaffe prone and she did endorse Mccain over Hayworth (a defendable call on her part). I don’t think it’s fair to say she’s corrupt. In fact, that’s a failure of critical thinking and being informed, in my opinion.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:50 pmWell said, Ian.
I think it’s unfortunate that when Palin comes up, people go on and on about ending the greedy corrupt without recognizing that Palin is a good example of a normal person who is not corrupt and got into politics for the right reasons. Until she actually breaks promises, it’s unfair to cast her aside.
Any real reformer will get the same treatment. All of them will be seen as dumb because they are outside the aristocracy.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 3:52 pmLook in our state, we have a trader in these toxic mortgages, and a head of a company implicated in
medicare fraud, moving up ahead, because of the disgust with traditional politicians.
As for Rubio, I haven’t been terribly sanguine about the Florida legislature, even though they are GOP, in my view they are like the Alaskans without
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:02 pmthe polar bears. But he leans more in the right, rather than the wrong
It’s been an enlightening and eye-opening discussion all around, I think. Thanks everyone and especially Stashiu! BTW, what is the Patterico record for longest thread evah?
elissa (ac6653) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:05 pmTie between every thread that Cyrus ever commented on. 😉
Patterico might know, I’ve got no idea.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:13 pmI think it approaches 800!
AD - RtR/OS! (6e3949) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:30 pmThere was one about the Monty Hall problem that approached 1000. Don’t think I ever exceeded 1000.
Patterico (c218bd) — 7/5/2010 @ 4:44 pmDustin/Ian–From what I can tell, Palin is the sort of reformer who, once she got into office, realized she liked being in office–or at least the limelight.
When I said “weak conservative” I probably misspoke. False conservative would be the better word. I can live with a weak conservative who admits he’s a weak conservative–what Crist was; what he is now, only God knows and He’s probably not sure all the time. Rather that than a superficially strong conservative who’s more interested in keeping himself in office, which is what much of the GOP establishment seems to be, and which Rubio seems to have become*.
I’d like to think that that the Tea Party will get honest conservatives into office, or at least prominence. Rand Paul might turn out well. Right now I don’t know of any GOP establishment figure I could trust with my vote. There are two reasons they might oppose Obama’s agenda. First, they think it’s full of Really Bad Ideas. That’s what motivates you guys here. Second, they think that opposition is a good means of winning elections (meaning getting power), whether or not Obama’s agenda is full of Really Bad Ideas. I often get the impression that for much of the GOP establishment, the second reason is the main motivation.
*For those not fully abreast of Florida politics, Rubio was discovered to have charged some personal expenses to his GOP credit card instead of his own credit card. He said he did it simply because his own card was maxed out, or by mistake, and paid the money back–but, as I understand it, only after the matter became public knowledge. Meanwhile the ex-chief of the Florida GOP, Greene, who was put there by Crist and stayed there with Crist’s backing despite a lot of discontent in the party ranks, has been indicted on charges of embezzling state GOP funds. I’ve seen allegations in the press that Crist may have had an idea of what was going on.
Rubio is not directly involved in this in the way Crist is. Meanwhile, today there was a news report today that Greene intends to call as witnesses several VIPs including Crist and Atty Genl. McCollum, who is now running for the GOP nomination for governor to replace Crist. His opponent in the primary is the health care executive Ian mentioned. The toxic mortgage trader is running in the Democratic primary for senator against Kendrick Meek. I have no idea of how truly conservative the health care CEO is. I don’t know how liberal the mortgage trader is. All I’ve seen of them is some nice ads–they are, at this stage, self financing their campaigns.
Ian, please correct me if I got any of the above wrong.
kishnevi (fb9343) — 7/5/2010 @ 5:35 pmHe’s the Inspector Clouseau of politics.
GeneralMalaise (9cf017) — 7/5/2010 @ 5:44 pmGreer you mean, Greene is the toxic debt roulette salesman, Who knows about Scott’s real bonafides,
the McClatchy press is going soft on him, now, whereas 10 years ago, they savaged McCollum, for
the temerity of challenging Nelson
On other points, I find you remarkably misinformed on the Governor’s record, in ways I couldn’t have fathomed, really only the Alaska Dispatch which features her No.1, nemesis, Dan Fagan, carries anything close to the distorted view of her tenure in office. I try to be charitable, but you’re really as bad as bad as Mr. Feets, clogging up this thread with detritus
ian cormac (93d17d) — 7/5/2010 @ 5:47 pmkish, if the lure of office were her primary consideration, why would she leave?
AD - RtR/OS! (6e3949) — 7/5/2010 @ 5:50 pmI mean, who doesn’t go through a family bankruptcy now and then.
Plus, her political supporters would have paid for the whole thing…oh, wait a minute, isn’t that one of the things she was being accused of…never mind.
#243 Eric Blair:
Where exactly do you think cowboys come from? Is there something different about the cattle of Utah, Wyoming and California that I don’t know about?
You’ve actually left me quite puzzled with that comment.
I’ve even met honest to goodness cowboys that originally hailed from Newww Yorrrkkk Ciiity! Now, that’ll bend your brain sideways!
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 7/5/2010 @ 6:21 pmkishnevi,
you know, I don’t really even disagree with you.
Palin probably seeks power for a career’s sake, at least partially.
Even if she didn’t, I am not pretending she is the ideal perfect candidate. I probably come across differently, but I do not like the attitude of Palin worship that reminds me of Obama worship. She isn’t the cure and she isn’t a saint.
I just think she’s shown some backbone and I liked her results. I would love to see some kind of ideal world without career politicians, too, but for now, we should consider that Palin’s downsides are more than made up for by the fact that she hasn’t broken her promises in my opinion.
I’m not going to pretend you’re wrong about my faults as far as I am a partisan republican who has a personal problem with democrats and how this cycle of alphabetism motivates me.
Such is life. Let’s hope the Tea Party brings some reformers in.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/5/2010 @ 7:26 pmtrue enough, but Palin supporters play the sex card constantly
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 7/5/2010
— Wow, do I ever hope that you are NOT referring to me with that comment!
Icy "Michelle Pfeiffer is My Goddess" Texan (4fa53c) — 7/6/2010 @ 2:30 am“UPDATE BY PATTERICO: Let me get this straight: Steele makes too many gaffes . . . so let’s get Sarah Palin?”
Do you have a point ‘Rico? No? Pobrecito.
gary gulrud (790d43) — 7/6/2010 @ 9:57 amIcy Texan,
first of all, where in Texas is it icy? Your beer freezer?
Second, it was playing the ‘race card’ to say opposition to Obamacare or participation in a Tea Party was racist. But it wasn’t playing the race card to say school segregation or Byrd’s 14 hour filibuster was racist.
It would be playing the ‘sex card’ that EPWJ is whining about if Palin supporters were unjustified. But they are playing the ‘reality card’. Palin has been treated like garbage because she’s an attractive and happy mom of an imperfect and American family, and successful anyway. Some criticism of Palin isn’t sexist at all, of course, but the ‘sex card’ is usually employed against the likes of Andi Sullivan, who simply wouldn’t be this unhinged about Palin or Hillary if she were a dude.
Palin supporters are already sick of race hustlers, so it’s clever to tell them they have to stomach bigots or they are the same. I’d ignore that crap.
If EPWJ had a specific example that didn’t make him look ridiculous, he would have named it.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 7/6/2010 @ 10:06 amThe beer freezer — frosty mugs always at the ready — is EXACTLY the place where it is icy here, Dustin!
As for your other comments, you’re preaching to the choir, brother! It just annoys the hell out of me when people on the right play that card.
[I first posted on this site as Independent Conservative (there’s no “R” next to MY name). I changed it to Icy Truth (I see the truth; the cold hard truth). When I moved from Arizona (where YES, I supported “Meghan’s daddy”) to Texas I altered it to reflect the change in location.]
Icy Texan (5b976b) — 7/6/2010 @ 11:19 pmDustin has obviously never been in the Panhandle in February, or in Dallas when a cold-front has rolled down from Canada and you can watch the cars slide down the overpass approaches that are coated in black-ice.
AD - RtR/OS! (1087df) — 7/6/2010 @ 11:41 pmDrew, I live in the childhood hometown of George and Laura Bush, and in the year and nine months that I’ve been here I’ve seen several ice days and five (non-consecutive) snow days!
Icy Texan (5b976b) — 7/7/2010 @ 12:49 am