Yowsah!Posted by Rob De Witt at March 15, 2011 11:18 AM
That was a bruising smack down. How did we go from Reagan to Pansy Patrol in so short a period of time? I quit reading these egg heads about 5 years ago because they just weren't pissed enough. Always minding their language. Must be something in the air and water of DC.
Bobby speaks for me as well.
Go Sarah! We need you.
The Buckley family went to the Pansy Patrol in just one generation--William F. to Christopher.
The so-called "intellectuals" of the right are scared stiff that Pailin will make it, listen as Reagan did, to their simpering advice, and then pay no attention to it at all, but start knocking heads together to get the budget under control and pride back into Americans.Posted by St. Thor at March 15, 2011 3:04 PM
Thank you for writing that. They can't understand her courage. She is a mama lion!Posted by Carol schumacher at March 15, 2011 3:24 PM
"Journalists" never can resist putting their thumb on the butcher's scale. The best of them are bought and paid for.
The trouble with politics is that one never gets exactly what one wants. Hell, even George Washington sent the army after the whiskey distillers.Posted by Casca at March 15, 2011 3:26 PM
I'm with Bob. I'll work for the (R) candidate no matter who since the alternative is Barry Butt-boy Soetoro; but I'll do it with a sense of shame if a RINO or close facsimile is the nominee instead of our man Sarah.Posted by raincityjazz at March 15, 2011 5:33 PM
F*ckin A ditty bag. I'm with you, Bobby.
SubsunkPosted by Subsunk at March 15, 2011 5:57 PM
Sarah? In a heartbeat!Posted by Milo at March 15, 2011 7:40 PM
Krauthammer and the rest have theirs. Sarah is as much a threat to them as she is to the Ds.
A common lament over the last 60 years has been that there's no essential difference between the parties so what's the big deal? There's a lot of truth in that. The Democrats represented the interests of labor and a gaggle of interests on the left while the Republicans advanced the interests of big business. Both parties saw the means to their ends lodged in a more powerful central government.
That's changing. They finally overplayed their hand with the radical extension of power of the Obama administration. You may not see it that way but that's how it looks to the people in the Tea Party movement.
We are now seeing not a struggle to divvy up the spoils but rather a fundamental reassessment of the purpose and direction of government. This movement is succeeding as few movements in our history. The main analogous ones are the abolition movement and the temperance movement, both of which resulted in major unrest.
It has progressed rapidly and strongly. The 2010 election was the largest swing in power in 70 years - at all levels of government. This barely 18 months after the first gatherings in April, 2009. It will continue and grow stronger. Look at the Tea Party - look at the hair. It's gray and white and blue and none. These are not young people flitting from sensation to sensation. They are the solid citizens who do not disrupt their lives to get involved in politics on a whim. They are also accustomed to seeing things through. Experience teaches you that.
As to Ms. Palin - I vividly remember what was said about Ronald Reagan. Amiable dunce, unelectable, electoral suicide, bring him on - we'll mop the floor with him. The Tea Party is not about governing - it is about disassembling the government. We don't need a policy wonk, we need a leader. When the Wicked Witch of the North (TM) can write on Facebook from her igloo and immediately dominate the national conversation - that's a leader.
"Something is happening here, but you don't know what it is - do you, Mister Jones?".Posted by Roy Lofquist at March 15, 2011 8:56 PM
I think the establishment Repubs are trying to sell Lisa Murkowski as the new Sarah Palin. Hilarious on so many levels.Posted by RedCarolina at March 15, 2011 9:03 PM
For a very long time, I have been confused and dismayed by the Republicans turning on Sarah Palin. Charles Krauthammer... saying the things he has about her... made no sense (and just aobut everything he has said before, I have agreed with)
It made no sense.
I understand things better now and where my interests and the interests of the Republican Party (and their intellectuals) diverge. I put my trust in Republicans and got into the habit of agreeing with them on most everything.
On the one hand, I would NEVER vote for a Democrat. They have sold their souls decades ago. But now I'm starting to question the Republicans too.
Good Post on Bobby, Gerard.Posted by cond0010 at March 15, 2011 11:41 PM
Dear Mr. Vanderleun: 1. Wonder what Bobby, the killer-for-his-country-with-his-own-two-bare-hands, would do if you showed him Reagan was a flaming liberal up to at least 1950. He'd take out his .357 I'm sure, but whether he'd use it on himself is another matter. Not manly enough. Best to kill himself with his bare hands. More macho... If the GOP can't accept converts of the caliber of Krauthammer, not only is it in trouble, but so is the country. The Democrats certainly aren't going to dump The One. Nor is the Tea Party going to run a successful third party challenge to the Presidency. Such an event hasn't happened since 1860 and that obscure fellow A. Lincoln. That was a four way split. Not even T. Roosevelt could pull it off in 1912, and he was even better known and far more qualified than SP.
2. Red Carolina, could you provide us with links to the establishment GOP who are selling the odious Lisa Murkowski as the new SP?
3. Roy Lofquist: "We don't need a policy wonk, we need a leader." This will come as a jolt to Paul Ryan, a 200 proof policy wonk. Are you reading him out of the GOP? Like you, I remember the scornful mirth against Reagan in 1980 (and 1976, and 1968...) This changed to "He'll be in over his head in no time," when he was elected in 1980. It is fortunate that RR lacked a Carteresque voracity for minutiae, thainking that would substitute for vision. But he had thought long and hard about what he believed in, and was able to carry out much of his vision. We are better for it today. That's a leader. So is Scott Walker's standing up to the public employee unions in Wisconsins, something SP did not do while Governor. Are you saying that Walker has faced a less intense struggle than SP did as Governor? He has not had so long a fight as SP has, but time will cure that. Even now, he is facing a recall campaign against the GOP senators who voted for his proposal. Come January 2012, when SW becomes eligible for his own personal recall campaign, he will face that battle too. He is and will continue to, face ferocious press savagery. I don't doubt that he'll face that too. Unless he resigns. Show of hands: how many think Scott Walker will resign?
4. Roy Lofquist: "Krauthammer and the rest have theirs. Sarah is as much a threat to them as she is to the Ds." What does that mean? That Krauthammer takes money to disparage SP? That she will somehow threaten his position on TV?
5. Raincityjazz: "I'll work for the (R) candidate no matter who since the alternative is Barry Butt-boy Soetoro; but I'll do it with a sense of shame if a RINO or close facsimile is the nominee instead of our man Sarah."
This guarantees that whatever you think, you won't be taken seriously in the primaries. I don't think I could vote for SP in the primaries because of her resignation. That doesn't mean I feel any need to disparage her, save when her idolaters proclaim her as "The One, 2012." Another show of hands: how many on this thread have donated to her legal defense fund , putting their money where there eharts and mouths are? SP has many merits, and has been badly treated. It is a mistake to support someone solely for the enemies she has. But if SP is nominated I will work for her, donate money, and vote for her without hesitation. My beef is less with SP than for the frenzies of her followers. This frenzy, which reduces her followers to failing both rabies and IQ tests, does SP no good. SP's followers are not enough to win an election by themselves. Even if they were, what is that but another page out of The One's playbook. Those who want to get rid of The One, should remember 2007-08. The Dems were in a perfect fury to rid the nation of Geo. W., and many latched on to The One, savaging all opposition to him. How many Democrats who voted for The One in 2008 will do so again in 2012? Fewer, I think. They may just stay home. I see the same phenomenon with SP's followers.
6. Jewel: If "pissed enough" is what you want, the Left has all you could dream of, and more. If you want the "Bobbys" of the world, well, there's plenty there. I'll stick with Walker, who does not feel the need for profanity laced tirades, or hyperbolic threats of violence. He says what he plans to do, steps forward, and executes the difficult task. He won't always succeed, but his effort and diligence command respect. Why on earth would anyone want to be "pissed" in the manner of the Left? They are deranged because they have nowhere to go. All roads lead downhill for them. For the Right, it's a question of stopping them now before they can do even more damage, and then begin the daunting task of reconstruction, amybe even with the guidance of despised wonks such as Paul Ryan.
7. St. Thor: "The so-called "intellectuals" of the right are scared stiff that Pailin will make it, listen as Reagan did, to their simpering advice, and then pay no attention to it at all, but start knocking heads together to get the budget under control and pride back into Americans."
Note that SP, as Governor, had a nominally GOP legislature. Yet she couldn't get that same legislature to revise the odious law that allowed the filing of bogus ethics complaints. These complaints drove her from office. Her departure is a flaw against her---and for those who cry, "Not so!" I renew my challenge to show me a Gov in 225 years of American history who resigned for personal reasons (not health related, nor resigning because of election to higher office, as Kennedy did), and was later in higher office. Nelson Rockefeller is a terrible precedent. But an even bigger flaw is her inability to a) grit her teeth and ride out the ethics complaint storm or b) get the law changed to stop it.
For those who denounce this style of thinking as "concern trolling" remember it commands at least one vote. There are many more votes of all different kinds. If you think that winning these votes for SP with profanity, hyperbolic threats, and denunciations of any questioning as idiocy, or sinister corruption will work---well, we have yet another disagreement.
8. Francis Porretto: you are right. This nation needs SP if for no other reason tdhan to show the liberal bigots that their tantrums aren't enough to silence opposition. But the way her career has unfolded is a tragedy, for her, for the Right, and for the nation. How much better if she had quietly declined McC's invitation in 2008, stuck to the governorship (likely with far fewer if any, ethics complaints) and accepted the Veep nomination in 2012. There, her phenomenal talent for connecting with people would not have been the sole asset of the GOP presidential campaign as it was in 2008, and would have been put to much better use. But the moving finger has writ---
Roy said: "The Tea Party is not about governing - it is about disassembling the government."
Does it surprise anyone here that bureaucrats and the people whose careers depend on bureaucrats are opposed to reducing bureaucracy? Me neither.Posted by Mikey NTH at March 16, 2011 10:33 AM
Dear Mr. Koster,
Sorry about taking so long to respond.
Reading Paul Ryan out of the GOP? Certainly and most emphatically not. Our government, by design, is diffuse. We have three branches at the federal level and that is the model for the states, counties and cities. We function best when all cylinders are firing.
I believe that the GOP has put together the most effective national leadership in my memory - goes back to Truman. Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, Ryan, Christie, Walker, Kasich, Martinez, Fallin - the list goes on and on.
What is needed at this point is an inspirational leader. There are exceedingly rough waters ahead. We need someone who can really connect with the folks who will bear the brunt of the storm. Reagan connected. He also coopted the opposition with his folksy humor and sheer optimism. Palin is the only one whom I have seen who is somewhat Reaganesque.
I suggest that you look into her actual history rather than depend upon the SNL parodies. She rose to the Governorship by eviscerating the Republican /big oil establishment in Alaska. She actually explained her resignation rather succinctly - the well meaning but pernicious ethics laws of Alaska made it impossible for her to fulfill her duties. "Everybody" said that was just an excuse but see if you can't find the clip of her actual statement.
As to Krauthammer et alia - they are part and parcel of the establishment. They are on record over a number of years on a number of positions. The ruling party is going to give way to the country party. Nobody likes change when you're on top. They will fight it tooth and nail. It's going to be bloody.
RoyPosted by Roy Lofquist at March 16, 2011 8:03 PM
I really haven't heard Palin say one thing that is going to turn this county around. Choosing the least worse candidate is not going to cut it anymore. Have a program, shoot the moon, provide the details, or shut up. All of them.
In all fairness, Wilson, it is still early innings. Hell, it isn't even warmup time.Posted by vanderleun at March 16, 2011 10:11 PM
Talk about missing the point, Gregory, her legal defense fund was disallowed even though it did not conflict with the ethics code, interesting she has been the only person subject to it, that's a remarkable detail. Who has been at the forefront of the ethical bankruptcy of the health care plan, at
the fraud that is the drilling moratorium, or QE 2, that has helped set the middle east on fire,
It is not early to judge, it is late.
There has never been a time when so many ordinary people and organizations were leading, and politicians were following--reluctantly. The nominating process has not even contained an outstanding individual for thirty years. We will look at the usual suspects not only in vain, but to the detriment of a solution.Posted by james wilson at March 17, 2011 10:03 AM
Gerard has you on the question of whether it is early or late. Seriously, if we don't know she's running, in fact we don't have anything more firm than the most gaseous wisp of an indication she might possibly be interested maybe. How can you call it "late"?
Shoot, I'm over thirty-five and I'm unqualified in all KINDS of ways. But I can fill out that "don't bow to anybody when you're the President" thing just fine.
Wow. That's an awesome rant.
I'm not a veteran, but I can tell she's a real leader. Even I can see that.
And I also saw that the left was absolutely terrified of her in early September 2008.Posted by rickl at March 17, 2011 4:41 PM