Be Afraid of Palin

31 responses so far

• 1 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 3:53 pm

  (*Headache*)

  “They – we! – are afraid…”

  Let’s shout it out together, kids… one… two… THREE:

  “Cognitive dissonance…!!!”

  David. You look upon yourself as representing the Republican Establishment. You see yourself… your “establishmentarian” ideals… as the way to move the Party forward to victory.

  Yet…

  (*HEADACHE*)

  You seem unaware that it was the fine folks behind the “Republican Establishment” 2001-2008 who lost the trust, respect, and support of the American People who transferred their votes to the Democratic Party.

  You’re like the guy who knows he’s lost, yet refuses to stop and get directions – rather, you simply mash on the peddle and drive full speed in the same wrong direction you’ve been heading, getting further and further from your claimed destination.

  BILL

• 2 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 3:58 pm

  You’re being a little inconsistent here. A couple of days ago you were suggesting or at least implying that it would be a good thing if Palin was nominated and the inevitable happened because it would essentially act as a purgative. I like you think she would have a good chance of getting the nomination, not a lock, I just don’t think she could sustain a yearlong campaign on rambling cracker barrel bromides, but definitely a chance. The problem of course is another handful of Republican senators and a few representatives would go down with the good ship Sarah. Not that I think this is going to happen for the simple reason as you said the other day, Palin is trading in politics for celebrity where there are bigger bucks and she doesn’t actually have to do any governing. She’s already essentially part of the Judge Judy circus so why not make it official. The problem for your former mentor who is really one of the most dishonest pundits out there, is that he like many other right wing spinners are very heavily invested in Palin. They found her, in the face of all evidence they deified her, and now when she makes her inanity patently obvious they are locked into outright defenses of varying degrees of hilarity or rationalisations of one sort and another. Even the ones like Krauthammer who realize what a disaster she is are compelled to join in the disingenuousness.

• 3 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 4:04 pm

  William Barker // Jul 7, 2009 at 3:53 pm
  “You seem unaware that it was the fine folks behind the “Republican Establishment” 2001-2008 who lost the trust, respect, and support of the American People who transferred their votes to the Democratic Party.”

  …….And you seem blissfully unaware that it was policies that you daily espouse in these pages that caused the outcome you describe.

• 4 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 5:10 pm

  Re: Ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 4:04 pm –

  Wrong again, Otto.

  (*SHRUG*)

  Once again, sharing my personal history, I re-registered as a Democrat in early 2006 and voted to fire my then RINO congresswoman Sue Kelly by voting to hire her opponent, Left winger John Hall.

  Once again, sharing my personal history, I voted against BOTH Barak Obama AND John McCain by voting FOR Bob Barr.

  The Republican Congresses of 2001-2006 certainly WEREN’T espousing nor acting upon MY policy preferences nor was Bush most of the time.

  Frum on the other hand worked for Bush. (*SHRUG*)

  Try to keep up, Otto. I know the voices in your head keep on screaming at you… just take your pills and CONCENTRATE on the words on the pages here.

  (*WINK*)

  BILL

• 5 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 5:44 pm

  barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 5:10 pm

  ……..It hardly matters what you’re registered as or who you voted for…. You constantly espouse policies that Karl Rove would be happy to endorse; treat Palin as if she is the second coming; and attack the current administration at every turn…the evidence of your worldview is totally conclusive I’m afraid…….It’s true the light bulb has only recently come on for David when he and the GOP establishment realized folks like you going off the reservation but that’s another issue entirely.

• 6 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 6:56 pm

  Otto… do you wanna be sent back to “time out?”

  Now I’m humoring you (to an extent… only to an extent) based upon my being one hell of a tolerant guy – a damned nice guy actually.

  What I won’t tolerate, though, is your just ignoring reality if you hope to have a reasonably civil exchange with me.

  Your posts show brief gleamings of intelligence 15%-20% of the time – so I know you’re capable of rational discussion. All I’m asking is that you concentrate and respond to reality, not your internal rewrite of it. Karl Rove and I share very few intersects except in the broadest sense. Rove is the ultimate “Bushie;” obviously I’m not.

  (*SIGH*)

  Anyway… enough wasting of time (good mood or not). David. How’bout you? Care to take part in your own thread…??? No need to be afraid of little ‘ol me.

  BILL

• 7 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 7:05 pm

  barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 6:56 pm

  …….Your conceptions of civility are apparent to all Barking…….As is your weltschaunung from your extensive public opinionating………we all try to keep our fear of you under control…..after all you know so much stuff about everything and have an intelligence level so far above those of us who are only intelligent 15% or on a good day 20% of the time

• 8 anniemargret // Jul 7, 2009 at 7:33 pm

  David Frum is correct about Palin. As a Democrat, I wish I could be as amused as some of my party members are, but I’m not. Increasingly I read Republicans writing on blogs teasing Democrats that we are ‘afraid’ of Palin, and therefore, they must unleash her on the general public, insist on her capturing the media attention, and worst of all, vote her in place as a would-be President . Am I scared? Absolutely. Like Mr. Frum explains, her obvious incompetency, her inability to speak coherently and articulately, her anti-intellectualism, her penchant for small town giggle and wink, her provincialism, her lack of education and by this, I mean not so much formal education, but a lack of understanding of serious issues, ad infinitum….the list is endless… means she is unfit for public office. Her latest drama of resigning before her term was up, and her absurd reasons for doing so, just underscores her incompetence. She wasn’t having a good time. She is used to the limelight; to people adoring her . She is used to dishing it out – in reams – but has a really hard time taking flack herself. She can’t stand the heat. Republicans have some soul-searching to do. As a Democrat who grew up in a Republican household, who voted for Ronald Reagan, who admires many conversatives on some of the issues, who sincerely loves this country and wants the best for all Americans, I am appalled at the disingenuous defense that is rising up within the ranks of so-called conservatives. There is, after all, nothing really conservative about her, is there?

• 9 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 7:58 pm

  anniemargret // Jul 7, 2009 at 7:33 pm
  “There is, after all, nothing really conservative about her, is there?”

  …….In a word no…to take one aspect David Brooks had a superb column in the NYT this morning on the disappearance of dignity from the political arena and its re-emergence with the president…..Palin is the un-dignity…….As a lapsed Republican I’m not in the least afraid of Palin being the Republican nominee in 2012….she’s the catharsis the party needs to bring it to its senses but it’s not going to happen…..She simply couldn’t hack a yearlong campaign and she knows it….no she’s going into the entertainment business where she will be showered with bucks and get no hassle…..I recommend the Brooks column he was on form and when he is he’s good…….Interestingly I saw a comment on another blog about the dignity aspect of Obama…..some guy in a British pop group said he was like a Cardinal in his physical fluency and calm presence and it’s a very apt analogy if you think about it. The total reverse of Palin.

• 10 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 8:12 pm

  “David Frum is correct about Palin. As a Democrat…”

  And doesn’t THAT just say it all…?!

  (*LAUGHING MY BUTT OFF*)

  (Laughing at Frum, not you, Annie.)

  “Increasingly I read Republicans writing on blogs teasing Democrats that we are ‘afraid’ of Palin…”

  Well, only you know if you’re “afraid” of Palin or not, Annie, but from a partisan Democratic perspective you really should be afraid of the “populist libertarian-leaning conservative” side of the GOP.

  Hey… the Frums are no threat to you. They’re never gonna draw parts of your coalition away from the DNC. And we see what happens when the GOP runs RINOs and “Dem-liters” like McCain against a “real” Democrat.

  (*SHRUG*)

  So, yeah… I understand perfectly why your side would cheer Frum on. Fair enough. The enemy of your enemy is your friend… (*WINK*) (*CHUCKLE*)

  “…her obvious incompetency…”

  Yeah. (*SNORT*) You keep on tellng yourself that. You might wanna compare the shape Alaska is in compared to Obama’s state of Illinois, my state of New York, California, and most other states. You might wanna compare Gov. vs. Gov. records on budget trajectories under Palin vs. her peers.

  (*SHRUG*)

  “…her provincialism…”

  (*SNORT*) Oh, yeah… you’re Frum’s type alright; I can see that.

  “…a lack of understanding of serious issues…”

  Tell ya what, Annie… give me a few weeks to get a feel about your level of sophistication based upon your posts. So far I’m reading lots of “shots,” lots of accusations and insults, but very little fact-based specificity. We’ll see… (*SMILE*)

  “She can’t stand the heat.”

  Hmm… sorry, points deduction right there. Politically speaking… she’s set her record as governor in stone, impervious to blame for whatever further spills the economy takes over the next year. As a partisan, she’s no doubt ensured that her chosen successor keep Republicans in control of the Alaska governorship for the next election cycle (2010).

  “There is, after all, nothing really conservative about her, is there?”

  You’re kidding, right…??? She’s a fiscal, social, national defense, and criminal justice conservative as far as I’m aware. What are you babbling about…?!?!

  Jeezus Christ… you’ve got “Otto Disease.”

  Please… someone… anyone… if I ever start babbling about Ted Kennedy not being a liberal…

  (*SNORT*)

  Unfrigg’nbelieveable.

  BILL

• 11 ottovbvs // Jul 7, 2009 at 8:27 pm

  barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 8:12 pm

  ……The anti Karl Rove speaks

• 12 inthemiddle16 // Jul 7, 2009 at 8:43 pm

  Well, I’m not inthemiddle16 instead of inthemiddle12 so I guess President Obama just got another 4 years.

  Anyway, nice change to the site.

  Barker13: “”populist libertarian-leaning conservative” I think a much more fear for you to consider is the reborn Liberal Party that is about to create a public option for health care. There’s a far higher probability that fear of yours will come true before any resurrection of some faux populist libertarian-leaning conservative majority.

  Once the public health care option is approved, and it will be since over 70% of the country wants a public health care option, there will be a restored liberal sensibility throughout the land that should scare you more than anything else. And considering the level of your rhetoric, I shall enjoy watching the reactions.

• 13 anniemargret // Jul 7, 2009 at 9:52 pm

  Nothing ‘conservative’ about her leaving Wasilla in debt after building her boondoggle sports arena, there is nothing ‘conservative’ about Palin today referring to the ‘Dept of Law’ or her belief that the Pledge of Allegiance came from the Founding Fathers; nothing remotely ‘conservative’ that she knew virtually next to nothing when asked about the Iraq war, saying she was busy with state government; nothing ‘conservative’ about her supporting the Bridge to Nowhere, but claiming she didn’t; nothing ‘conservative’ about the hint of book-banning and/or censorship in Wasilla especially if you believe in civil liberties; nothing ‘conservative’ about her dragging her children through hell and high water to make brownie points politically instead of shielding them as any good truly ‘family values’ conservative (or liberal) would do; nothing conservative about her posing for magazines while she hands off her special needs infant on someone else to take care of. Nothing conservative about happily supporting the illegal and immoral ‘war’ in Iraq, wasting billions of dollars and the precious lives of American soldiers; nothing ‘conservative’ about egging on the bigots and racists which always tend to appear at her rallies. There’s a lot of different types of ‘conservatives’ out there, donja think?

• 14 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 10:01 pm

  Re: Inthemiddle16 // Jul 7, 2009 at 8:43 pm –

  “I think a much more fear for you to consider is the reborn Liberal Party that is about to create a public option for health care.”

  Yep. You’re damn right I fear government action making things worse rather than better. And if you’re smart you’ll worry too.

  “…over 70% of the country wants a public health care option…”

  Can’t we just stop the nonsense? Please? You know that stat is meaningless, without context. Depending upon how you phrase the question and then what follow-ups you pose in order to put the initial answer within a realistic context you’ll get answers all over the board – contradictory answers.

  “…there will be a restored liberal sensibility throughout the land…”

  Oh, brother… (*SNORT*) Let me guess… a present or past English major?

  “…considering the level of your rhetoric, I shall enjoy watching the reactions.”

  And what “level” would that be, ITM16? (*SMIRK*)

  BTW, weren’t we discussing Palin…???

  (And still Frum holds himself above the fray.) (*GRIN*)

  BILL

• 15 barker13 // Jul 7, 2009 at 11:11 pm

  Re: Anniemargret // Jul 7, 2009 at 9:52 pm –

  “Nothing ‘conservative’ about her leaving Wasilla in debt after building her boondoggle sports arena…”

  Hmm. Let’s look into this charge:

  http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/background/story/168047.html

  QUOTE: Wasilla voters agreed in 2002 to a half-percent increase in the city sales tax to pay off a $14.7 million bond to build the multi-use facility. The project “was completed on schedule and under budget,” Mayor Dianne Keller said, and the complex opened its doors March 6, 2004. Sales tax revenue, which can only be used to pay the bond, is coming in faster than expected. Keller said she believes the facility will be paid off at least two years ahead of the 10-year schedule.

  (*SHRUG*)

  Just out of curiousity, Annie, Palin aside, is support or opposition to taxpayer subsidized sports complexes always a straight “conservative vs. liberal” political issue as far as you’re concerned? Meaning if Ted Kennedy happened to oppose a new stadium in Massachusetts this would make him a conservative just as apparently Palin’s support for the Wasilla stadium apparently makes her… er… a liberal?

  Also, just to clarify… do you have a problem with bonding for capital projects? Is this in your mind another “conservative vs. liberal” issue where a true conservative must be doctrinally against bonding for any and all capital projects?

  Continuing…

  “…there is nothing ‘conservative’ about Palin today referring to the ‘Dept of Law’…”

  Huh? Ya wanna provide a link to a transcript so I can follow in context?

  BTW, should I take it that “misstatements” count as either “conservative” or “liberal” as opposed to… er… simple slips of the tongue, a momentary inability to grab the right word or phrase from your head at a moment’s notice every moment…???

  “…her belief that the Pledge of Allegiance came from the Founding Fathers;”

  (*SHRUG*) Again… citation please? Not that I question your integrity – I don’t – but like Reagan I’m a “trust but verify” kind of guy. (*WINK*)

  In any case… for the sake of argument let’s assume Sarah Palin wrongly attributed the Pledge of Allegiance to “The Founders” as opposed to giving rightful credit to Francis Bellamy. This would make her… er… wrong; I don’t see how it makes her “not conservative.”

  (*SCRATCHING MY HEAD*)

  “…nothing remotely ‘conservative’ that she knew virtually next to nothing when asked about the Iraq war…”

  (*SIGH*)

  OK. I think I see the pattern here. You’re misusing the word “conservative,” citing any perceived weakness (from your perspective) in Palin as being evidence of “non-conservative” thought or action.

  Interesting… (*PURSED LIPS…SCRATCHING MY CHIN*)

  “…nothing ‘conservative’ about the hint of book-banning and/or censorship…”

  Umm… usually one WOULD tar book banners with the “conservative” label, not the liberal label; same with the issue of censorship. (You seem to be confusing yourself in an effort to slam Palin from all sides.) (*SHRUG*)

  Anyway, Annie, usually before I rely upon urban myths while waging blog debates I take the time to check out if I’ve got my facts straight. (*CHUCKLING*) You might wanna do the same in future. For example…

  http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp

  Anyway, Annie, I think I get where you’re coming from. You hate Palin so you’ll throw as much mud as you can against the wall hoping some sticks. (*CHUCKLE*)

  One area where you’re dead on right is that one can certainly look upon the Iraq War as anything but true conservative policy.

  (*HANDSHAKE*)

  BILL

• 16 dacookson // Jul 8, 2009 at 2:05 am

  This is getting ridiculous now. There’s no way Frum can post this after postingthis previous one unless he’s simply trying to drive up traffic and comments. She’s finished, she never really started. There’s no way she’ll win the GOP nomination and absolutely no way she’ll win the presidency in 2012. You think she’ll handle the year of primaries and all the rest of it? Not a chance. And if you want her to win for some ‘purgative’ reason, you’d better realise that the inevitable shattering defeat at a general election will leave an ultra-conservative remnant in Congress that puts the party in a much worse condition to remake itself.

  And I don’t want to get involved in an argument here but barker13… You may well be a damned nice guy, or Karl Rove’s nemesis, or super-clever or whatever it may be, but your writing style does come across as ever-so-slightly mental. We really don’t need all the (*SMIRK*)s and (*SNORT*)s and especially the (*WINK*)s. A few here and there maybe, but you use them so much it looks like a personality disorder. Or clownish. Why not put a few (*Honk*)s and (*Wakka Wakka*)s in there too?

  Try using a few carefully placed emoticons instead, there’s a list of the supported ones here. We can generally pick up the tone of what you’re saying without the emotional aids. And to show you I’m not being hostile here’s a

• 17 Chekote // Jul 8, 2009 at 3:01 am

  Test

• 18 Chekote // Jul 8, 2009 at 3:06 am

  After watching the rambling, incoherent resignation speech by Palin, I think the time has come for John McCain and his team of campaign advisors to tell Republicans how this woman was selected as VP. Why were grown-ups, compentent people like Tom Ridge, Joseph Lieberman overlooked in favor of this incoherent, uninformed boob. I said this as someone who was a HUGE Palin supporter when she first came on the scene. But it has been almost a year and Palin still cannot articulate any policy positions beyond canned talking points. If Mac was trying to get the Hillary vote, he should have selected someone like Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Again, they owe Republican voters an explanation.

• 19 anniemargret // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:23 am

  If, as some of the writers here claim,that’s she’s toast, then why is it being reported that “7 out of 10 Republicans’ would vote for her if given the chance in 2012? There were two letters to the editor in our city’s paper this morning regaling her as a ‘fine Christian woman” and speaking for ‘us’, and excoriating the paper because they ran a Maureen Dowd eviscerating article about Palin yesterday. She has her defenders, but more than that, she has her corner on that market with the GOP, and it ain’t going away. She will be seen and heard over the next 3 years, and now that she is no longer having to deal with the governing of Alaska, she will have her tutors and mentors and studying Civics 101 so that she appears more polished and articulate on the stage. She will give her song and dance about caring for her family, while she continues to pose in magazines. As a woman, I will tell you that if Ms. Palin was an ordinary looking woman, she never would have made it this far. Her attractiveness is what’s selling, and that’s about it. It is a sorry state in this country when the outside package is more important than competetent brain in such a dangerous world.

• 20 ottovbvs // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:49 am

  dacookson // Jul 8, 2009 at 2:05 am

  ……..As I said above I don’t think she has much chance of winning the nomination for the reasons you enumerate. On the other hand as H. L. Mencken observed no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people. I actually agree with the purgative theory. There’s no other way I see the GOP making the abrupt change of direction that is required for them to become electorally viable again. In any event I think she will make it moot by the switch to a celebrity career. Follow the money!

• 21 ottovbvs // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:57 am

  Chekote // Jul 8, 2009 at 3:06 am

  …..You and I don’t agree about much but we’re completely on the same page about this. It was an act of astonishing recklessness and incompetence on his part. And the problem is that Palin incubus remains with us. Usually the loser in a presidential election and even more so his vp leaves the public stage and largely disappear from the public consciousness. This hasn’t happened with Palin. It doesn’t matter what her motives are, more politics or a celebrity career, she’s getting a lot of attention because of attractiveness and Gerry Springer atmosphere. This means the GOP is stuck with her as one of its most visible public faces. And she’s a massive albatross. McCain has a lot of splainin to do.

• 22 barker13 // Jul 8, 2009 at 9:26 am

  Re: Dacookson // Jul 8, 2009 at 2:05 am –

  “And I don’t want to get involved in an argument here but barker13… You may well be a damned nice guy, or Karl Rove’s nemesis, or super-clever or whatever it may be, but your writing style does come across as ever-so-slightly mental.”

  (*GRIN*)

  All I can tell you is that if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery… well… I get a fair amount of flattery.

  (*CHUCKLE*)

  “Why not put a few (*Honk*)s and (*Wakka Wakka*)s in there too?”

  Hmm… I’ll consider it. I do insert the occasional (*DRUM ROLL*)

  “Try using a few carefully placed emoticons instead…”

  (*SNORT*) Ahh… you’re a herd animal then. I should have guessed.

  “We can generally pick up the tone of what you’re saying without the emotional aids. And to show you I’m not being hostile here’s a ”

  “Generally” doesn’t work for me; I’m a “better safe than sorry” kind of guy.

  Anyway, Dacookson, no offense taken. (*SMILE*) I’ll stick with my blogging style, you stick to yours.

  Let civility – and diversity of style – reign!

  (*WINK*)

  BILL

• 23 barker13 // Jul 8, 2009 at 9:32 am

  Re: Anniemargret // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:23 am –

  “As a woman, I will tell you…”

  (*FALLING TO THE FLOOR LAUGHING*)

  Oh… Annie… that was great! Ha! Ha! Ha! Oh, jeez… you’re bringing tears of mirth to my eyes!

  Hey – seriously for a moment… you folks might benefit by reading the latest Paglia:

  http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/07/08/reader_letters/

  BILL

• 24 Oneon1isto // Jul 8, 2009 at 11:13 am

  Palin does have one ability, of that I am sure. To automatically devolve any logical discussion into mere ramblings. She apparently has that affect on her own self as well.

• 25 dacookson // Jul 8, 2009 at 11:34 am

  Fair enough barker13, just had to say it. As you say, each to their own, just an opinion

  I saw a sketch by Penn and Teller on YouTube where they did a card trick. They shuffled the pack and asked an audience member if the card was completely lost in the deck. Audience member said “yes”. Then they asked him if he was prepared to put money on it and he said “no”. You can see the clip here. Suspension of disbelief is okay when it’s a bit of fun but when it comes to the crunch Palin’s support will ebb away. I know there’s few better at suspending disbelief than religious conservatives but just look at the collapse of polling figures during the presidential campaign and in Alaska since. She won’t get nearly as easy a ride from her Republican opponents for the nomination as she did from Democrats during the presidential election. By 2016 she might have brought herself up to code but I still doubt it. Nice quote ottovbvs.

• 26 sinz54 // Jul 8, 2009 at 12:25 pm

  inthemiddle16 sez: “Once the public health care option is approved….there will be a restored liberal sensibility throughout the land”

  Not for long.

  The advent of Social Security didn’t stop Eisenhower or Nixon from getting elected.

  The advent of Medicare didn’t stop Nixon or Reagan from getting elected.

  Even though Medicare and Social Security weren’t “options,” but mandatory.

  What conservatives end up doing is accepting what can’t be undone, and moving on.

  The advent of a public health care *option* isn’t going to change anybody’s attitude, any more than the existence of the U.S. Postal Service has.

  You liberals are contradicting yourselves at every turn. First you claim that it’s only an “option,” and now you’re claiming it will cause a universal change in attitude. That’s hard to do if only a minority of Americans subscribe to it.

• 27 ottovbvs // Jul 8, 2009 at 2:03 pm

  sinz54 // Jul 8, 2009 at 12:25 pm

  “The advent of Social Security didn’t stop Eisenhower or Nixon from getting elected.”

  ……..Both would be called RINO’s today as to a large extent they were.

  “What conservatives end up doing is accepting what can’t be undone, and moving on.”

  …….Exactly……the goal posts get moved further left and we move on.

  ……..As for the last couple of paras all “in the middle” is saying is just this. You might want want to re-read your last three paras if you want to see a perfect little gem of self contradiction……I haven’t the energy to explain it

• 28 sinz54 // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:21 pm

  chekote asks: “I think the time has come for John McCain and his team of campaign advisors to tell Republicans how this woman was selected as VP. Why were grown-ups, compentent people like Tom Ridge, Joseph Lieberman overlooked”

  Is this a rhetorical question, or you really don’t know the reason???

  That’s not a TOP SECRET, chekote!

  The dynamic that led to Palin’s pick was widely reported by Washington Post, NY Times, and other major media.

  I’ve explained it myself on NM several times already:

  When word leaked out that McCain was considering Lieberman or Ridge to be his running mate, the pushback from the social conservatives was instantaneous and furious. Because both Lieberman and Ridge are pro-choice.

  Kathryn Jean Lopez of National Review threatened a walkout of conservative delegates at the GOP convention, if McCain nominated either one of those two men. I read her diatribe the day she published it.

  Faced with a potentially fatal split at the convention, McCain backed down. He had to do some fast rethinking–and basically pulled Palin’s name out of a hat. (The fact that she was a woman also gave him some hope that she could appeal to some of Hillary’s supporters too.)

  Remember that the Religious Right hated McCain already. A reliable social conservative, say Hunter or Huckabee, might have been able to get the Religious Right to swallow Tom Ridge as VP. But for McCain, already hated by the Religious Right, choosing a pro-choice running mate would have been the last straw for the Religious Right. They might have made trouble at the convention, and/or sat out the election, rather than campaign for the GOP.

  BTW, welcome back! I always liked your posts, and I was concerned you might have left NM.

• 29 sinz54 // Jul 8, 2009 at 8:31 pm

  ottovbs: The “goal posts” on government intervention in the economy have NOT moved steadily left.

  In the 1960s, there was no serious large-scale theoretical opposition to big government social programs. All the GOP could do is mutter it would cost too much.

  Today, about 40% of the electorate is philosophically opposed to big government social programs on principle. Polls taken this week show a majority of Americans opposed to a second stimulus package despite double-digit unemployment. That attitude would have been unthinkable 40 years ago.

  Forty years ago, wage and price controls were considered a legitimate tool of economic stewardship. Today, they have been discredited.

  Forty years ago, the notion that the welfare system would be drastically reformed seemed unthinkable. In the 1990s, it was reformed.

  And the lack of a positive socialist role model in the world these days has left the Left scrambling. In the 1960s, Leftist intellectuals in the West rationalized certain Marxist regimes like Hungary and Yugoslavia. Today, even Leftists have been forced to give up their Marxist wet dreams.

  That’s why Obama is forced to sneak a single-payer health care system past the American people, by bamboozling them with this so-called “public option.” He wants single-payer, he’s said he wants single-payer, his supporters all want single-payer–but notice how afraid they are to say so in press conferences and public speeches. Because they know that will be a non-starter. That was not true 40 years ago.

  Ben Wattenberg had it right: It’s like driving a car. Your hands are constantly making slight course corrections. You keep those things that are good from liberals (FDIC, Social Security, Boulder Dam). You jettison those things from liberals that were bad (stagflation, forced busing, welfare handouts, Soviet domination of half the globe). You keep those things that were good from conservatives (the intellectual and physical destruction of Marxism, the creation of emerging markets, vibrant private sectors), and jettison those things that were bad (anti-intellectualism, invasions of personal privacy).

• 30 Chekote // Jul 8, 2009 at 10:01 pm

  Hi Sinz!

  It was a somewhat rhetorical question; however, I would like for Steve Schmidt and others to openly, clearly state that it was the NRO crowd that caused Mac to change course. We need to have an open discussiong about it. I truly believe that we need to take this time to reform the GOP and create a new agenda for the future. If we don’t present a credible alternative to voters, Obama’s policy failures will not be enough for the GOP to win.

  Today, Coburn admitted that he knew about Ensign’s affair. I really believe that it is time to drop the “family values” and much of the SoCon agenda and above all their tone. Have you seen this?

  Republican Sex Scandals a Sign It’s Time to End the Family Values Wars

  An Oklahoma state legislator recently divined the cause of our economic funk. We are paying the price, according to a resolution state Rep. Sally Kern is sponsoring, for becoming a “world leader” in pornography, same-sex marriage, divorce, and other “forms of debauchery.” It will come as no surprise that Kern is a Republican (a “Kern-servative” at that, according to her website).

  If the states are indeed the national parties’ farm teams, the Sally Kerns of the world will doom the GOP. Republicans can no longer afford to lustily fight the culture wars, and it’s time for them to sue for peace on the marriage front.

  I am still hoping that NM will be a vehicle through which reform of the conservative movement will take place. It is badly needed.

• 31 Canadian liberal // Jul 9, 2009 at 3:21 pm

  You know, she’s growing on me. Not as a potential president (that is still very scary) but I can see how her life has changed so much that since getting the VP nomination that there is no joy left in the governorship. She whines a bit, yes, and she thinks she can get away with taking the easy path (and not studying up to learn some important policy files), but she does have a core of common sense and a real “fetching” way of putting it across. A little logic-training might help to get her ideas strung together in a way that makes her speeches easier to understand, and maybe fewer cliches would help. But politicians always need training on how to say not much without sounding like they’ve nothing to say – its just an art not to sound like that all the time. Much as I tend to disagree with most of her positions, I think Palin is good to have on the political scene. But only if she promises not to run for President – I’m pretty sure she will never be ready for that one.

You must log in to post a comment.