Saturday, September 27, 2008

Throwing Sarah Under the Bus

I opened up my newspaper while enjoying breakfast Friday morning, and quickly turned to my favorite page, opinions & editorials. I immediately saw a piece by one of my "favorite" Conservative columnists, Kathleen Parker. What I read soured my stomach. What I read angered me.

Said Ms. Parker: "Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League....If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself. If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes.But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true."

Not content to simply insult Governor Palin, she suggests subtle ways for the obviously weak-minded "pit bull with lipstick" to crawl away like a frightened little poodle.

"McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden. Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first. Do it for your country."

D.R. Tucker of Human Events noted that "Kathleen Parker has joined the ranks of anti-Palin conservatives George Will, Charles Krauthammer, David Frum and Ross Douthat(as well as moderate-conservative David Brooks" in their criticism and negative views of the Republican VP nominee.

Tucker also observes that "Movement conservatives and the “conservative intelligentsia” are united in their desire for a McCain victory—but if that desire is not fulfilled, one hopes that the dream of harmony between these two conservative factions will not be deferred as well."

Well, now it's MY TURN. First, some clarification. I have been a "movement conservative" since the first term of Ronald Reagan. While other "College Republicans" were out getting drunk to celebrate the 1984 Reagan victory, I was planning to attend the inauguration, cooperating with conservative candidates for the Legislature in North Carolina on local elections and issues, and working to implement the Reagan agenda.

As a bona fide "movement Conservative," up until late August, I had NO plans to vote for John McCain. While I respect D.R. Tucker and agree with the overall premise of his column, I think he is DEAD WRONG that "movement conservatives and the “conservative intelligentsia” are united in their desire for a McCain victory." Many of the Conservatives I know vowed, as I did, not to be "Bushed or Doled" again.

Then, the unthinkable happened. John McCain, in what can only be called an epiphany, chose the governor of a small state, FAR away from Washington, who is an "outside the box" reformer, a pro-life mother of five children including a Downs Syndrome baby, a hunter, and worst of all (*GASP*) and Evangelical Christian! Short of resurrecting Ronald Reagan himself to replace McCain at the top of the ticket, Palin was the ONLY thing that swayed me to support a McCain bid for the White House. I remain -- as a "movement Conservative," loyal to Sarah Palin. Period.

The so-called "conservative intelligensia" who have come out against Sarah Palin should be examined to determine whether they are actually either "conservative" or "intelligent." George Will hasn't been "conservative" since the Reagan era. Charles Krauthammer, despite being spot on in matters of defense and the War on Terror, is pro-abortion and generally socially liberal. I don't really know WHAT has gotten into David Frum (just being frumpy?) and WHO the heck IS Ross Douthat?

These so called "conservative intelligensia" are actually from the more libertarian wing of Conservatism -- more interested (supposedly) in economic and civil liberties than in social conservatism and values. They offered up McCain in 2000. They offered up Dole in 1996. They offer only defeat and permanent minority status for Conservatism.

So here's the newsflash. The Parker's and Krauthammer's and Will's and Doughnuts and Frumpy's need to understand that without us ignorant, "God and Guns" Reagan Conservatives from flyover country, Republicans can't WIN this election, or any other. And if these folks succeed in scuttling Sarah, not only will they not win this election (because I won't vote for a single Republican!) but they will ensure a schism that will split and likely kill the Republicans for good.

So, a note to the so-called "conservative intelligensia": Get off your high horses and help the ticket, rather than cowering in fear to your former masters, the Democrats. If you don't the only thing you all will have left is your lucrative jobs. Real conservatives will be LONG GONE.

copyright, all rights reserved.


Eric Dondero said...

Of course some conservatives are turning on Sarah. She's a libertarian. Conservatives have always been uneasy with us libertarians, and even less comfortable with us being part of the GOP coalition.

Cast her off, and you piss off the entire libertarian vote for 2008.

Singleguyinsd said...

Calling for Palin's head after 3 weeks is ludicrous. It is like throwing aces into the discard deck. The race is so tight that if either party changed their line-up at this point it would cause a catastrophe and knock the ticket out of the race. It would be an admission of extreme poor judgment in the initial pick and more bad judgment to dump the nominee. The only time it occurred in the 20th Century was in 1972 when Thomas Eagleton, a good and descent man, was railroaded off the McGovern ticket because of a public with an immature knowledge of treatment for depression. Hell, Lincoln was depressed. He seemed to do okay. There are a lot of so called pundits that could use some electro-shock therapy today.

The writer appears to be an admirer but I sense this is a hit piece. The writer did not give a cogent argument for Palin's disability to perform the duties of the office but only offered bitchy and tactless cheap shots at her. If BS was currency Palin could bail out Wall Street herself? Ha, ha, ha. That is original. Everytime the Left opens its mouth my highly calibrated Bullshit Detector redlines in the danger zone.

Does she think Palin would seriously entertain leaving the ticket "to spend more time with her baby?" If that isn't sexism, what is? I would have been drawn and quartered for suggesting something like that. The writer sounds like my ex-wife.

The Vice Presidency is an important position because Reagan, Clinton and Bush 43 made it so. Dan Quayle was not a factor. Walter Mondale was important because Jimmy Carter was so inept. Richard Nixon's complaint about Spiro Agnew is "I don't mind if he takes an afternoon nap, I just wish he wouldn't put on his pajamas".

I think the writer's argument about Palin's "dancing" with the media is probably true. She was put into the crucible with a hostile and lethal media gunning to knock her out. In that context, she held up well. She remained poised, even if she didn't demonstrate her strengths.

I can't for the life of me understand why McCain threw her to the wolves right off the bat. Just because the MSM was demanding immediate access, McCain did not have to oblige. I realize that the McCain campaign wanted to capitalize on Palinmania ... when you're hot you're hot. Had I been advising them (notice the full voice mail box on my cell phone) I would have offered another alternative.

The conservative base was thrilled with the music Sarah Palin sang. Her first introduction should have been to her people. Even though it is singing to the choir, a number of things could have been accomplished by going through the interview rounds with the talk radio media: (1) an opportunity for her to become more intimate with the base to further motivate them to work in November (2) outline her views (or talking points) in a less pressurized and hostile environment, (3) drive the MSM bezerk by ignoring them and forcing them to report the "substance" of where Palin stands from the foundation she laid on talk radio.

Once she was on record on a number of issues with a supply of soundbites and quotes, then the agenda given to the MSM would be set on what she had already said, rather than giving the MSM the first shot and the opportunity to bushwhack her. As it happened, the Left surrounded the Palin phenomena and pronounced it dead even if the grass root reality will surprise them in November. McCain had a real opportunity to take the wind of an already disdained MSM by playing his cards his way. Instead, he has given them recognition as still the people that have to be pleased.

The sorry shape of the newspapers, declines in circulation and advertising reveals people are increasingly moving away from the daily paper for information. Network TV news still has an audience, but we all know it is on a negative trend line. The blogosphere and talk radio command a larger audience share of the "free" radio waves than any other format.

Now Palin needs to go to the new media outlets on talk radio and re-energize the base. She is faced with a pre-ordained skeptical MSM media story line that will discount her abilities however well or poorly she performs in the VP debate. The post VP debate "punditry" may demoralize the base once again with prevaracation and distortion. The propaganda attack from the Left is to ridicule, disgrace and belittle anything the Republicans do. Hate Bush Syndrome is a metastasized cancer infecting the Left. It should be more properly labeled as Left Derangement Syndrome.

The Left is close to achieve it's goal of the 1960's to "tear the system down". As the financial markets stagger and the banking industry lays nearly comatose, the recapture of political power by the most extremely radical leftist presidential candidate in U.S. history would allow the Left to claim victory. Robert Bork was right when he entitled his book "Slouching towards Gomorrah". Looks like that Gomorrah is the next stop on this roller coaster ride.

J. Dale Weaver, M.Div. said...


I agree that Sarah Palin has a libertarian streak. And as a conservative, I think that's a good thing! Still, she had the moral and social convictions of a Conservative -- and that's about the best mix one can get these days.

It is her brand of leadership that will have the best [only?!] shot at fixing what ails our federal republic.