Posts Tagged ‘conservatism fights back’

…at David Horowitz News Real Blog about the sudden invisibility of Shirley Sherrod and that’s this.

From what I’ve seen of Andrew Breitbart he is a great poker player, but looking closer and closer at the Sherrod case he might just be a chess player too.

You will recall he was very careful about the release of the ACORN tapes spacing them out and getting the media to fall into trap after trap until ACORN was a broken organization.

Also recall that Breitbart is a totally intergrated web person who worked regularly with Matt Drudge before venturing out on his own. He knows the web well, and that he had the initial video stuff months before he used it.

Is it reasonable to think that he would not have googled this woman? In just a few weeks enough info has come out about her that she has become radioactive. Can one assume that before his initial (and still ignored) column Brietbart or his assistants would have done the same research that others have done and been aware of the trap that the media was being setup for?

Breitbart Nailed the NAACP and the White house, but people forget, they are not his primary targets overall (although he does say in this case the NAACP was). The media is and always has been the wall that he has been chipping away at.

To what degree was this a media trap and with the deification and disappearance of Shirley Sherrod from that national conscience did he manage to make his media case after all?

What do you think?

Big Government tell me I’m apparently not the only person who remembers the Republican Establishment’s reaction to Reagan:

You had to live through it to recognize the metamorphosis. During those early days of June 2004, as the nation mourned the passing of Ronald Reagan, you would have never known he had been ridiculed and treated with disdain for most of his political career—not only by Democrats but by establishment Republicans. Frankly, I was stunned by the display of love and gratitude in 2004.

As the Reagan motorcade drove toward the Reagan Library for the final tribute, ordinary citizens along the route were paying their final tributes as well. It was an amazing moment.

But it was not always so.

Yet another testament to the great love the Republicans have for members of their party who are actually capable of winning elections. Somehow he sees the same parallel with Palin that I do.

Imagine that!

During the Atlanta campaign W. T. Sherman used flanking maneuver after flanking maneuver to push Joe Johnson back through Georgia. The one exception was Kennesaw Mountain where his frontal assaults were repulsed. After that defeat, he went back to the flanking tactic that took To paraphrase Ken Burns from The Civil War “Sherman never admitted it was a mistake but never did it again”. Like Sherman in the early days of the campaign Sarah Palin made some mistakes dealing with the media, also like Sherman, she didn’t let those early defeats stop her demonstrating why she is invaluable to conservatives.

When the media attacks Palin doesn’t sit and take it, or play under their rules, she counterattacks:

Yesterday, PolitiFact.com fact-checked my statement about the coming $3.8 trillion Obama tax hike – the largest tax increase in history. They did such a bad job of it, however, that I feel compelled to fact-check the fact-checkers.

And because her primary method of counterattack is Facebook that means she can answer on her terms. Try and twist a soundbite out of that:

Unfortunately for PolitiFact, no such proposal exists. They admit as much, by the way, when they state that “There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don’t have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.” That doesn’t stop them, though, from claiming I “confuse the issue” by “using numbers that assume all the tax cuts are going away. That is not the Democratic plan nor is it President Obama’s plan.”

Plan? What plan? There is no plan. All we have is smoke and mirrors based on an old Obama campaign pledge.

Defense? Never heard of it. It’s really something what a pol can do when the McCain Campaign isn’t managing how they respond. If only every republican was willing to fight back on their own terms.

Read the whole post it is devastating as is the challenge at the end:

PolitiFact doesn’t dispute the $3.8 trillion estimate of the cost of repeal of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. It admits that “Palin’s estimate of $3.8 trillion over 10 years is within a reasonable range, if you’re talking about all taxpayers.” And yet somehow it continues to argue that I’m wrong, based on a proposal it admits doesn’t exist which in turn is based on a phantom campaign pledge which Democrats have already broken anyway. I call that a “Pants on Fire” statement.

To prevent PolitiFact from making similar mistakes in future, it would be helpful if the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership finally mustered the courage to table their plans to let the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire. Mr. President, publish your proposals, and we’ll duke it out. You can argue in favor of a multi-trillion dollar tax hike in an age of economic uncertainty and mass unemployment, and we’ll argue for fiscal sanity combined with serious spending cuts. I for one look forward to such a debate.

If sure the White House is dying to have that debate, I know congress wants that debate so badly that democrats are rethinking taxes.

How many Republicans do you know if the same spot would have played “Duck and Cover”? Now if the Poli”fact” (and yes after this I put the “fact” in quotes) is reported so must her response, and if it is NOT then the question becomes: Why?

What would we do without her?

…so explains the liberal view by Jonah Goldberg:

Let’s start with the left, which certainly has different motives than Klinghoffer’s. The urge to lament how far today’s conservatives have fallen from the “golden age” of Buckley & Co. is a now-familiar gambit. You see, this is what critics on the left always say: “If only today’s conservatives were as decent or intellectual or patriotic as those of yesteryear.”

The best conservatives are always dead; the worst are always alive and influential. When Buckley and Kristol, not to mention Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, were alive, they were hated and vilified by the same sorts of people who now claim to miss the old gang. The gold standard of the dead is always a cudgel, used to beat back the living.

What hath Bainbridge wrought?

Via Glenn who really isn’t interested in the topic, honestly!