Posts Tagged ‘sarah palin’

…I guess we will have to win without him, won’t we?

Let’s examine his points in reverse order:

#10 He doesn’t like the voices of conservatism these days. He forgets that during those wonderful days of Buckley and Goldwater the democrats ruled. Firing line was on 35 years, 31 of them were years of Democratic house control, During Goldwater’s 30 years it was even less. Reagan never had a house majority. Liberals always respect conservatives as long as we lose. Even better when we lose gracefully

#9 Can you define what is a Nativist? Does being against Illegal immigration make one a “nativist” Is that something like Andrew Sullivan’s “Christianist” term?

#8 As for birthers I’ve hit them myself but also pointed out that the Administration loves them because it is to their advantage for them to exist. This is a very tiny fringe of the conservative movement and his inclusion of it elevates it to liberal advantage.

#7 Excuse me? Didn’t this president stress Afghanistan all during the campaign? I seem to recall him attacking the war in Iraq and elevating Afghanistan over and over again. The General who was in charge was his general, the decision to replace the general was his decision and the latest surge is his surge (and when Petraeus wins this war it will be his success and he will deserve it). Yes Bush went in first, yes Bush focused more (correctly) on Iraq but right now this war is our current president’s responsibility.

#6 Anti-science? I’m sorry but did you come out of a coma and miss the entire climategate scandal? I suggest you google “Hide the decline” or “global warming e-mails“. Let’s put it another way, other than not believing in the Global Warming Climate Change where else do we see conservatives as anti science? Oh and check this link from Glen yesterday.

#5 Yeah that horrible tea party that drew 10k in Boston in April and has energized voters. The Polls are close in NV and the Prof might have already given up but I wouldn’t be so ready to haul up the white flag. If we only listened to the MSM and the RNC about the tea parties a year ago what would conservative prospects be right now?

#4 This one is a good point. The GOP did fail to restrain spending but that is due to their unwillingness to act “conservative” Ironically it’s those tea party voters that you disrespect so that are holding republican feet to the fire and will desert those same republicans if they after winning congress decide to go back to their spending ways. (Although I would add the caveat that the war spending was and is justified, I actually think that some of the spending was to buy votes on the war from dems but that is strictly my opinion).

#3 I didn’t see the column in question am reading it now…You’ve got to be kidding. That column has gotten your knickers in a twist? It’s not much of a column but if that column is your number #3 reason to be embarrassed to be a conservative then you need a Valium quick! Update: And how many people voting conservative have even heard of these guys? Do you think the conservative movement hangs on their words? If you think so you need to get out more.

#2 You are correct that Tancredo is wrong. I wrote a post called: Let’s not get carried away making that same point. Am I embarrassed by Tancredo being wrong? Not really, so he’s wrong big deal. If the conservative movement was pushing for impeachment and running on that platform that would be a different story. But this is a mountain out of a molehill

#1 Let’s be blunt here. It is #1 that drives all the others for you. Palin Derangement Syndrome. How embarrassed must you have been that Palin almost managed to win the 2008 election for John McCain until he went along with the bailouts. How horrible that she has brought the Hoi Polloi into the political process. How terrible that she draws huge crowds and raises money hand over fist for conservatives. How horrible that she started as a mayor and rose through the ranks to a governorship, succeeded as a governor and has managed to do this without an elite university degree or the backing of the eastern elites and the inside the beltway crowd? I’m old enough to remember the elites hitting Ronald Reagan the same way.

Put it another way, what American has been more successful in the last 2 years in advancing both their personal fortunes and the fortunes of their worldview? Who has done more to advance conservatism that Sarah Palin? Who other than Rush kept fighting when the rest of the GOP wanted to run? Who had a better and more impressive record going into the 2008 election? Palin or our current president?

You want to hate Palin, you are welcome to do so. You want to be embarrassed by Palin? Feel free. You want to get a few extra hits and a popular memeorandum thread? Go wild, but don’t beat your breast about being embarrassed to be conservative these days. You sound like Braxton Bragg after Chickamauga unwilling to follow up the victory.

As I said at the start, if we have to win without you we’ll manage, but I’d just as soon win with you, because once we do win, we will need people to help keep the new congress honest on spending and you can be an important part of that.

Oh and Prof I’m not embarrassed by you from what I hear and have read in the past you are an OK guy, you just happen to be wrong today.

Update: left out the phrase “climate change” and added to point 3

Update 2: Professor Jacobson farts in their general direction.

This story brought back flashbacks:

If former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin decides to jump into the 2012 presidential race, liberals would be thrilled, an unofficial poll released today shows.

In a straw poll of attendees at the Netroots Nation conference in Las Vegas over the weekend, 48 percent of respondents said they’d like to see Palin as the Republican Party’s 2012 nominee. Rep. Ron Paul came in a distant second, at 11 percent. Ten percent voted for Rick Santorum, 9 percent for Mitt Romney and 8 percent for Newt Gingrich. Seven percent chose Tim Pawlenty, while 5 percent said Mike Huckabee, and 1 percent said Rep. Mike Pence.

I seem to recall that back in 1980 democrats supporting Jimmy Carter were thrilled to death that Ronald Reagan was the Republican they were going to be facing. They were much more worried about this lightweight ex-governor who’s popularity was based on celebrity

Now I’m agnostic on the subject in one respect. Palin is young enough to run any time in the next 20 years, but liberals if you want to face Sarah Palin after 4 years of Jimmy Carter redux, bring it on!

As I recall the republican establishment didn’t care much for Reagan either, Rush is right liberals will tell us who they fear the most.

memeorandum thread here

Allahpundit agrees, I don’t know how well he remembers 1980.

Who knew that Sullivan’s Syndrome might have a positive side effect:

If you want to know why the allegedly liberal media didn’t touch – and still won’t touch – this story, look no further. It has nothing to do with the facts, and everything to do with their politics. Notice the core modus operandi of the political operative, not the journalist. When dealing with a story: first ask yourself not if it is true but whether the outcome benefits your side. Second, write things in defense of this that you cannot possibly know. Palin a “wonderful mother”? How on earth did Klein know that?

I’m reminded of the line from Screwtape XIII where Screwtape comments that a “patient” is: “defended from strong temptations to social ambition by a still stronger taste for tripe and onions” His trig trutherism is such a deeply held belief that it removes the blinders from his eyes to the dangerous of journolist and the lies therin one more quote:

This is your liberal media, ladies and gentlemen: totally partisan, interested in the truth only if it advances their agenda, and devoid of any balls whatsoever.

His Palin derangement comes through in the next lines blinding to the fact that of course the press would have the willingness to attack Palin in 2012 just not with Trig Trutherism. I will say this for him: He was honest enough in his delusion to openly admit it and fight for it, not so others.

Via Sissywillis on Twitter

Top memeorandum thread here.

How Ironic is it that Sullivan’s trig trutherism might be the thing that forces the journolist into the MSM? I know the Lord works in mysterious ways but this takes the cake.

Update: Who the **** is Leo La-Port?

Update 2: Ok that name I recognize. All you need to make news is a fedora and a trenchcoat to sit on.

The reason why this memeorandum thread has so much action is the absolute apoplexy.

Sarah Palin has the courage to bluntly say what everyone knows, but the left wants to pretend isn’t true.

A Mosque could be built anywhere on the subway line to have easy access, building it near ground zero is a deliberate attempt of Islam to assert power. Every radical Islamist worldwide will see it as a sign of submission, particularly when the towers have not been rebuilt. Pretending otherwise is a delusion of the type we’ve talked about before.

Yet Sarah Palin comes right out and says it. Not only is the uncomfortable truth expressed but it is expressed by the one the left hates most of all. That is why it has driven this “Patrick” and others totally nuts.

Tell you what guys. Let’s take a national poll of Americans and see if they think a Mosque at or near Ground Zero is a good idea. If you want your guys to run on that be my guest. You might manage to win Berkley, SF and Cambridge and I stress the “might”.

I wonder if Bloomberg’s aide would be willing to call the Saudi’s racist since they will not allow a Christian Church in their country. I wonder if that aide would call the Palestinians racist because they insist on an Judenrein Gaza? I think not. This is an example of the “courage” of cowards.

The days when the denial of reality pays off are rapidly dying.

Update: An update via Atlas on Islam in general. A must read.