|
|
|
November 05, 2008
Marxing Off A Cliff
Eric makes the point in his post A building, not a tent, that economic conservatism is the cement that held the Republican party together. Commenter Bob Smith made a very interesting point that confirms that view. Another commenter asks a question: I don't know exactly who is to blame for the disappeance of the cementBob answers: Not, who, what. Specifically, the cement disappeared once Republicans started thinking that government was the way to get things done. Not only is that corrosive of the values you mention, but it makes them indistinguishable from Democrats. And since Democrats own the media and can therefore do a much better job pushing the idea that Republicans are racist, greedy, selfish jerks, the Democrats will always win the contest of "who can use the government to get things done". "Compassionate conservatism" is not only neither compassionate nor conservative, but the phrase itself betrays its flaw: it uses the language of the left in implying that conservatism is not compassionate unless it destroys itself and embraces Marxism. Many conservatives have lived for so long under liberal doublespeak that they cannot identify this problem. That's because they have been conditioned by our educational establishment and media to internalize the left's lingo, talking points, and frame of reference, so they frequently lack the language to rebut liberal political rhetoric.Let me repeat the key point: the cement disappeared once Republicans started thinking that government was the way to get things done And it doesn't matter what the project is. The economic projects of the left or the social projects of the right. So what exactly was our biggest failure in the last 8 years? No one stood up and said NO with a loud enough voice to make it stop. Certainly not Bush. And not McCain either. So what is left? Well McCain has given us Sarah. If she can expand her education and we can maintain her as a national figure for the next 4 years we may have a worthy candidate in the next Presidential Election. If she wants to do it. Why does she work for me? Because she comes from the most libertarian oriented State in the nation. And she has way more charisma than Andre Marrou. Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 11.05.08 at 03:03 AM
Comments
Sarah definitely has charisma, and she seems to know how to get things done. But to the bigots who judge a person primarily based on her degree and her speech patterns, she will never pass muster. It's become pretty clear that there are a *lot* of such bigots; also, that they have an influence even in excess of their numbers. david foster · November 5, 2008 02:43 PM Agreed 100% about Bush, but McCain was actually quite solid on Bush's budget busting ways. He voted against No Child Left Behind, the Perscription Drug benefit plan, and the infamous Highway, Farm and Energy bills/ special interest grab bags that Bush supported. Could he bave been louder in his criticism? I suppose, but lets get real, many of the same people lamenting in 2008 how Republicans lost their way were threatening to exocummunicate McCain for the fights he was picking with Bush back in 2001-2003. Sean P · November 5, 2008 08:02 PM Sean, McCain got saddled with the party brand. We didn't need to reform McCain. We needed to reform the party. McSame was a dagger - not at the heart of McCain. It was a dagger at the heart of Republicans. It depressed the Republican vote. M. Simon · November 6, 2008 04:10 AM The GOP inside the beltway, self-proclaimed "elite" didn't want Benito Giuliani (I did) but they did want Mitt "I've been a conservative for about a week" Romney, so they attacked Benito in ways that set off the religious conservatives and were hoping for Mitt-dreamy. Well, that worked in getting rid of Benito, but it almost gave us the Huckster. People got scared of that so we ended up with McCain. The Beltway "elite" then wanted Mitt-dreamy as the VP, when McCain went all mavericky and at least tried to make his putative base happy (conservatives) by choosing Palin, they freaked out. They are going to try to push Mitt-dreamy on us in 4 years. Count on it. I think McCain himself depressed the GOP vote and he was a symptom of the problems with the party. He's been sticking his finger in my eye for 8 years and now I'm supposed to vote for him as the lesser of two evils? You can't win an election on hate, just ask Presidents Dole or Kerry. I know I wasn't sure who would do the most damage, Obama! and his poll-reading governance or McCain trying to get in the good graces of the NY Times and granting the Dem Congress cover for their wish-list of legislation. My greatest hope for a McCain presidency was that he was too old to serve two terms and therefore, Palin would run in 2012. On topic for the post, I think the worst moment was Terri Schiavo, where social conservatives acted exactly like liberals in their desire for the gov't to step in where it didn't belong. (and I'm sorry if that comment sets off an "abortion-" or "religion-" post-like crapstorm of comments). Nope, we're screwed and McCain and the current GOP are just symptons. We've forgotten what it means to be American. We're great not because of our Government, but because of our Constitution and too many people want to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution to keep. At least this end of civilization has been and is being funny. I mean, we're going to have at least 4 years of Joe Biden and his gaffe-matic mouth. What's funnier than that? Veeshir · November 6, 2008 11:04 AM Veeshir, I'd agree more with you except that I don't think it was McCain that lost. The black man won. Nothing mattered - not his policies, not his friends, not his accomplishments. All that mattered was his skin color. M. Simon · November 6, 2008 11:08 PM Good point. Of course, many people know nothing (or the wrong things) about his policies, friends and accomplishments. We can thank our media betters for that. Veeshir · November 7, 2008 09:41 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
November 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
November 2008
October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Freedomism is disgusting
• Where Is The Faith? • A Move In The Right Direction • Choosing The Robber Barons • Keeping the news in the closet • "Will this put a stop to the idiotic rumors? Of course not!" • Soothe The Monkeys • McCain Is Against Coal • All speech is like pornography! And libertarians don't exist! • The election is over, but the geographical literacy campaign continues
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Alaska has the image and history of being the most libertarian and individualist state in the nation. But it is also the state that hands out checks to everyone just because they live in the same state as a lot of oil.
It is not really clear from her record which of those discordant traditions more shapes Governor Palin. I am afraid it might be the latter.
But, yeah, definitely more charisma than Andre Marrou.