Site Meter

He loves and she loves

Just Causes

Password required

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

« Palin Envy, a freudian diagnosis for our cojones-challenged GOP establishment? | Main | Sarah Palin and Elizabeth Edwards, sisters under the skin? »

December 02, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834518c7969e20147e0547df2970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference GOP Blue Bloods and the politics of envy:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The more these old guard GOP "bluebloods" rant and rave about Sarah Palin, the better I like her!

I used to have the utmost respect and affection for Barbara Bush but given her recent statements, she too has become part of the problem, rather than part of the solution (Sarah of course).

In their envy and pettiness they are forgetting the cardinal rule of politics - "He may be an s.o.b., but he's OUR s.o.b.!" and dissing other Republicans. And the Obamabots are sitting back and giggling at the damage their PDS has wrought!

Get your heads out of your nether regions, GOP bigwigs and start moving forward with those of us who have already arrived at the new day!

And just to be crystal clear - I am 68 years old and I get it - so why don't they?

The Old Guard GOP is the very definition of the problem with inbred government.

Of course, they have been in power for so long - they will fight tooth and nail before they give it up. Even if this means becoming exactly what they've always said they hated in order to do it.

I know this is kinda goofy to mention but...

Lots of people are jealous of Sarah Palin. One reason? She's really attractive. Not 'good looking for a politician' attrative. She's good looking, period.

For liberals, the only truly acceptable woman looks like a sullen Gloria Steinem pants suit fetishist or a buzz-cut KD Lang clone from the hipster districts of Sapphosville. On the left, Palin is unacceptable for a lot of reasons. But I think a lot of their rage at Sarah comes from the fact that she hasn't chosen to conform to their goofy standards of feminine appeal.

Because she's been blessed with good looks that she's chosen to keep, rather than downplay, she'll never be accepted by many members of the progressive movement. They just can't handle her femininity.

The desire to keep the unqualified out of office does not make one a "blue blood" or an elitist. It simply means that we have standards. Washington,Lincoln, TR, FDR, Reagan etc... were all distinguished individuals of accomplishment and intellect. Ms. Palin, while certainly a nice, well-meaning person, is not in their class.

Not a big Palin fan, but I'm even less a fan of the ruling class.

I will be unenthusiastic in 2012 if my alternatives to Obama are a Bush family sockpuppet (regardless of surname), Romney (I repeat myself), Palin, or Huckabee.

I think you paint with too broad a brush when you lump in Charles Krauthammer with the likes of Peggy Noonan. Yes, he has criticized Palin -- surely being a Palin fan is now not a litmus test for one's conservative bona fides. When you state that Krauthammer is anti-tea party ("gratuitous dismissals of the likes of Sarah Palin and us Tea Partiers") I think you are mistaken. I have heard him vigorously defend the Tea Party from left wing smears. What is the basis for your statement?

Some idiot recently called Sarah Palin 'a faded beauty queen' in the same way that Reagan-haters dismissed him as 'a B-movie actor'. But pageants were just a way for Palin to get tuition money, like a summer job. And not incidentally, Reagan always played in A-movies - the premier half of a double bill.

But Palin and Reagan do have something in common. Next to him, she is the best politician I have ever witnessed. Like Reagan, she's so good that her detractors - even the Roves and Krauthammers - can't even recognize what she's doing. They are puzzled that such a moron has skyrocketed to the top rank of American politicians. The secret, of course, is that she is anything but a moron.

She has spent the last two years turning sudden celebrity, a VP slot on a losing GOP ticket, and a thin resume into an unstoppable political force. She has made herself the inevitable Republican presidential candidate in what is likely to be a Republican wave election.

If you want to know how she's going to beat Romney and Obama, just look at how she beat Alaska Governors Murkowski and Knowles. That was the regional playoff; 2012 is for the championship.

The economic record -- from a free market perspective -- couldn't be more clear.

George W. Bush = Herbert Hoover + Lyndon Johnson rolled into one.

The outstanding characteristic of the Bushies is arrogance and entitlement leavened by self-evident mediocrity.

Not a good combination.

Bush now admits he hadn't a clue what was happening on Wall Street, in the housing market, and with the economy -- "I'm not an economists" is his excuse.

Well, the first moral duty is not to be ignorant -- intellectual incompetence is no excuse when you are the captain of the economic ship.

I tend to agree with kurt above regarding Charles Krauthammer. The good doctor didn't exactly just fall off of the turnip truck, and we ignore him at our peril.

And, I hate to break the news, but Sarah Palin is not going to run for president. She's got it too good as it is; why should she risk everything?

What drives people crazy about the the Bushes and so much of the GOP Washington establishment is their mediocrity and lack of commitment to the Founders principles.

Is there a first-rater in the bunch?

And note well.

They even admit there incompetence in the areas where their fans claim special insight and ability for them.

Rove admits he completely botched the PR program of the President -- letting the "Bush lied, people died" charge go unanswered until the point where everyone believe it to be true (if he won't answer the charge, he must have a good reason .. i.e. it's true). It doesn't take a college degree to figure this one out.

Bush admits he botched for YEARS the post- invasion phase of the Iraq war -- and some of his top aids agree.

Dick Cheney's brilliant piece of political economy is the genius idea that "deficits don't matter". Time to pop some heart pills and sit down, Dick.

And the "brilliant" GOP Senate and House leadership during the Bush years -- ask Michelle Malkin what she thinks of McConnell, McCain, and the rest.

And what the hell was going on at the SEC or the with "Brownie" and his agency, or with the Bush botch of Katrina, and with the lies about the cost of Medicare part D, etc., etc., etc.

Without Bush and the GOP Washington elite the tea party wouldn't exist, it wouldn't have to exist.

The fact that it does exist and that it needs to exist is Bush's great legacy.

What Gov. Palin brings to the battle is a willingness to stand in stark contrast to the ideology of her opponents ... and (having learned the hard way in 2008) not let the GOP professional/political class change her in ways that will diminish that contrast.

She is true to herself, not bound by the conventional wisdom, and is not afraid to ask "WHY?" when it comes to changing herself in the name of "electability".

She is also the example for a different way of thinking about our leaders on our part ... that basic, simple wisdom is of greater value to this nation than academic genius ... that an ordinary, but wise, person who both knows their limitations and knows how to combine the knowledge/effort of others with their own to get things done, is of far greater value to this nation as a leader than a Nobel laureate or Rhodes scholar who lacks the above attributes.

The realization of what she represents in this regard leads to a deep fear of her in two camps ... fear which is distinctly different from the conventional-wisdom-derived condescension expressed by Barbara Bush and others.

The Progressive Left has an obsessive fear of her ... because if the conservative worldview is seen as credible by enough people through the contrast she presents, the value to society of their own preening as “enlightened intellectuals” will be diminished … and their own self-worth is too heavily invested in such preening to let that go unchallenged.

And the professional/political class … from Rove to Obama … knows that, if someone like Ms. Palin can work around them to attain high office, their services will be rendered as obsolete as the buggy whip in short order. Her presence, and the presence of those like her, is a direct threat to their meal tickets.

Hence the vitriol directed at her ... because she threatens both camps' ability to engage in flashy political swordplay and benefit from it, like Indiana Jones "conclusively" threatened a swordsman of another kind.

In this light, she may be the very candidate ... and elected leader ... we need at this time in our history, to CTL-ALT-DEL this nation so it forsakes the blind worship of intellectual acumen and returns to the common-sense values that got us here.

But that doesn't mean she should be anointed by us... she needs to be challenged, right along with anyone else who throws their hat in the ring ... challenged in ways that will reveal AND sharpen her as a leader. However, let's not strain at every gnat that offends our own sensibilities as we do so, either ... and make the Regressives' job easier for them by giving them more unfounded talking points to use against her.

Ahh. Maybe this is why ....

So. There was some post or other at NRO about Palin a couple of days ago. And so I responded with a quite trite - though apropo, and on topic - observation that 2012 was Palin's to lose. She runs, she wins. Period. Yada-yada.

The observation is so damn obvious that I dunno a) why I bother, and b) why this sometimes comes a surprise and/or debatable point to anyone (which goes a bit of the way to explain "a").

Anyways, so I click send ...and check back a few hours later. Nothin'.

Now, I've posted on NRO since they opened it up. No problem before. Hmm. So I post a little innocuous "test to see if earlier post was lost" comment ...and that shows up in the usual mysterious way (i.e., "after awhile").

After reading THIS though, I gotta give a little credence to maybe stating the obvious at NRO might just be passing through a little ...filter ...or something.

I mean, in general they ain't exactly Palinsta's over there donchknow.

HAHAHA. Now that, even the thought of that, is just delicious. (Hey! - I'm a geek; I'm easily amused.)

I have to agree with the commenters who've stood up for Charles Krauthammer. Though I admire Sarah Palin myself I recognize that criticizing her doesn't automatically make one an establishment big-government RINO.
Unlike Peggy Noonan or David Brooks Charles Krauthammer is actually on our side (the side of limited government and strong foreign policy). He doesn't deserve to be lumped in with the rest of the borrow-and-spend RINO's the rank-and-file Republicans have finally started to notice are no better than Democrats.
I would love to see the big government apologists like Noonan and Brooks marginalized and ignored, but if we turned our backs on Krauthammer we'd be losing a good journalist and an insightful opinion-maker.
I think you should examine his record and reconsider his bona fides as a true conservative.

Got no use for the elite of any stripe...

Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Kurt.

I agree with you that unlike Peggy Noonan, Charles Krauthammer is a genuine conservative, a long-time favorite of mine till he came down with PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) in the late summer of 2008. Litmus tests were never my thing at all, by the way. My beef with Dr. Krauthammer is what I take to be a contempt for tea partiers like myself implied in his gratuitous dissing of Palin's intelligence. Please check out my July 2009 post "Newsbites and viewsbites and the power of crowd-sourced journalism" for more thoughts on the subject. A taste:

"You cannot sustain a campaign of platitudes and clichés over a year and a half if you're running for the presidency," Charles Krauthammer told Megyn Kelly — first woman ever to sub as host of Fox News's flagship "Special Report with Brit Baier" — last night. We cringed at the condescension towards Sarah Palin as we grumbled to the television that oh, yes you can sustain a campaign of platitudes and clichés, indefinitely, if your name is Barack Obama and big media is in the tank for you. Most annoying of all, our beloved Krauthammer agreed with liberal co-panelist Mara Liasson …

Thank you for your comments, MikeC. Please check out my own comments above directed to Kurt for my take on Charles Krauthammer's case of PDS.

As for your certainty that Sarah Palin "is not going to run for president" because she's "got it too good as it is; why should she risk everything?" I think you "misunderestimate" her vision, which I believe runs something like this, as I wrote recently in "Sarah Palin's words: 'A realness that's not common in the political world'":

"It's about something larger than ourselves, the Founding Fathers' exceptionalist vision of Governor Winthrop's Shining City Upon a Hill."

In other words, she's not in it for the fame and fortune.

Laika's Last Woof:

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I agree with you that Sarah should not be above criticism. My objection, as spelled out in an update, is the implied condescension toward tea partiers like myself when even the best and brightest of our commentariat like Charles Krauthammer himself seems to have fallen for the PDS party line about Sarah's being a dummy. He got off on the wrong foot with me on this issue way back in August of 2008 as rumors were flying that the Governor of Alaska might be the one, when he pronounced that McCain should pick someone "safe."

I agree. I hope Charles Krauthammer reconsiders or at least doesn't condescend to Palin and her supporters.
Many of the conservative intelligentsia didn't think Reagan knew what he was doing, either. They were wrong.

The comments to this entry are closed.

The Cold Turkey Cookbook

Kudos

Blog powered by Typepad