About Me

Name: Allen Caeden
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

The GOP Base vs. The GOP Establishment

What Republicans need is a mutiny

The party establishment is out to sea, so conservatives need to start rocking the boat.
By Richard A. Viguerie
May 10, 2009
Two major debates face conservative Republicans about the future of the party. The first, rekindled by Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democratic Party, is whether the GOP should move further leftward. The second is whether conservatives should tone down their advocacy on social issues. History is on the side of outspoken conservatives in both debates.

To learn where to position themselves, some big-government GOP loyalists are going on so-called listening tours. The trouble is, skulking around the country on pandering tours isn't leadership. Politicians, lobbyists and campaign consultants who caused the problem cannot fix it. You can also rebrand damaged goods all you want, but they're still damaged goods, which is why GOP establishment leaders are incapable of understanding the problem -- it's them.
The ascendancy of conservatives to power was done by boat-rockers, not establishment politicians. Barry Goldwater laid the foundation of reducing government to conform to the Constitution. Ronald Reagan demonstrated that the conservative vision of smaller government is one of prosperity. The Gingrich revolution started making congressional leaders the servants of the people, not vice versa.

In each case, the message was reforming the Washington establishment. President Obama's campaign used a variation of that theme. His message of change, while obfuscated, clearly resonated with the grass roots. He remains popular, although polls show his version of change is substantially less so.

The current GOP leadership has no message or vision that appeals to the grass roots. We never hear from them the boat-rocking message of successful conservatives.

Instead, the public's image of the GOP is that it is incompetent (think Hurricane Katrina), corrupt (think Jack Abramoff, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, etc.) and without principles (think wild spending, bailouts, earmarks and a lack of a true conservative vision). Republicans can try smoke and mirrors, but they really need new leaders who will reverse the big-government policies of Bush 43 and congressional Republicans and articulate and move a conservative agenda forward.

Democrats have nothing to fear from today's Republican Party leaders. That's why Democrats have taken to targeting Rush Limbaugh and others who aren't in formal leadership positions in the GOP but who forcefully articulate a conservative vision.

Republicans need the political equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous. First, they must admit their problem (many are in denial). Next, they must promise never to do it again. Then they must recognize what caused the problem ("Washingtonitis," abandoning the principles of the party and allowing people who didn't believe in the principles of the party to assume leadership positions). Last, when in a hole, stop digging.

Instead, Republicans are still digging. The GOP has lost the Goldwater/Reagan vision of rolling back unconstitutional government and restoring it to its prescribed authority. Its leaders seem barely capable of fighting for basic GOP principles of low taxes, a strong national defense and traditional values.

The American people have said clearly in the last two national elections that they don't like the GOP of Bush, Karl Rove, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, etc. All the rebranding efforts and pandering tours won't work as long as the party remains under the leadership of the team that was a party-wrecking disaster on the order of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Bush 41 and Bush 43.

In the 2008 election, Republicans acquiesced to the Specter/Colin Powell wing and nominated the one member of their party most famously critical of conservatives and most open to partnerships with people from across the aisle, John McCain. That obviously didn't work.

For Republicans to remove the stigma of Bush 43 and his GOP Congress, they must be able to honestly communicate to Americans that they are "Open Under New Management" -- but with old, time-tested principles.

The second debate is whether conservatives should tone down on social issues such as abortion and marriage.

Those, however, who win without principle have neither an agenda nor a mandate and rarely change anything for the better. In the history books, centrists and accommodators end up alongside James Buchanan, who compromised with slavery, and Neville Chamberlain, who compromised with Nazism. Political leaders we respect are ones who changed political reality, not those who accommodated themselves to political reality.

Leftist activists on social issues not only advocate loudly, even threateningly, they are happy to achieve their objectives through unconstitutional methods such as judicial activism.

Certainly, conservatives need to appeal not just to the faithful but must use logical and constitutional rationales on social issues. But stay quiet? I think not. What would have become of the great social and political debates of our country -- slavery, segregation, suffrage -- had activists acquiesced to the political establishment?

Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

The political establishment is averse to conservative boat-rockers, which is why conservatives should withhold financial support from all GOP national committees and establishment politicians but support principled organizations and candidates. They should run candidates for every party and public office except when there's a principled incumbent conservative.

Conservatives should no longer look to Republican politicians for leadership and should assume the role of leading the opposition to Obama and the Democrats. We believe we have a party and a country to save, and the GOP establishment is in our way. Let the rebellion begin.

Richard A. Viguerie is the author of "Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Forget Bush not Reagan

This is a recent article written Michael Reagan concerning his father Ronald Reagan:

If some media reports are correct -- a dangerous assumption nowadays when media skepticism has given way to unquestioned Obama worship -- former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush says the GOP needs to abandon nostalgia for the Reagan era.

I'm inclined to doubt the accuracy of that report since Jeb Bush was probably the best governor Florida ever had, and one who clung ferociously to the Republican principles exemplified by my father, Ronald Reagan.

Even if he did say something silly like that, my argument with him and Mitt Romney and the other participants in the so-called listening tour is not about my dad, but about the absurdity of a listening tour designed to tutor Republican bigwigs on what the public really wants from government,

My short answer to that question is that I want the government to get the hell out of our way and let us act like the free people our founding fathers wanted us to be, and not like subjects of an all-knowing, all-powerful federal government.

The listening tour is nothing but Republican gimmickry. The reality is that had they been listening over the past four years of the Bush presidency they would have seen the disaster of 2006 coming and they would have seen the catastrophe of 2008 coming.

Instead, they turned a deaf ear to the Republican conservatives not only on Capitol Hill, but to those out across America.

They lost in 2006 and 2008 because they stopped listening to the "nostalgia" for the conservative principles which guided my dad's administrations.

They receded backwards to the principle of losing elections, a habit that gripped the GOP until Newt Gingrich came along and showed them how to win congressional elections by standing for something, and my dad showed them how to win gubernatorial and presidential elections by championing the principles that made us the wealthiest and most-powerful nation in world history.

The lesson they taught was that you don't win elections by saying "me too," and trying to substitute a Republican version of big-government, wild-spending quasi-socialist agenda for a Democrat big-government, wild-spending quasi-socialist agenda.

Democrats know how to be socialists, Republicans don't. They can only try to imitate the real thing, so you end up as Benito Mussolini, half-socialist and half-capitalist, and not as Joe Stalin, socialist all the way to the death camps of Siberia.

If the GOP listeners want to know what the conservative majority among voters want and are thinking about, all they need to do is listen to Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and -- in all modesty -- Mike Reagan.

Our voices are the voice of the majority of Republican voters and open-minded independents. We don't have tens of millions of listeners every day because we have a message that contradicts the opinion of our audience -- we have such a vast army of listeners because they recognize that we are echoing their own opinions and telling them they are right in thinking as they do.

They recognize gimmicky when they see it. Watching TV this morning, I saw a pornography star who is running for the United States Senate announcing that she is on -- guess what -- a "listening tour," to learn if voters want her to make the run for Capitol Hill. It seems Republicans aren't the only ones using gimmickry these days.

If Republicans had really been listening, they'd still be in control of the House and Senate and there would be a Republican in the White House.

They didn't listen then, and they aren't listening now. If they start listening, what they'll hear is a demand that the Republican Party get back to the principles and beliefs embodied by Ronald Reagan, and get back to the principles of genuine conservatism which echo Thomas Jefferson's sage advice that a people who fear government cannot be free, but a government that fears the people is a government where the people are the masters and the state is their servant.

Finally, it isn't nostalgia for the Reagan era we need to forget, but the big government, wild-spending of Jeb Bush's brother George's administration.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

JEB Bush vs. Ronald Reagan

JEB Bush has recently commented that we need to forget the Reagan Era and Reagan’s principles. I am not surprised by this statement from JEB Bush since the Bush family has almost singlehandedly destroyed conservatism in this country. JEB Bush’s father quickly departed from the Reagan Revolution, which resulted in his political defeat against Clinton. JEB Bush’s brother George never saw a government program he did not like. In 2006 he advocated amnesty for illegal aliens which resulted in the Republicans left over from the 1994 Conservative Revolution in Congress being defeated. Folks whenever a Bush or a McCain, or a Romney, or a Lindsey Graham opens their mouths just turn a deaf ear to them. These folks are not conservatives, and they do not want Reagan’s principles to be the principles of the GOP, they have different plans for the GOP. What is this plan? Grow government, grow the deficit, ignore socially conservative issues, ignore the border problems, and ignoring the limits of the Constitution. Reagan won two landslide victories, and what have the Bushs’ brand of Neo-Conservatism brought us? More government, public debt, massive political defeats, and now a Marxist named Obama in the White House.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sarah Palin's dilemma.

Is Sarah Palin in a political dilemma? Josh Painter from Redstate.com has written the following:

The Anchorage Daily News pretends to be confused about Gov. Sarah Palin’s travel plans. It asks whether the governor will going to New York City and Washington, D.C., this weekend:

The Chicago Tribune’s political blog and others are reporting as fact that the governor is going to be Fox News’ guest at the White House Correspondents Dinner in Washington, D.C., on Saturday.

But it’s not clear if that’s true.

ADN quotes Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton:

“The governor may be on the East Coast this weekend to attend state events and meetings. If she is there, the governor may accept one of the standing invitations for dinner.”

The left-leaning McClatchy newspaper then asks whether Gov. Palin will appear at New York’s Alaska House for an Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute event there and take part in NCNA listening tours across the lower 48. Again, Stapleton responds:

“If there is something that she can do that benefits Alaskans or Alaska or allows her to keep Alaskans first, she’ll participate.”

Whenever there is an event which would require the governor to leave the state, we are treated to this sort of political theater. The actors know their parts well and don’t even need to rehearse their lines, so often have they repeated them.

The drive-by media opens Act I by asking whether the governor will attend some event the organizers have - either by leak or outright promotion - let it be known Gov. Palin is invited to attend.

In Act II, her political enemies, those strange bedfellows that are the Democrats as well as the Republicans she has stood up to, whine that Palin is more interested in her national political opportunities than she is in doing the job the voters hired her to do.

Act III is that part of the play where the governor’s spokesperson says that if the governor travels beyond the state lines, it will be in Alaska’s best interests, as Sarah Palin is well-known for talking up Alaska as a source of energy, a producer of seafood and other products and as a place of scenic wonders not to be missed by passengers on the cruise ships.

In Act IV, Gov. Palin either skips the event, citing pressing state business, or attends and makes an Alaska sales presentation a key part of her visit. If she does not attend, the drive-by media, who we remember from Act I, crows that the governor’s aides are incompetent and there are communication problems between her staff in Alaska and her PAC in Washington, D.C. If she does attend and then returns home, Palin is roundly criticized by her enemies for abandoning the state, and some even go so far as to file frivolous “ethics” complaints against her for having the temerity to actually think that as an American citizen, she has the right to freely travel around the country. The drive-by media types then reprise their role as publicity agents for these enemies of Gov. Palin by pretending to take their ridiculous compalints seriously and amplifying them. The play ends on a suspensful note, as the drive-by chorus asks the snoozing audience members whether the governor can survive. The curtain falls.

And so the governor’s enemies and the media play off of each other to keep Sarah Palin on a leash. She cannot go anywhere outside of Alaska or do anything without having to justify the excursion as something which will greatly benefit the 49th State. She and her spokespersons have to be non-committal to keep from providing her enemies with a surplus of ammunition to be used against her.

Some have opined that Mother Nature keeps her close to home by threatening one  natural disaster or another, but this is the 21st Century, where all sorts of electronic marvels allow the governor to stay in touch with state officials and direct operations from any place on the globe just as well as if she were in Juneau or Anchorage. It’s all about perceptions. If she is out of state and Redoubt blows its top, the media and the anti-Palin forces will blame every potential death, injury or dollar lost on her, when in reality it would make no difference one way or another whether she were in the state or beyond its borders if and when the incident occurred.

Having had some success tethering Sarah Palin to Alaska, the Democrat wing of the anti-Palin axis has reported to DNC headquarters, and now the tactic is being used against Louisiana’s Governor Bobby Jindal. If it’s successful in the Bayou State, look for it to be adopted in any state with a Republican governor who has a shot at a leadership role in the GOP. In other words, this pitiful play is likely coming to a state capitol near you.

It’s the modern version of “Much Ado About Nothing” and a remake that’s pointless to anyone who isn’t a Democrat activist. The stagecraft is really getting tiresome. The same chorus which sings its sad lament seems to collectively forget its lines every time Barack Obama jets to Hawaii or a Democrat governor goes to another state to campaign for a fellow party member running for public office. But hypocrisy has always been the core value of the party of the Braying As*.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, and Sarah Palin

   Rush Limbaugh has over the last few days has been defending Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan from fellow “Republicans” like Mitt Romney, JEB Bush, and other “moderates”. The plain fact is that these people are what are known as Neo-Conservatives, and these people believe in open borders, bigger government, and could care less about conservative social issues or the limitations put on the federal government by the Constitution. They are basically “Democrat Lite”. Now in the 1970’s the GOP was dominated by the liberal “Rockafeller Republicans” and now the GOP establishment is dominated by Neo-Conservative big government types, in both cases the GOP establishment is to the left of the GOP base, Ronald Reagan, and now Sarah Palin. In 1976 and in 1980 the GOP establishment fought Reagan tooth and nail in the GOP primaries, and in 1976 they defeated Reagan in favor of Gerald Ford (what a great trade off huh?) In 1980 the GOP grassroots had enough and they pushed Reagan over the top. The point is that Sarah Palin is the new Reagan on the block. She is a rock solid fiscal conservative who despises big government, and she is a social conservative by conviction and not merely for political expediency. She is extremely charismatic and profoundly motivates grassroots Republicans. She is a gifted speaker and a fine debater (she killed Biden in her debate with him). Sarah Palin is also one who has little tolerance for corruption and inefficiency, both of which abound in Washington. Sarah Palin has her convictions and she sticks to them. This woman is as tough as nails and knows how to run a first grassroots campaign as the political underdog and win in the end. Folks if Reagan were alive today the GOP establishment would be as much against him as they are against Palin. I know for a fact that the Democrats fear her in a presidential run in 2012 because they continue to viciously go after this woman, and one only attacks those that they fear. How many Democrats are attacking Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal, or Tim Pawlenty? I think I have made my point. 
   I think what we are seeing is what occurred between 1976 & 1980, meaning the GOP base is sick of the GOP leadership and their lack of true conservatism. We can see this in many forms. First, there is the incredible popularity of Sarah Palin with the GOP base, which is not diminishing. Second, we have seen the “Tea Parties” across our nation. Third, is the extreme popularity of Mark Levin’s book “Liberty & Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto” which advocates a return to the Traditional Conservatism of Ronald Reagan and that we leave big government Neo-Conservatism behind. However, these big government moderates will not go down without a fight, just like they did not in 1980 with Reagan.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sarah Palin joins a GOP national political group.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin plans to work with a new Republican group, the National Council for a New America. this in effect puts Sarah Palin smack dab in the middle of things for the GOP on a national level. This is bad news for people like Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal, JEB Bush, and Huckabee. Sarah Palin is first and foremost in the hearts of most of the GOP base and now she is at the center of the conservative GOP movement. This will help Sarah Palin stay in the national spotlight and make political alliances at the same time. Whether the GOP establishment likes it or not Sarah Palin is the brightest star of the GOP, since Ronald Reagan. God bless Sarah Palin. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Some Republicans are dissing both Reagan & Sarah Palin

At Conservatives4palin.com there is a youtube.com post from Rush Limbaugh who today commented on the GOP establishment’s dissing of both Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan by Republicans who are on a national “Listen to America Tour”. Some of the worst comments came from JEB Bush and especially Mitt Romney. What this tells me is that the GOP establishment is still clueless as to why it has been losing elections. The big government Neo-Conservatives who control the GOP absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility for the election defeats of 2006 & 2008. Also, the last thing they want is another Ronald Reagan in the White House, and this would explain their attacks on Sarah Palin who is the first  national candidate to be most like Ronald Reagan in both political philosophy & style since Reagan left office in 1988. Sarah Palin is the candidate of the rank and file GOP base, she is the candidate of the “Tea Parties”. Sarah Palin is the candidate of Mark Levin’s bestselling book “Liberty & Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto”. Folks I have said this before and I will say it again, the Neo-Conservatives have to be booted out of power. Their big pro-growth government ideology has been a disaster for the GOP and has now been rejected by the American voters in the last two elections. The Neo-Conservatives are nothing more than “Democrat Lite”. Who are the Neo-Cons? These would be people like both Bush presidents, John Mccain, Lindsey Graham, JEB Bush, Mitt Romney, George Will, Bill Crystal, Walter Krauthammer, Fred Barnes, Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Jonah Goldberg, and the whole damm Weekly Standard.    

One of the things that is going on is a revolt by many in the GOP against Neo-Conservatism. This revolt can be heard from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and can be seen both in Sarah Palin’s immense popularity with the GOP base and recently in the national “Tea Parties”. Conservatives are sick of big government and having to choose in elections between a Democratic socialist and a phony pseudo-conservative who loves big government. I believe the game is up, people are sick of GOP politics as usual. The GOP base is now demanding a new Ronald Reagan for president or they will stay home on election day once again. The Neo-Conservatives has yet to get the memo which reads, “Get lost, we want true conservatives in office!” Hence Lord willing we will have Sarah Palin in 2012.

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sarah Palin is alive & well!

From Redstate.com
 
by Josh Painter

There are those who wish to bury Sarah Palin, not praise her. Leftist Democrats, their drive-by media assassins and Republican backers of some of her potential opponents for leadership in the Republican Party have been pushing the meme that the former vice presidential candidate no longer has a future in national politics. They want to convince others that the governor’s political career has been ruined by the recent tug of war she has been engaged in with the Alaska legislature and the noisemaker tabloid media’s exploitation of some problems in her family and would-be in-laws.

If the foibles of politicians’ family members were career-killers, then Roger Clinton would have surely been the kiss of death for his brother. But even the millstone of a coke-dealing sibling couldn’t put the brakes on Bill Clinton’s bandwagon. Americans tend to be a forgiving people, and in Bill Clinton’s case, they were even willing to overlook his own sexploits and give him a second term. If having a brother who sells hard drugs doesn’t dim your star, having a cat burglar for a sister-in-law and a loose-lipped almost-son-in-law should not be that much of a long-term problem for Gov. Palin.

 

For a governor to have issues with a legislature is likewise not necessarily the stuff of ending a political career. Harry Truman won a stunning upset victory in the 1948 presidential election by railing against the “do-nothing” Congress, and sympathetic voters cheered him on, urging Harry to “give ‘em hell.” Alaskans may view their state lawmakers in the same light that Americans saw the eightieth Congress. The legislature has little to show for its session - only a handful of bills were passed of the literally hundreds which were introduced. In some respects this could be a good thing, but Alaska has serious intrastate energy issues, and the legislature failed to deal effectively with them.

The Alaska legislature’s rejection of the Palin nominee for Alaska attorney general and its tug of war with the governor over filling a vacant state Senate seat are hardly tantamount to being headed for the political graveyard. Indeed, the politically-motivated “tasergate” investigation of the governor, spearheaded by a state Senator who just happened to be a Democrat supporting Barack Obama and Joe Biden while Gov. Palin was running against that ticket, set a combative tone for the legislative session. That some of the old-boy-network Republicans sided with the Democrats against Palin was likewise no surprise. Some of that crowd had been looking for payback, and what better way to get it than with a trumped-up ethics complaint?

Gov. Palin compromised with the Democrats over the Senate seat before the legislative session ended, and she will simply appoint an attorney general in the interim well before the next one convenes. Though her home state approval ratings are down from their stratospheric highs of earlier days of her term, they remain at 60% or better, a percentage most other governors would consider enviable.

The governor could well borrow a phrase from Mark Twain, for the reports of her political demise are little more than wishful thinking on the part of those who have a vested interest in seeing the GOP foolishly stake its hopes on another McCain-ish opponent for President Obama three and a half years hence… or perhaps one that resembles Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty. To illustrate the point, we have the case of a rare breadcrumb of intellectual honesty falling from the media’s table this week. Kenneth T. Walsh, Chief White House correspondent for U.S. News & World Report, reported that Sarah Palin still enjoys strong support among conservatives, and some GOP insiders are saying that her future remains bright. That’s right, Paul Bedard is not the only scribe at U.S. News who can find an anonymous “GOP insider/former Bush advisor” to help support his narrative. Not all party insiders have a dim view of the governor, as writers less biased than Walsh may try to lead us to believe. She still has strong backers, even on the mean streets inside the beltway.

That does not mean that Alaska’s governor can coast to the front of the elephant walk. A “widely-held” belief among those party insiders, according to Walsh’s GOP strategist source, is that Sarah Palin will be just fine if her first term as governor will be regarded as a successful one. She has two more years to polish her record, and the same amount of time to go, as the advisor phrased it, “from sexy to studious”:

He says Palin should concentrate on building a conservative record of success as governor while also gradually placing herself in situations that demonstrate her knowledge of national and international issues.

These could include participating in forums of political leaders or policy experts at prestigious universities or giving a series of speeches at think tanks or conservative gatherings. “She needs to show that she’s more substantive than people think,” the strategist adds.

Gov. Palin is working on it. She speaks with authority on energy issues, and her arguments for saving the nation’s missile defense capabilities are both well-reasoned and compelling, especially considering the military ambitions of North Korea and Iran. She’s also up to speed on trade issues, as Alaska ranks fourth among the states in trade on a per capita basis and eighth in exports as a percentage of gross state product. She has met individually with scores of trade representatives and addressed a number of international trade delegations. While she’s no economist, the governor has rather wisely invested a considerable portion of her state’s oil and gas revenues, enough to give Alaska some breathing room while most other states are feeling much more pain at this point in the recession. And I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see Gov. Palin take the other advice of Walsh’s strategist source and start making the rounds of some of the better-known conservative think tanks.

In fact, she has already been a speaker at the Hoover Institution’s Board of Overseers meeting in Washington, D.C. last year, where she addressed the benefits of her pet project, an Alaskan natural gas pipeline to deliver the clean-burning fuel to the lower 48. The former vice presidential candidate has some admirers at Hoover, including Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson, who has written with his characteristic eloquence in her defense:

“I think Palin can speak, and reason, and navigate with bureaucrats and lawyers as well as can Obama; but he surely cannot understand hunters, and mechanics and carpenters like she can. And a Putin or a Chavez or a Wall-Street speculator that runs a leverage brokerage house is more a hunter than a professor or community organizer.”

She should be welcome also at The Heritage Foundation where Rebecca Hagelin is one of that think tank’s vice presidents. Hagelin has written of Governor Palin:

“What makes her absolutely appealing to ordinary citizens across the country, both young and old, is that she didn’t go looking for greatness somewhere ‘out there.’ Instead, she sought to make a difference in the lives of the people in her path — and in so doing, greatness found her.”

Likewise, the doors of the Hudson Institute should be open for Sarah Palin. Hudson Senior Fellow John O’Sullivan had no qualms at all in connecting the Alaskan and Britain’s Iron Lady:

“I know Margaret Thatcher. Margaret Thatcher is a friend of mine. And as a matter of fact, Margaret Thatcher and Sarah Palin have a great deal in common.”

How about it, Governor? Shouldn’t you visit these good scholars and thank them in person for singing your praises, while at the same time less accomplished beings such as Kathleen Parker, Peggy Noonan and David Frum were haplessly engaged in trying to dig your political grave? Mark Twain once said of critics:

“If a critic should start a religion it would not have any object but to convert angels, and they wouldn’t need it.”

Although the timeless author was speaking of literary critics rather than the political kind, somehow I think he would would still approve of such a tour, if only just to poke a stick in the eyes of the latter.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »