Consider the strikes against him:
Erudite (X)
Well-traveled (X)
Lived in New York City (X)
Used big words (X)
Journalist (X)
As revealed in this TNR profile, Palin is driven by resentment against people like WFB. She’s Nixon minus the intellect.
And she’s no conservative, as Peggy Noonan explains.
But that won’t diminish her appeal among the dime-store populists who’ve infiltrated the GOP. They prefer red meat to intellect (check out the venom directed toward dissenters like Noonan and Kathleen Parker), and Palin not only speaks their language, she feels their indignation.
Palin the attack dog isn’t likely to sway the election, but she will get a head start on securing the Republican nomination in 2012. As demonstrated in her first mayoral campaign, she’ll do just about anything to get it.
(I)n a move practically out of Karl Rove’s playbook, she dwelled on how Stein’s wife used her maiden name, going so far as to demand a marriage certificate as proof of their nuptials. Palin’s campaign literature proclaimed her “deeply devoted to conservative family values”–all in the context of an ostensibly nonpartisan election. (Stein himself was a moderate Republican.)
She’s off to a good start with the “us versus them” crowd. Interesting how a movement started by a unrepentant elitist is now fueled by anti-elitist sentiment.
Palin is a libertarian. Buckley was a conservative. While conservatives and libertarians get along, and are friends and allies against the socialist Left, we are not the same.
We libertarians care much more deeply about freedom and limited government. Conservatives compromise way too much with the liberal socialists.
That’s why you’re beginning to see a little bit of a split between libertarian Palin and moderate conservative McCain.
So, yes, Buckley would be welcome in the new libertarianized GOP. But he’d be asked to take a back seat and let the libertarians like Sarah Palin take the wheel.
She’s not a libertarian, and a true libertarian would recognize that. Palin’s a populist Christian who would gladly expand government in order to promote her religious agenda. And would a libertarian support the bailout?
Palin’s a charlatan above all else, and any party that would choose a lightweight like her to lead them deserves irrelevance. Do you even know what she really believes? Other than abortion, she’s failed to articulate an ideology that I know of.
You can only insult the public’s intelligence so much (at least I hope).
Yeah, she’s a libertarian that likes that Government Cheese. What kind of libertarian is that?
Sounds like the “conservatives” down South (e.g. ol’ Sonny Perdue) who also like to belly up to the federal trough while extolling the virtues of fiscal responsibility between gulps of cash.
The Republican Party has struggled for years with this very battle. The Blue Blood establishment Republicans have always ben moderate with Rockefeller Republicans being fairly liberal. George HW Bush is clearly in that mold, as was his fathers Prescott.
This struggle was one of the most revolutionary things about Reagan’s nomination.
Palin is a conservative – Buckley is a conservative – living in New York has nothing to do with it. They would get along just fine.
How about Roosevelt and Obama – don’t think FDR, Truman or JFK cared for domestic terrorists or high taxes.
Working off DaleC’s post, my admittedly facile and unoriginal psychoanalysis of the modern Republican party is as follows:
The two major arms of the party are 1) the pro-business, small-government faction, and 2) Christians. There are times when this coalition works well.
Often, foreign wartime is one. The interests of the coalition merge. Expressions of moral imperative, along with the promise of future expansion of business interests (not to mention the immediate interests of the military/industrial complex), almost ensure Republican electoral victories.
Times of general prosperity are another (what “general prosperity” looks like, along with what policies lead to general prosperity, are of course up for argument). The pro-business faction holds always holds a great deal of lobbying sway, but this is particularly true when there’s a lot of swag to spread around. The Christian faction is mollified during election season, and can gradually increase its influence in re policy the longer Republicans are in power, but at it’s the pro-business faction that maintains ultimate authority (I’m more comfortable with them than I am the Christians FWIW).
But at this moment, the coalition is in disarray, and thus unable to attract swing voters looking for cohesive leadership. Despite his recent (desperate) maneuvering, McCain has been cast as the face of economic laissez-faire while the economy is tanking. And Palin is an empty-headed Left Behind-er. They are the dead-end kids of their respective factions.
Which is why it’s now slime time.
Palin’s a populist. Tell me when she reduced the size of government?
I don’t even care anymore – Obama (Jimmy Carter Jr) is going to win hands down. It will be one big flick flacking laughing time. All of the Obama myrmidons deserve about what we are going to get. Sadly my child doesn’t, but America has weathered plenty and here we go again.
George Bush Jr and the 1998-2004 Repubs did a piss poor job on leadership and the Repubs deserve their current role of crap. They earned it big time with their K street strategy.
On the other hand, Nancy and Harry are sacks of manure for leadership. The fact the dems fall in line behind these losers is pathetic. Damn Obama, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank are huge recipients of gifts from Fannie and Freddie lobbyist but get away with any of our current economic issues- the left needs to grow a damn pair and we live in a country of ignorant asses.
Pay off your debt and buy gold. If you like history go back and look up 1977- 1981 American economy – coming to you soon.
I like how IC Atlanta doesn’t have the balls to fess up to being part of the problem…”K street strategy” is just a dodge, as used here.
My only problem is yours too – our choices were Bush / Gore & Bush / Kerry. Bush did three good things as president – lowered taxes, Alito & Roberts, stood up to terrorism.
His overspending and weakness when it came to social security reform, fannie & freddie reform, signing McCain-Feingold did him in for me. I don’t think he cares anymore either.
FWIW – most of Wall Street pulls the lever for Democrats – start with Paulson.
“FWIW – most of Wall Street pulls the lever for Democrats – start with Paulson.”
Umm, isn’t he the President’s Secretary of the Treasury? Since when did Bush become a Democrat? Give me a fucking break – talk about not even trying anymore.
ATL Paddy you need to do a little research there fella Paulson is a democrat and supports Obama. Robert Rubin another wall street titan is also a big dem.
So, Henry Paulson is a Democrat and supports Obama. That’s news to me and I would imagine the rest of the rational world. How about you back that statement up with a credible source? (hint: WorldNetDaily doesn’t count)