Anyone watch Rush address to CPAC?

[Perd Hapley]

Mark Sanford? Sarah Palin? Paul Broun? Ron Paul?

1 and 3 are disqualified, for now, because I don't know who they are.  Yes, that probably means I'm ill-informed.  But I'm more politically aware than most of the voter base they're supposed to lead, so they're disqualified anyhow.

2 is a bit shaky right now, and 4 has already had his day in the sun.  I'm not sure he has more chance of succeeding the next time 'round. 

[MicroBalrog]

Generally, 80-year-old men don't run for President. However, I feel Ron Paul has made a different contribution  - agitated a lot of youn people to join the GOP and created an organization for them, the YaL-CFL. They continue to listen to him and some of them remain active. This is an investment that future political candidates can have access to. He still remains part of the leadership.

Mark Sanford is the governor of South Carolina and heads the Republican Governors' Association. He's awesomesauce. There are several Sanford '12 groups and so forth.

Paul Broun is a just bloody awesome.

[Balog]

Fisty: why is SP "shaky" right now? Just because of the massive hit job the MSM did on her? Any serious opposition to the media's little darling will get the same treatment.

[Perd Hapley]

Fisty: why is SP "shaky" right now? Just because of the massive hit job the MSM did on her? Any serious opposition to the media's little darling will get the same treatment.

That last bit is quite true, but I still don't think she's The One.  She might be a little steadier later on, though. 

But to rekindle the perpetual fire of Jindal Derangement Syndrome, that's one reason why I don't count him out.  Sure, the media will run away with the scary creationist angle.  But they will find something on everybody, and make it just as scary.  Look how McCain went from media darling/maverick/thorn in Bush's side, to far-right-wing Bush flunky.  (Yes, I note the irony of implying that Bush is right-wing.) 

[grampster]

Wouldn't it be interesting to see a fairly large number of R elected officials that suddenly started agreeing that the Constitution has been widely circumvented and that the federal government needs to be seriously reigned in.

It's too bad there is no courage among R's to defend the Constitution.  They really don't have anything to lose, do they?

[Balog]

That still doesn't answer what specific issues you have with her fisty. I'm honestly curious; what problems do you perceive her to have?

Wouldn't it be interesting to see a fairly large number of R elected officials that suddenly started agreeing that the Constitution has been widely circumvented and that the federal government needs to be seriously reigned in.

It's too bad there is no courage among R's to defend the Constitution.  They really don't have anything to lose, do they?

You assume that the R's think that. They only oppose big fed.gov socialism when the D's do it. Different color hogs, same trough.

[Perd Hapley]

That still doesn't answer what specific issues you have with her fisty. I'm honestly curious; what problems do you perceive her to have? 

Oh, OK.  She didn't seem to be able to answer a lot of questions that were put to her.  I guess I'm mainly thinking of her debate performance.  She landed a few good punches, but seemed to dodge questions too much.  Nothing she couldn't improve on, of course. 

[AZRedhawk44]

I agree with MTP regarding Palin.  I was initially excited about her, but she really kinda pissed me off after about a month.  She was a very weak debater, posed well for photo-ops but didn't inject anything into the policy discussions, and didn't stand tall and say "Eff-off!" to reporters who pushed the line.

That "Troopergate" thing?  She should have stood on top of the Empire State Building, thumped her chest and roared for all the country to hear: "I didn't do anything wrong, the guy deserved to get canned and I was making sure my cops are the best I can provide for Alaska!"  Then thrown a banana at a circling reporter's helicopter and knocked it from the sky.

And all the poking and prodding at her family, most particularly her pregnant daughter?  She needed to stand up better to that.  "Saracuda" she was not. 

I also think she lacks the mettle/metal/whatever to be Commander in Chief, as well as the strategery or cunning necessary to play international politics.

She's a Republican media darling and she's fun to watch on the political stage, but she'd be a disaster as POTUS.

[Jamisjockey]

Motion seconded!  I think AZ just summed up entirely my feelings on Palin.  Such a big deal was made over her, but I just don't think she even came close to delivering.
Part of the problem was that she was tossed onto the stage at the last minute.  I personally don't think she was McCain's first choice.  I'm figuring that whoever they really wanted either said "no" or didn't pass the screening process.
At least with Jindal, they're putting him up in the spotlight now.  We've got several years to keep an eye on him and see if he's a nitwit or a leader.

Oh, OK.  She didn't seem to be able to answer a lot of questions that were put to her.  I guess I'm mainly thinking of her debate performance.  She landed a few good punches, but seemed to dodge questions too much.  Nothing she couldn't improve on, of course. 

I felt like she was a walking, talking, talking-point.   All she could do was basically recite the same things over and over. 

[longeyes]

Palin disappointed, that's true, but she was all along an exemplar of a certain character type, embodying certain deeply American values, that people had been longing to see on the public scene.  It's true that we need to find a tougher, bolder, smarter version of the Palin model for 2012, but it was important that she surfaced as a symbol for all of the Americans who'd been left behind, so to speak.  McCain was supposed to, as a war hero and "maverick," fill in the holes, but, let's face it, when the chips were down he wasn't exactly Teddy Roosevelt either.

[Balog]

I can see that about SP. The hype was definitely not lived up to. I personally think her hands were tied to a certain extent by her running mate and his handlers, not to mention the useless cowards who seem to infest the highest levels of GOP leadership. I'd hope that as her own candidate she could be more free to be herself, but perhaps that's wishful thinking. I also agree she wasn't ready for prime time, but to be fair the interviews were hatchet jobs that only featured her weak answers.

[Perd Hapley]

I agree with the last four posts.  She did give the impression of being one big talking point.  I'll excuse for that, a little bit, as all politicians do that to an extent, and she really didn't have the time needed to bone up on the national issues she didn't need to deal with as a governor.  And the fact that Russia is visible from Alaska was not such a great answer, either.   

[Scout26]

And the fact that Russia is visible from Alaska was not such a great answer, either.   

She didn't say that.  Tina Fey on SNL did. 

Remember Sarah wasn't at the top of the ticket, so she had to follow the script/talking points/lead of McCain and his clowns advisors.  When she wandered off the Reservation, the McCain campaign got pretty upset and it created friction, but the voters loved what she said.

If they would have allowed to be herself, she could have carried the ticket. 

[Gewehr98]

I'd have figured Fistful would be smart enough not to take a Tina Fey SNL skit as gospel truth.

Maybe not.

[seeker_two]

I'd have figured Fistful would be smart enough not to take a Tina Fey SNL skit as gospel truth.

That's a whole lot of faith you're putting in Fistful's smartness.....   

[ronnyreagan]

She didn't say that. 

She did say that. She said "They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska" in the interview with Charles Gibson discussing her national security credentials. Tina Fey's "I can see Russia from my house" line was based off that.

[Rudy Kohn]

...But you actually can see Russian land from some places in Alaska.  Specifically, the Diomede Islands.  One is American, one is Russian.  They are two miles apart.
One statement is true.  The other is parody that is also phrased in such a way that it is no longer true.

I would laugh at Sarah Palin for saying the latter (and Tina Fey was pretty funny when she said it), but I can't see humor in her illustrating a valid point about how close Alaska and Russia are in a question about international relations experience.

That's not saying that I think Sarah Palin has a particularly bright future in national politics.  Unfortunately for her, she seems to come off as very inauthentic among people I talked to (who aren't already hardcore Republicans).  The media's coverage of her didn't help her image among most Americans either, regardless of how many points they claimed to make were deliberately misleading or simple fabrications.  I don't expect their coverage of her to be any more positive in the future, and, in the future, even fewer people will remember she didn't actually say she can see Russia from her house.

Edited to add:  I read the transcript of Rush's speech.  I thought it was not a lot of words for an hour-and-a-half speech, and the fact of the matter is that I don't think that he addressed anything that hasn't already been addressed a million times before.  I agree that there were too many asides and diversions.  I guess you could say I thought it lacked focus.

[Perd Hapley]

She did say that. She said "They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska" in the interview with Charles Gibson discussing her national security credentials. Tina Fey's "I can see Russia from my house" line was based off that.

That's how I remember it, yes.  My only problem with her saying it is, it did nothing to impress anyone with her foreign policy credentials.  Quite the opposite, in fact.   

[Jamisjockey]

That's how I remember it, yes.  My only problem with her saying it is, it did nothing to impress anyone with her foreign policy credentials.  Quite the opposite, in fact.   

It gets better.  One of the news shows dug up some information on the island you can see Russia from.  Its a teeny island, and Palin had never even been there.  Also, IIRC, the Russian island you can see is uninhabited.

[MechAg94]

Was that the "only" thing she said about foreign policy or just what everyone focused on? 


Personally, I think some people made it a point to crucify her over the issue because some Republicans were saying she had more foreign policy experience than Obama.

I agree that it is up to her to prove she can survive on a national stage.  We'll see.

[Perd Hapley]

It gets better.  One of the news shows dug up some information on the island you can see Russia from.  Its a teeny island, and Palin had never even been there.  Also, IIRC, the Russian island you can see is uninhabited. 

Are you pointing that out because you think it discredits Palin further, or are you just trying to demonstrate how the media can use irrelevant facts to distort things? 

Obviously, neither of those facts have any bearing on the point Palin was making. 

[Perd Hapley]

Was that the "only" thing she said about foreign policy or just what everyone focused on?   

She said other things, sure.  But I can't really blame the other side for harping on that one thing.  It sounded like she was grasping for straws.  She should have been more forthright, and just reminded the mediatards that she was the running mate of a man whose foreign policy experience was miles ahead of anything Obama could claim, he being only very, very recently elevated from community organizer to state Senator, to U.S. Senate.

The same sort of fun might have been had with the claim that Obama's early years in Indonesia gave him some kind of foreign policy experience.  But we know who the media was rooting for, don't we?   :rolleyes:

[Perd Hapley]

Democrats are now doing their best to make Rush Limbaugh the face of the Republican Party.  Didn't realize it was this high-level, or this coordinated.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19596.html

Not long ago, when McCain clinched the nomination, it was fashionable to say that Rush was no longer relevant.  After all, the Republican Party had chosen one of El Rushbo's least favorite Republicans as their candidate.

Of course, that was over as soon as the Left got their drawers in a twist about Operation Chaos, but that view is plainly wrong, now that McCain is irrelevant. 


Stolen from another thread, with thanks to longeyes

The Great Divider?

Posted By Victor Davis Hanson On March 2, 2009 @ 8:01 pm In Uncategorized | 76 Comments

Do As I Say­Not As I Do?

1) Forget talk radio. During the campaign, President Obama, you went after Sean Hannity on numerous occasions­which are recycled ad nauseam almost daily as sound-bites on his radio program. Once in office, both you and your staff have zeroed in on Rush Limbaugh by name. But Presidential candidates and elected Presidents must seem above the fray, and not descend into tit-for-tat with media celebrities. There is a reason why even your closest associates have ceased calling you Barack and now quite properly address you as “Mr. President”­and it is not due to your persistence in demonizing talk radio.

Did George Bush go after Bill Maher or Air American or Keith Olbermann when almost daily they slandered his character? Did he serially evoke Michael Moore? To have done so by name, would have demeaned his office. Worry about refuting conservative ideas, and governing the country, rather than dueling over the airways with those who get paid for only that. The country wanted a Lincoln, not another Nixon going after Dan Rather at a press conference. So far your administration resembles the latter, not the former.

[grampster]

Say what you want about W, but he did as the Old Testament advises....I paraphrase....Do not repay evil or unkindness with evil and unkindness.  Rather repay it with kindness.  In so doing you pour heaping coals upon their heads....

The character of a man is displayed by how he responds to criticism and calumny.