Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rich Lowry - and most of the rest of the NRO crew - don't get it.
The Virginian ^ | 7/8/2009 | Moneyrunner

Posted on 07/08/2009 1:48:05 PM PDT by moneyrunner

Dear Rich,

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but I’m starting to think that Christopher Buckley endorsing Barack Obama for President may not have been an isolated case of poor judgment. Your piece, Sarah Palin Up and Out, tells us quite a bit more about you than it does about Palin.

At the risk of being sued for copyright infringement, I’ll quote the beginning of your screed:

In all the speculation about why Sarah Palin quit the Alaska governorship, no one — right or left, supportive or critical, rational or conspiratorial — has credited her stated reason that she had to do it for the sake of Alaska.

It’s just too absurd. .. But she still proved adept at the traditional political art of extreme disingenuousness.

You then go on to state: She didn’t want to put Alaska through the hell of a lame-duck governor who would “hit the road, draw the paycheck, and ‘milk it.’” Never mind that if she feared becoming a lame duck, she could run for re-election — especially if “serving [Alaska’s] people is the greatest honor I could imagine.”

Well, my friend, and you are my friend, you may have reached the pinnacle of your ambitions by being editor of a magazine that has to beg for gift from its readers, but Sarah Palin has bigger goals. The reception she received from the Republican base showed that she was the biggest draw in the party. If she wanted to see whether she stood a chance of being the leader of the party, and perhaps its Presidential nominee, she needed to make a move. No matter how much she loved Alaska. You can’t run for President from there. Distance won’t let you; not if you are also the governor.

(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: palin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
Comment #1 Removed by Moderator

To: moneyrunner

Bill Buckley would be heartbroken to find his beloved magazine in the hands of “Spanky and Our Gang.”


2 posted on 07/08/2009 1:52:37 PM PDT by RanGreHad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Actually, the Lowry hit piece looks to me like a case study in misogyny.


3 posted on 07/08/2009 1:52:45 PM PDT by hampdenkid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I’ve been totally unimpressed with most of Rich Lowry’s ramblings. Not too long ago, FOXNEWS had him on a panel as the “conservative” voice, and he spent all of his time agreeing with the libs on the panel. Obviously someone who is out to win friends in the “establishment media”.
Remember, most of the talking heads hated Reagan too, but the people loved him.


4 posted on 07/08/2009 1:54:51 PM PDT by Ikemeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RanGreHad

Buckley was the one who turned NR over to The Hamster in the first place. Still can’t figure out what the hell he was thinking there...


5 posted on 07/08/2009 1:55:17 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
Perhaps it is to be expected, but why does every so-called conservative who works his way up in the firmament become an elitist a**hole? Why do they lose all humility along with their common sense? If they wanted to turn a buck, they could lose the appeal that draws the snotty crowd (a small percentage of magazine-buying Americans) and, instead, attempt to appeal to the vast majority of non-blueblood, non-Ivy League Americans.

National Review died with WFB. But, maybe it could rise from the ashes by broadening it's audience and purging the country club jerks.

6 posted on 07/08/2009 2:00:08 PM PDT by Dr. Thorne (Buy Gold and Guns Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Sorry, but the last thing we want to take from 2008 is that we can run an ill-informed mouthpiece for President since Obama won.

The reason we can beat Obama in 2012 is because he is ruining the country, and is incompetent, ignorant, and inexperienced.

The easiest way to LOSE in 2012 would be to run someone with even less experience, since “experience doesn’t matter anymore”.

In 2012, we need someone who looks like they can step in and fix things up across the board, and not screw up with inexperienced errors like Obama.


7 posted on 07/08/2009 2:03:38 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

The Barracuda senses green in the water. She should hit the speaking circuit, make money for herself and raise some for her friends. Write a book exposing it all. Then for 2012 collect support from those she raised money for. I love it when a plan comes together.


8 posted on 07/08/2009 2:06:14 PM PDT by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Hunter/DeMint 2012. Accept no substitutes.


9 posted on 07/08/2009 2:09:54 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Your “ill informed mouthpiece,” bunky, is the very successful governor of Alaska who just shepherded the biggest gas pipeline in the world through the legislature and is probably the best informed national leader when it comes to energy policy. Energy policy may well be the most important domestic issue to face the country in the next few decades.

So stop getting your panties in a wad after watching Tina Faye on SNL. She's not the real deal, she's an actress.

10 posted on 07/08/2009 2:22:21 PM PDT by moneyrunner (I have not flattered its rank breath, nor bowed to its idolatries a patient knee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Hunter/DeMint 2012. Accept no substitutes.

Oh yeah, those guys are real balls of fire who can get the "Reagan Democrats" to vote for them...not.

11 posted on 07/08/2009 2:24:34 PM PDT by moneyrunner (I have not flattered its rank breath, nor bowed to its idolatries a patient knee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

AS a matter of fact, this is nothing more than early campaigning by NR for St Mitt - nothing more and nothing less.

Having said that, I think Rich is capable of far better critique because this is a notch above ad hominem chattering (he must have been in a hurry to get on the cruise).

Dont worry, they came around on the immigration issue and they will on this. Sarah is the UberOutsider that people of all stripes will flock to when the poop hits the fan - any association with the bailouts will be the kiss of death.


12 posted on 07/08/2009 2:26:29 PM PDT by blackminorca
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Since both are rock ribbed Reaganites, and Hunter is the champion of American manufacturing, I’d say you were correct, before the snarky “not”


13 posted on 07/08/2009 2:27:19 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
ex-snook,

You understand. Wonder why you, me and Sarah seem to be the only ones? The Republicans still don't get it.

For a fun read, click on I Still Hate You, Sarah Palin ... The Republicans bring a knife to a gunfight, and lose again.

14 posted on 07/08/2009 2:28:55 PM PDT by moneyrunner (I have not flattered its rank breath, nor bowed to its idolatries a patient knee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Sigh.

All the crew at NRO are just a bunch of RINOs. (sarc).

If the people at FR — who get teed off anytime anyone (even those with solid conservative credentials) points out obvious issues with Palin — think they can do a better job, let them start their own magazine, and see how well it does. Of course, none of them have the intellectual firepower to do that, so they will continue to post anonymously here, slandering anybody who doesn’t agree with them 100 percent, and making no attempt to try to deal substantively with the points of those who disagree with them.


15 posted on 07/08/2009 2:29:16 PM PDT by lady lawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Well, you sure know how to spout the MSM (Dem) Party line.

This apparently comes as a surprise to you, but much of what the MSM says about Sarah isn't actually true.

16 posted on 07/08/2009 2:38:25 PM PDT by 3niner (When Obama succeeds, America fails.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer
Rich Lowry and the crew at the NRO
17 posted on 07/08/2009 2:39:53 PM PDT by o2bfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
In 2012, we need someone who looks like they can step in and fix things up across the board, and not screw up with inexperienced errors like Obama.

Well we know that ain't Mitt, so whom else do you have in mind?
18 posted on 07/08/2009 2:40:07 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Since both are rock ribbed Reaganites, and Hunter is the champion of American manufacturing, I’d say you were correct, before the snarky “not”

I accept your admonition that the "not" was snark. However ... and this is a big "however" are these guys going to be able to generate the enthusiasm of people who don't care about rock ribbed Reaganites? No one can replace Reagan because he had a genius about connecting with people.

That's the problem I have with people who tell us that Palin has to learn to sound as if she read textbooks about foreign policy or [fill in the blank] policy. That's not how Reagan connected; that's not what wins elections.

If that were the case Barry would not be President and Reagan would not have been either. Remember that Reagan was described - even after his election - as a amiable dunce.

We need someone who's instincts are right, who can galvanize the base and who can connect with the vast majority of Middle America. I can think of no one more suited than Sarah Palin.

19 posted on 07/08/2009 2:41:03 PM PDT by moneyrunner (I have not flattered its rank breath, nor bowed to its idolatries a patient knee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner; CharlesWayneCT
So stop getting your panties in a wad after watching Tina Faye on SNL. She's not the real deal, she's an actress.

You don't understand, his post really isn't about Sarah, it's about tearing down support for Sarah so his boy Mitt can win.

Charles is really transparent.
20 posted on 07/08/2009 2:42:03 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson