Posted on 10/17/2008 9:34:11 AM PDT by St. Louis Conservative
The truth few wish to utter is that the GOP has abandoned many conservatives, who mostly nurse their angst in private. Those chickens we keep hearing about have indeed come home to roost. Years of pandering to the extreme wing — the “kooks” the senior Buckley tried to separate from the right — have created a party no longer attentive to its principles.
Instead, as Christopher Buckley pointed out in a blog post on thedailybeast.com explaining his departure from National Review, eight years of “conservatism” have brought us “a doubled national debt, ruinous expansion of entitlement programs, bridges to nowhere, poster boy Jack Abramoff and an ill-premised, ill-waged war conducted by politicians of breathtaking arrogance.”
Republicans are not short on brainpower — or pride — but they have strayed off course. They do not, in fact, deserve to win this time, and someone had to remind them why.
Christopher Buckley, ever the swashbuckling heir to his father’s defiant spirit, walked the plank so that the sinking mother ship might right itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Kathleen is mad that an Alaskan “hick” is the new voice of the party. Ronald Reagan who these elites used and sponged off of, was a movie star.
She has swallowed the narrative from her Washington Post colleagues - the Republicans have been taken over by “extremists” and “kooks.”
I wrote to her and asked - exactly who are the “kooks?”
exactly what extremist positions are the Republicans now espousing? What conservative values have been abandoned?
I sense the Obama love-fest in DC has become too much for her to resist.
It’s annoying to be lectured by someone about conservatism’s failures by someone who does not fundamentally understand what conservatism is. Parker is a tool.
Buckley said this week that he was going to vote for “The One.” Isn’t that like killing to baby to cure diaper rash?
I wonder why she is sinking her own ship.
Kathleen Parker is in a downward spiral into liberal hell.
These people do not have beliefs and principals. They have attitudes and nuanced positions.
Just like their new hero, Barry Soetero. He's the cool black friend they always secretly wished they could have.
Actually, Katty, WFB is probably turning in his grave.
The dork of a son said Rush is from the Sanhedrin wing of the party. WFB admired Rush and called him the leader of the conservative movement.
St>louis, I can no longer even reply to this wingnut. When you have time and/or inclination, you might read “The Sixth Deadly Sin” -—http://www.wegotsarah.com/
Has Kathleen Parker always been a “conservative”? She is always referred to as a “conservative” columnist, but is she really? What’s her history? What have her columns been like in the past?
No doubt his seafaring father is cheering from heaven: “Ahoy there, Christo! Well done, my son.”
No doubt his conservative father is jeering from heaven: “Ron, Jr., I see you gave up ballet . . “.
The mess the GOP is in is precisely the result of following the advice of halfwits like Parker. Does she think the “far right” are responsible for the No Child Left Behind Act, the prescription drug bill, the Iraq War, and the Wall Street bailout? I would submit that Kathleen would have a pretty damn hard time making that case. That bimbo must be suffering from delusions of adequacy. My guess is that her phone has been ringing off the hook with calls from MSM and Hollywood types praising her for her “insights” about Palin, and stoking her obviously overblown ego. She'll end up like Arianna Huffington, I suppose. Well, good riddance, toots, you were an affirmative action hire in the first place, so your departure will be no great loss.
KP, enjoy your 15 minutes of approval from the MSM.
At the risk of invoking the dangerous "Hitler Analogy" I am reminding of Hitler's ordering the destruction of Germany when the war was lost because he decided the nation had "failed" him. Man, I don't want to be loved by these kinds of people.
The increasingly irrelevant, soporific, and downright silly Kathleen Parker's latest homage to clueless irony.
“She calls the Bush years eight years of “conservatism”?!? Aside from some tax cuts and some great judges, there wasn’t a whole lot of conservatism there.”
Exactly. It isn’t conservatism that brought us to this point it is the RINO party.
My point is that you cannot point to the fiscal policies of W. and use them as a definition for “conservative” as a basis for your attack on conservatism. That’s a fallacy of logic I believe is called a Strawman Argument.
With the beginning lines of this column, I may only conclude she too tasted some Kool-Aid and has joined the cult. Whatever she’s written in the past is part of her former life.
She's strictly 50/50 for every 'conservative' column she writes another which is mainstream democrat left wing. I've been reading her for years on-off since I stumbled upon a very common sense column she wrote opposing women in combat. I like to think of her as the greatest pundit that ever straddled both horns of a dilemma. But, make no mistake,and I wish I could find the column where she stated this succinctly, she is a democrat and after all her self-described conservatism she will party vote for the democrat.
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.