Replies

Krauthammer was one of the leaders of the "Bush didn't move fast enough" crowd over Katrina. Apparently he is unaware of how FEMA is organized, and ignored the Preident's efforts to get New orleans evacuated. He couldn't even bring himself to say "Let's wait until all the information is in." He piled on because he was panicked by Geraldo and Shep.

And of course, in failing (along with many of the other consrvative pundits) to defend the President and attack the real source of the problem, Blanco, he aided the trashing of the President by the MSM.

The result of this trashing was lowered approval numbers for the President. With lower approval numbers the squishes in the Senate get weak-kneed. Hence the request by Susan Collins and others for Bush to send them someone who wasn't controversial. The squishes are afraid of the press.

So now, after being part of the media blitz which caused the problem with the Senate, he is now griping because a more famous candidate wasn't nominated. He is griping about this "smallness" of the nomination.

Well, I am griping about the cluelessness and obtuseness of the conservative pundits. Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer can complain about the competence and conservatism of this nomination; I, myself, am going to complain about the competence of a conservative pundit who draws his paycheck from the Washington Post.

Can you address the substance of why Krauthammer says this pick is wrong, rather than produce a domino theory of how it is his fault as a pundit, that the President of the United States was forced to make a lackluster appointment?

Krauthammer is by far not alone. You can keep working down the ever-growing list, dismissing all as kooks or fools or haters. But eventually you'll run out of invective and we'll still be left with this weak pick.

"Well, I am griping about the cluelessness and obtuseness of the conservative pundits."

If there was ever a time to send our pundits to their room it is now.

Any Senator who votes against this woman is going to have the average American crying foul and elitism.

The beltway and pundits are irrelevant here and it is showing.

TDSFW.

I really wish we had more big picture thinkers in the "conservative movement". Miss M, what do you think Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg and the other old lib fart are going to do when they come to the realization that their votes no longer matter. A protracted fight over the "known quantity" puts their day of reckoning farther away.

A quick confirmation of a conservative appointee virtually guarantees two more vacancies in short order. Then will be the time for the knockdown drag out we all are looking forward to.

re: Perhaps Mr. Krauthammer can complain about the competence and conservatism of this nomination; I, myself, am going to complain about the competence of a conservative pundit who draws his paycheck from the Washington Post)))

They do tend to forget that they serve at the pleasure of their readers. I have long wished for a whole new, bright, generation of conservative punditeers that do not hail from the northern Atlantic.

I think some are missing the big picture here...and its not a pretty one.

For any political movement to be effective, it demands the unity of three elements.

a) An active base of footsoldiers who provide money, time, and walk the streets, work the polls...etc.., and most important...VOTE regularly.

b) An intellectual or pundit group who provide inspiration and encouragement to the base. The base usually follow the pundits religiously...as the many listeners to Rush have over the years. Politically active people not only lurk on FR, they also listen and follow these "elitist" pundits.

c) A political party who incorporates the policies of the pundits, and are voted into office largely due to the efforts of the base group. For example, the foundations of the Reagan revolution were established not by Reagan himself, but by Bill Buckley (an elitist pundit) who inspired Reagan. Up until now, for the conservative movement..the conservative party has been synonymous with the Republican party.

When you are lucky...an inspired political leader comes along who not only leads the base...he or she attracts other outside groups into the movement...as Reagan did with the so called Reagan democrats...and as Bush did post 9-11 with many social conservatives such as Jews and Catholics and fundamentalist blacks who normally voted democrat.

Now...we have a situation developing which is very serious...a schism of sorts is forming....and it is being led my an overwhelming majority of the same intellectual punditry class... many here are calling the "elitists".

And the base is slowly becoming aware...watching and listening...and getting alarmed.

Overtime...this schism will seriously weaken the conservative movement... or lead to the establishment of a third party alternative. It has happened before...it can happen again.

If people step back and look around...they will be very concerned, as I am...unless of course they are 'moderates' who dont particularly care about the viability of the conservative movement.