Posted on 01/23/2010 3:21:51 AM PST by broken_arrow1
Sarah Palin's decision to campaign for John McCain's reelection bid is dismaying some of her staunchest allies and defenders on the web.
This serves as a much-uninvited buzz-kill to conservatives, who finally had the beam of hope shone on them Tuesday night. Grassroots conservatism made a historic comeback with Scott Brown, who defeated Martha Coakley for Edward Kennedy's Senate seat in the very liberal state of Massachusetts.
Aside from her personal allegiance to John McCain, it is incomprehensible what Palin thinks this will do for the country or her political career, which has made her one of the main inspirations of grassroots enthusiasm.
Of course, there is no doubt that John McCain is an honorable man who proudly served his country. There is also no doubt that the Arizona senator has delivered on selective issues, like the current health care debacle that the majority of Americans disapprove of.
I personally am so humbled by McCain's strongest characteristics that I might even be willing to overlook his daughter Meghan's passive-aggressive dissent from the conservative wing of the Republican Party.
Like many conservatives, I am certain that Sarah Palin is grateful to McCain for plucking her out of Alaska and placing her in the spotlight, where her endless well of conservative energy has been able to flourish.
Truthfully, every grassroots conservative responsible for the surge of vocal dissent to Obama's policies knows that as the frontrunner in the 2008 election, John McCain gave real Americans and independent voters very little to believe in -- that is, until he gave us Sarah Palin, who became the first V.P. candidate in history to carry the entirety of a ticket's momentum.
Looking at McCain's political history, it doesn't take long to determine why he was unable to inspire the grassroots. While one person can make the case for McCain's patriotism, the next can make an equally convincing argument to question his conservatism.
McCain reached across the political aisle in 2007 to develop a soft-amnesty piece of proposed legislation with the late Senator Edward Kennedy. Condemned by critics like Michelle Malkin as a "crap sandwich," the bill proposed small fines to illegal immigrants. Not only did the fines lack the value of the infrastructure these immigrants had taken advantage of for years, but they also allowed them to stay. Americans were outraged, and the bill was never put to a vote.
Previously, McCain had again reached to the far left and crafted McCain-Feingold in 2002, which placed campaign-contribution limits and regulations on selective entities such as businesses and corporations. Coincidentally, that bill was overturned by the Supreme Court this week. This was such a success for freedom and democracy that it immediately won the scathing dissent of President Obama and Senator Chuck Schumer.
Next, John McCain used his power as a United States senator to hysterically denounce enhanced interrogation methods at Guantánamo, and he also became a strong proponent of the campaign to close altogether the prison where detainees are given three full meals a day, hours of free time for activities and religious reading, and the right not to be awakened for interrogations. The average detainee has gained forty pounds during his stay at Gitmo. How's that for "torture?"
Aside from health care, conservative victor Scott Brown campaigned explicitly on the Obama administration's soft treatment of terrorism (providing them with lawyers, having their trials on American soil, and proposing to relocate them to American prisons).
The independent spirits of Americans have responded. Obama's approval ratings have tanked, the life of the current Senate health care disaster has been doubted by Nancy Pelosi, and Americans have overwhelmingly denounced treating terrorists who seek to destroy our democracy and its accompanying constitutional fabric as common criminals with constitutional rights. They did it on Tuesday by giving a half-century-old liberal seat to a conservative.
Sarah Palin had a major effect on this by awakening the once-silent majority. We are now witnessing the loudest dissent against big government ever via average American independents.
Similarly, the Tea Party movement's effectiveness immediately earned it an unflattering nickname from the viewer-lacking hosts on MS-NBC and Air America radio. The movement has adopted all of the same commonsense approaches that Sarah Palin advocated from the moment she sat on the city council of Wasilla to the moment she was elected governor.
Naturally, Palin has earned the title of keynote speaker at the first-ever Tea Party convention, and her political action committee is bringing in massive amounts of money donated by real Americans inspired to continue to challenge the status quo.
Knowing that Palin has already repaid McCain by preventing his campaign from suffering one of the most embarrassing landslide losses in history, one wonders exactly why she would use her momentum stumping for him, especially when he is undeniably perceived by many members of the grassroots community as the same type of status-quo politician she's fought in the past. This sadly leads some to believe that this is mere political payback.
Sarah Palin is no longer a V.P. candidate being told what to say and do by a campaign. She is among the frontrunners of a movement far greater than simply running for president. This kind of a quick decision not only gives the media an open forum to further attack her, but it also purposely creates doubts among her biggest supporters.
While conservatives and independents band together to materialize such a movement in an attempt to undo many years of damage created by liberals and RINOs, Sarah Palin has the responsibility of using her newfound power wisely.
If she doesn't, the people can respond to her just as loudly as they responded in Massachusetts, thus making John McCain one political bridge to nowhere she'll never shake loose.
See post 100
Just as I will never agree with everything other politicians espouse, I will disagree with Gov. Palin at times, too. This is one of them, although, she does owe McCain for bringing her to the nation’s spotlight.
I appreciate loyalty and hope she shows up, says nice things about Senator McCain and goes on about her business.
She will still be my favorite Conservative.
“The guy who claims to have pulled McCain out of the jaws of defeat in 2008 is FRED MALEK. Fred, according to some on FR, is now leading Palin on her path.”
“Fred Malek,has singled out former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as the GOP’s leading contender in the early stages of the 2012 Republican presidential derby.”
lol, Malek can’t support Palin and Romney for the same race.
Disagree. This is the equivalent of Bush stumping for Specter over Toomey, and Gingrich continuing to endorse Scozzafava: Political suicide.
Personally it may be nice, but politically she will lose her support with the Conservative Base and Tea Party, have no chance in 2012, probably end up leaving FNC, and hand the Left a "dream come true" gift.
NO ONE has announced, so that would make your statement true. And she is CERTAINLY being pimped here.
As to the larger point, if you favor her so much, then state your case for her. I will happily defend against her standing upon the three pillars of Conservatism. If she does not fit the criteria in all three factions, she is not Conservative.
So far, no one has been able to define her as a Conservative against this well worn and time honored method- and I have offered this same challenge on numerous Palin threads. State your case. I will get back to it this evening.
This comment speaks to your ignorance of politics. Palin isn’t redefining conservative. She is marketing herself as a conservative who uses common sense, something that is lacking in Wash. DC.
No. What is lacking in Washington is old-fashioned, normal, every-day Conservatism. Reagan Conservatism, not "common sense" conservatism. It doesn't need redefining, as the additions are superfluous... Unless one is looking to redefine it on purpose. Two wit: Name me these "conservatives" who are lacking common sense in Washington.
You also didn’t support Scott Brown, who isnt a conservative but agrees with conservatives on many points in Liberal La La land Massachussetts. In one election, he has saved us from Socialized medicine and helped mitigate the damage done to our economy by that stupid ObamaCare.
Scott Brown saved us from nothing. Considering that he was *for* cap and tax in Mass, and *for* universal Romney-care in Mass, one has a hard time believing his rhetoric and promises. I will again assert, you will rue the day.
Federal power will not be averted with anything other than Federalism. True federalism, asserted by the STATES. That is the money shot. Anything else assumes the federal power. At best, Brown is a stop-gap, and at worst he is yet another vote, when the Republicans come to power and do the same damnable things the Democrats are trying to do now. The reason for electing provable Conservatives lies therein. Not only will they block any federal power, they will not stand in the way of federalism. Your Mr. Brown will be on the wrong side of such a thing.
“This is the equivalent of Bush stumping for Specter over Toomey”
Sorry, there is no equivalency there. Specter didn’t bring Bush onto the national political stage like McCain did for Palin.
She is probably the most conservative of any candidate who has announced they are running.
“NO ONE has announced, so that would make your statement true.”
My statement is also true of the candidates that are the favorites to run and expected to run.
Palin
Romney
Pawlenty
Huckabee
“So far, no one has been able to define her as a Conservative”
Wow, you really are a 1.7%’r. You may even be a .3%’r based on that comment.
” conservatism... doesn’t need redefining”
Palin isn’t redefining conservative. She is marketing herself as a conservative who uses common sense, something that is lacking in Wash. DC.
“name these conservatives that don’t have common sese”
Nearly the entire leadership, most of whom were in office in 94 and subsequently spent money like big govt
Democrats...Boehner, McConnel et al.
“Scott Brown saved us from nothing.”
Reaffirming your irrelavency. You might have noticed that the Dems were dealt a severe blow in liberal Mass. You may want to reassess you mensa status in all things political.
Was Specter a RINO? Yes.
Was there a more Conservative candidate, Toomey, running against Specter? Yes.
Could Bush have quietly asked Specter to retire and then campaign for Toomey? Yes.
Did Bush campaign for Specter instead? Yes.
Did incumbent Specter win? Yes.
Did Specter later betray the GOP and Conservatives with his voting record, and ultimately party affiliation? Yes.
Granted, JD just announced his candidacy and Sarah may reconsider. Hopefully she will!!
Umm you ignore the previous fact that McCain put Palin on the national political stage. That makes your comparison to Bush/Specter a faulty one.
...and no, she isn’t going to change her mind
DeMint endorsed Mitt during the last election cycle.
LOL!
What was Reagan saying when he chose the 85% liberal Richard Schwieker as his potential VP in 68?
Ouch!
Well I doubt that the relationship between Bush/Specter or Gingrich/Scozzafava can be similarly characterized. Palin res ipsa loquitor owes much to McLame, I don’t see where the other groupings have similar histories. OTH, I would agree that if her relationship to McLame were similar to the latter two, going there would be just plain stupid. Sometimes you gotta dance with them that brung ya.
If one were to accept partial qualifications, such as are represented in these you gave me, Huckabee is the pick - At least he advocates strongly for one of the three pillars (social conservatism)... The rest do not qualify in ANY, to include Palin. Of course, I do not accept partial qualifications - So I will not vote for any of these in any circumstance.
Wow, you really are a 1.7%’r. You may even be a .3%’r based on that comment.
Rather than epithets, PUT UP or SHUT UP. Accept the challenge.
Nearly the entire leadership, most of whom were in office in 94 and subsequently spent money like big govt Democrats...Boehner, McConnel et al.
I asked you to name Conservatives who lack common sense - not Republicans. Certainly, the "compassionate conservatives" you mention are not Conservatives. They are moderates of the same cloth as the rest. Your girl Palin is rubbing elbows with the self-same moderates that you say she is going to displace. It is laughable.
Reaffirming your irrelavency. You might have noticed that the Dems were dealt a severe blow in liberal Mass. You may want to reassess you mensa status in all things political.
My irrelevancy? Again, it is the Republicans who are irrelevant - Else they would have WON. Even WRT Brown, the Republicans had *nothing to do with it*. It was the TEA Parties that lofted him up.
No. The "severe blow" comes from the Democrats insisting to go further. If they back off, this will tend to improve their chances, as they have time to transform. If this had happened in June, I would say it is unrecoverable. But the message sent will force them to moderate, which will tend to resolve the problem. Even as Clinton backed off, and had a fairly successful presidency.
If Republicans do not revert to real Conservatism, they will not win big this fall - Their same old tired platitudes, and "UP the middle" strategy will destroy them.
And what price, if all that happens is filling both houses with moderate Republicans? SOSDD. The agenda would be moderated, but not REMOVED under a moderate-controlled Republican Congress. Amnesty would remain. Cap & Trade would remain. Almost every thing the Democrats are doing was (and still IS) mirrored in the Republicans.
What is necessary is a C_O_N_S_E_R_V_A_T_I_V_E revolution. All else is more of the same.
She will be booed as a teaparty keynote speaker...so sad.
I've been thinking about how that Tea Party convention might go now. And I wonder if she yet realizes how many of her supporters will be very dissatisfied with this move to support Juan over JD (who everyone knew was highly likely to enter the race).
If she does not realize that by now, then she does not read FR - if she does not read FR then she will never win since she will not listen to us. So bad move all the way. Unless she knows something we don’t...that McCain will loose or give up? I am really lost here. Trying to understand why she took that road. Here is a difference between being a good friend and saving the country with the right principles. Oh well...that was a great dream..let’s see what happens next.
If she doesn't change her mind, and we find a re-elected McCain "reaching across the aisle" to support Shamnesty II, Cap-n-Tax Lite, Sotomayor II, or McCain-Feingold II....
Sarah Palin is over.
That poll came out the very same day Palin announced she would campaign here in AZ for McCain.. NO WAY she is the person causing it to go up, if you lived in the state you would be acutely aware McCain has been running nasty anti-JD ads for weeks now and JD has been unable to respond because he is not a candidate for office yet...
You really have no idea of what you are talking about.
Your words:
“... The rest do not qualify (as conservatives) in ANY, to include Palin.”
Strong on defense and terrorism, strong on limited government, stong on social issues and abortion.
You couldn’t be any more incorrect.
” I do not accept partial qualifications - So I will not vote for ANY of these in ANY circumstance.
That’s why you are Mr. Irrelavent.
That’s why you are a .03%’r
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.