This is an example of a positive campaign ad, about as good as I’ve seen. A positive approach is when the candidate tells you what is good about him (or her) and not what is bad about everyone else. This is not to say negative campaigning will or should ever stop. It won’t for one simple reason: It works. People say with their mouths that they hate negative campaigning, but they don’t say that with their votes. Negative ads get votes so negative campaigns will always be with us. That’s not to say that merely being negative is enough. One must also hit the right notes. Michelle Bachmann found that out when she released Ed Rollins to attack Sarah Palin and it backfired on her. But it’s still true that in politics the cliche about nice guys finishing last is as true at it can ever be. It’s good to see a positive campaign ad like this once in a while.
Mickey Kaus asks “Have any of the actual GOP candidates given a speech as good as Sarah Palin’s “crony capitalism” talk in Iowa on September 3?” My answer is a resounding no. The problem may be a lack of conviction to anything other than the desire to get elected.
Below is a sample of Palin’s labor day weekend speech that Kaus believes is better than anything we’ve heard from the likes of Romney, Perry, Cain, or even the eloquent but untrustworthy Newt Gingrich. Right now Cain appears to be the one who stands out as able to inspire voters, and once there was Michele Bachmann. Unfortunately, she has gone off of some weird tangents and her candidacy is pretty much in the dumper now.
This is the part of Palin’s speech where she recounts the Tea Party victories in the 2010 elections which gave newfound hope of reclaiming the blessings of liberty and prosperity in America. As great as that was, some difficult struggles remain:
We sent a new class of leaders to D.C., but immediately the permanent political class tried to co-opt them – because the reality is we are governed by a permanent political class, until we change that. They talk endlessly about cutting government spending, and yet they keep spending more. They talk about massive unsustainable debt, and yet they keep incurring more. They spend, they print, they borrow, they spend more, and then they stick us with the bill. Then they pat their own backs, and they claim that they faced and “solved” the debt crisis that they got us in, but when we were humiliated in front of the world with our country’s first credit downgrade, they promptly went on vacation.
No, they don’t feel the same urgency that we do. But why should they? For them business is good; business is very good. Seven of the ten wealthiest counties are suburbs of Washington, D.C. Polls there actually – and usually I say polls, eh, they’re for strippers and cross country skiers – but polls in those parts show that some people there believe that the economy has actually improved. See, there may not be a recession in Georgetown, but there is in the rest of America.
Yeah, the permanent political class – they’re doing just fine. Ever notice how so many of them arrive in Washington, D.C. of modest means and then miraculously throughout the years they end up becoming very, very wealthy? Well, it’s because they derive power and their wealth from their access to our money – to taxpayer dollars. They use it to bail out their friends on Wall Street and their corporate cronies, and to reward campaign contributors, and to buy votes via earmarks. There is so much waste. And there is a name for this: It’s called corporate crony capitalism. This is not the capitalism of free men and free markets, of innovation and hard work and ethics, of sacrifice and of risk. No, this is the capitalism of connections and government bailouts and handouts, of waste and influence peddling and corporate welfare. This is the crony capitalism that destroyed Europe’s economies. It’s the collusion of big government and big business and big finance to the detriment of all the rest – to the little guys. It’s a slap in the face to our small business owners – the true entrepreneurs, the job creators accounting for 70% of the jobs in America, it’s you who own these small businesses, you’re the economic engine, but you don’t grease the wheels of government power.
So, do you want to know why the permanent political class doesn’t really want to cut any spending? Do you want to know why nothing ever really gets done? It’s because there’s nothing in it for them. They’ve got a lot of mouths to feed – a lot of corporate lobbyists and a lot of special interests that are counting on them to keep the good times and the money rolling along.
The full transcript of Palin’s speech is here. The GOP hopefuls should read it carefully. So far, not one of them is this inspiring.
From Sarah Palin’s facebook page Tuesday, September 6, 2011:
These are the things the Republican party candidates should be saying. They can learn from listening to Sarah Palin. If none care to, Obama will be the winner.
Incidentally, Internet Chat Rooms (I’ve never been to one) are said to be dying on the vine. Facebook has destroyed them the way it destroyed MySpace, another internet phenomenon I never knew personally. I do have a facebook page. I’m told the Chat Rooms were the best way to make the internet pay by selling advertising, but not anymore. The traffic is on facebook.
Will blogs be next? I don’t think so. They serve a different purpose and market. Besides, blogs and facebook compliment each other.
The way to think about an Obama reelection in 2012 is to think about a McCain victory in 2008. Had McCain won in 2008 where would conservatives be now? “On the ropes” is the only answer that makes any sense given what is known of McCain’s history and his personal traits. It’s unimaginable that there would be the sort of conservative ascendancy that has occurred in the last 2 years if McCain had defeated Obama in 2008. Obama has done for the conservative movement what McCain could never have done, nor had any desire to do, and that is to revive the conservative movement and inspire The Tea Party which has moved big numbers of “precious” independents away from the Democrat party to the Republican party. I call independents “precious” because both parties think they are the key to electoral success.
The Republican field of likely presidential candidates for 2012 doesn’t look all that good unless you consider some that are probably not well positioned for 2012, but will be by 2016. For 2012 it is Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Mitch Daniels, Newt Gingrich or Mike Huckaby. All of those would be a disaster for conservatives and for the Republican party because they are tentative conservatives and would be too easy for Democrats and the media to demonize. They’d start apologizing as soon as they were attacked on the most frivolous grounds, or like Daniels, give up on conservative principles. They are in the George B. McClellan branch of the Party. In the Ulysses S. Grant branch of the party are the young bloods; they are Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin, and possibly Mr. “Roadmap for America” Paul Ryan, although he has already ruled himself out for 2012. Texas Governor Rick Perry fits here as well.
The Grants are the ones that can reposition the Republican party to attract conservatives and independents and make it a winning majority, and become the party of good governance. While the McClellans dither, snivel and apologize for being just a teeny-weeny bit conservative, the Grants fight for conservative ideas and proudly proclaim their allegiance to conservative principles. The McClellan branch are losers and will take down conservatives and Republicans with them. But if a Republican is to defeat Obama in 2012 it will likely to one from the McClellan branch. If one of them can beat Obama it won’t be because he is such a good candidate. It will be solely because Obama is such an awful candidate. The Grants have the potential to be great candidates, but perhaps not yet. Perhaps not by 2012. Surely by 2016, though.
A 2012 outcome that has Obama getting a second term but Republicans in control of both houses of Congress would not be a bad result. The Grants will be there doing good by holding the namby-pamby, scaredy-cat, tired and old McClellan slow-boys’ feet to the fire. Obama’s continued presence will keep the Tea Party rolling along as well. The fight to get rid of Obamacare will intensify and Obama and the Democrats will have to defend it as it becomes increasingly unpopular. All in all, 2016 will be a great year for conservatives and Republicans by heading off a possible McClellan win in 2012 and the sort of sorry-assed, one-term Republican presidency any of them are good for only to be followed by another big across-the-board Democrat victory in 2016 when the voters are once again fatigued by Republican moderates, RINOS and losers.
I find support for this thesis from Noemie Emery, one of my favorite columnists.
Liberals, oh sorry…progressives, and their media pals thought they had a BIG opportunity. Oh Boy, Oh Boy, a horrific shooting that might be blamed on Sarah Palin and the Tea Party! The liberal media was salivating. Surely this atrocity could be exploited the way Bill Clinton, with the guiding hand of Dick Morris, successfully exploited the Oklahoma City bombing. Joy to the Left-Wing World!
Now, within 48 hours, a total collapse of the story line. It didn’t work. It’s exposed for the fraud and hatred that it is. Nobody is buying it, except Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who has probably cinched his defeat in the next election. It turns out part of his motivation is to cover up how his own department dropped the ball on Jared Loughner, missing an opportunity to have stopped this killer before he struck.
And then there is this: Official: DHS has not determined any possible ties between Arizona shooter and any right wing group.
So the tables are now turned. Michelle Malkin is ready to play tu quo que . “They asked for it. They got it.”
Here is a list of the hateful left-wing rhetoric against conservatives from 2000-2010 that would have driven the liberal media right out of their minds if any conservative person or group had said anything of a similar nature about the left.
This McCarthyism of the left – devoid of intellectual content, unsupported by data – is a mental tic, not an idea but a tactic for avoiding engagement with ideas. It expresses limitless contempt for the American people, who have reciprocated by reducing liberalism to its current characteristics of electoral weakness and bad sociology.
Journalists Who Warned Against “Jumping to Conclusions” After Ft. Hood Now Jumping to Conclusions On Arizona Shooting
All of journalism warned against “jumping to conclusions” after Maj. Nidal Hasan killed 13 people at Ft.Hood, Texas on November 5, 2009. The conclusion we were warned against was that the Ft. Hood shooting had anything at all to do with Islamic terrorism, in spite of a mountain of evidence showing that it is exactly what it was.
That evidence included the following: Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar!” as he began his spree, his computer showed that he had visited numerous websites devoted to Islamic violence, he had left postings on those and other websites that he viewed the U.S. Military as his enemy, he advocated Muslim suicide bombings, he told people that he was going “to do good work for God, “ and railed against U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, calling those involvements “wars on Islam.” There was no need to “jump” to the conclusion that Ft. Hood attack was an act of Islamist violence; that was the obvious conclusion.
Nevertheless, one heard all over the media warning against jumping to any such conclusion. Army spokesmen General George Casey said “We can’t jump to conclusions,” and retired General Wesley Clark said “The important thing is for everyone not to jump to conclusions” that this had anything to do with Islam. Obama said, “I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts.” Quickly the conventional wisdom all over the news media was that it would be wrong to “jump to conclusions.”
Jared Loughner shot and gravely wounded Arizona Congresswoman Gabriella Gifford at a safeway store yesterday. He also shot several other people including a Federal Judge who died. In all five people are dead by Loughner’s gun and eighteen are wounded. A 9-year old girl born on 9/11 is among the dead.
Democrat politicians and the news media did not hesitate one second in jumping to the conclusion that Loughner was put up to it by the Tea Party and Sarah Palin. Even Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik has jumped to his own conclusion blaming “the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government.” The sheriff gave no explanation, of course.
There is now ample evidence that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party are about the last thing on earth that can be associated with the likes of Jared Lee Loughner. It is clear that in the immediate aftermath of the shooting there could not have been a scintilla of evidence connecting Loughner to anything or anybody connected to the Tea Party, Sarah Palin or any conservative idea or cause. Loughner has not claimed any connection to any group, not given any motive and is apparently not talking.
So with no evidence, Palin was blamed for using gun and shooting metaphors in speeches , on her Facebook pages, and in her tweets on Twitters. That is about as thin as it gets since nearly everyone uses such metaphors as “targeting”, “putting in the cross hairs”, “hitting the bullseye”, “reloading”, “ammunition”, etc. These are always understood by the context in which they appear and no one believes they are an incitement to violence. Blaming Palin for Loughner’s criminal acts based on her use of these metaphors is ridiculous beyond belief. It is grasping at straws by people desperate to find something, anything, to blame on Palin and the Tea Party movement.
With the passage of mere hours of the event we know that Loughner was a pothead, he liked looking at videos of American flags burning, his favorites books included the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. Most of his internet postings appear to be incoherent rants. He might be mentally ill. He is certainly no Tea Partier, nor Sarah Palin fan.
That doesn’t stop the left from using this horrific shooting to cram their political agenda down our throats. These people have no shame.
Jennifer Rubin gave my favorite quote about Jared Loughner: “You can almost hear the disappointment from the left that he was a pothead rather than a Tea Partyer.”
I’ve said in previous posts that if Republicans are willing to pay attention the Democrats will always tell them who they most fear by demonizing that person. So the vicious attacks against Sarah Palin by the left is a sure sign that they fear her and will try to get Republicans to dump her. The reason Republicans are sometimes called the stupid party is that sometimes they fall for it. This time seems to be different and no amount of petty criticism is convincing Republicans that Sarah Palin is anything but one of their most valuable assets.
Washington Post columnist David Broder is often said to be the dean of Washington journalism. He is highly regarded by the Washington liberal establishment of journalists and top-level Democrats. Therefore, his recent Washington Post column on Sarah Palin is sure to drive the liberals nuts.
The snows that obliterated Washington in the past week interfered with many scheduled meetings, but they did not prevent the delivery of one important political message: Take Sarah Palin seriously.
Her lengthy Saturday night keynote address to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville and her debut on the Sunday morning talk show circuit with Fox News’ Chris Wallace showed off a public figure at the top of her game — a politician who knows who she is and how to sell herself, even with notes on her palm.
This was not the first time that Palin has impressed me. I gave her high marks for her vice presidential acceptance speech in St. Paul. But then, and always throughout that campaign, she was laboring to do more than establish her own place. She was selling a ticket headed by John McCain against formidable Democratic opposition and burdened by the legacy of the Bush administration.
Broder’s words here will grate like fingernails on the blackboard to that part of the left that passionately hates her, which is most of the left. And their agony can only increase as they read on:
Blessed with an enthusiastic audience of conservative activists, Palin used the Tea Party gathering and coverage on the cable networks to display the full repertoire she possesses, touching on national security, economics, fiscal and social policy, and every other area where she could draw a contrast with Barack Obama and point up what Republicans see as vulnerabilities in Washington.
Her invocation of “conservative principles and common-sense solutions” was perfectly conventional. What stood out in the eyes of TV-watching pols of both parties was the skill with which she drew a self-portrait that fit not just the wishes of the immediate audience but the mood of a significant slice of the broader electorate.
Freed of the responsibilities she carried as governor of Alaska, devoid of any official title but armed with regular gigs on Fox News Channel and more speaking invitations than she can fulfill, Palin is perhaps the most visible Republican in the land.
Broder may be shown some of the viciousness of the left that is normally reserved for Republicans and conservatives, but the grown ups in the Democrat party are going to start wondering if the usual strategy of Alinsky Rule #5 [“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”] is not working this time. Not only are Republicans refusing to cave in, one of the Democrats own liberal high priests in Journalism that usually has their back appears smitten by Palin. The Shrinks in Manhattan will be fully booked.
Those who want to stop her [that would be Democrats, Ed.] will need more ammunition than deriding her habit of writing on her hand. The lady is good.
The more the left scorns her the stronger she gets. Ralph Reed writes at National Review Online:
Palin has sharpened both her message and performance on the stump. Her Tea Party remarks provide a blueprint of sorts for conservative candidates in 2010.
Conservative candidates are lining up to get Palin’s support because they want the Tea Party to support them and not to become a third party movement, which would simply elect Democrats by splitting the Republican vote. The Tea Party people are wild about Palin, maybe because she speaks a clear message they like and doesn’t try to talk down to them. Reed explains two accomplishments for Palin at the Tea Party convention:
First, she led with Obama’s lack of leadership in the war on terrorism, including Mirandizing the Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab after 50 minutes and treating terrorism as primarily a law-enforcement matter. “To win that war we need a commander-in-chief, not a professor of law standing at a lectern,” she said to a loud ovation.
Second, during the Q and A following her speech, when asked what were the first things Republicans should do if they regain Congress, Palin emphasized fiscal responsibility and time-honored values. “We’ve got to rein in the spending, obviously, and not raise it [with] extremely high budgets and then say, okay, we are going to freeze a couple of programs,” she said. Then, talking about America’s religious heritage, she said America needs to “go back to some of our roots as a God-fearing nation” and elect leaders unafraid “to proclaim their reliance on our Creator.”
This is driving the left bonkers.
Democratic consultant Bob Shrum, appearing on MSNBC, denounced all this as essentially hate speech. He attacked Palin for being “a merchant of hate with an oh-gosh smile.” (Translation: It’s working!)
The left will always tell us who on our side is the most effective in opposing them. They show us by their loathing and demonizing that person. According to Reed, they know what they are doing but apparently can’t help themselves:
What ultimately drives the media crazy is they know instinctively they are co-conspirators in her rise. From the Katie Couric interview to the over-the-top attacks by the likes of Shrum, by overplaying their hand they made Palin a bigger force than they ever intended. Had they simply been fair to Palin when she ran for vice president and treated her with decency, she would not be viewed now by so many grassroots conservatives as a victim of irrational elitist hatred. As much as John McCain in selecting her as his running mate in 2008, the MSM made her a force, and she is proving she can use that platform very effectively indeed.
Someone named Stefan Sirucek at The Huffington Puffington Post thinks he has found a bombshell when a picture of Sarah Palin at the Tea Party convention reveals that she —Shock!— wrote some crib notes on her palm and referred to them in an interview after her speech to the convention. I’d wager that Stefan is the sort of guy who tried to cheat on tests in high school by writing test answers in his palm. In younger days I can remember writing notes on my palm of things I thought were important to remember, such as a girl’s phone number.
Here is Stefan with the best he has to offer:
Closer inspection of a photo of Sarah Palin, during a speech in which she mocked President Obama for his use of a teleprompter, reveals several notes written on her left hand. The words “Energy”, “Tax” and “Lift American Spirits” are clearly visible. There’s also what appears to read as “Budget cuts” with the word Budget crossed out.
Just to be clear: The notes most likely weren’t for her speech, for which she used prepared remarks, but for the Q&A session that followed, during which she glanced at the hand in question.
But in my opinion that’s even worse.
There were no specifics on there, just general concepts and things she supports.
The takeaway is that this presidential contender apparently can’t remember her supposed core principles and needs a cheat-sheet when simply asked about her beliefs.
To quote Charlie Brown:
My, my, Stefan. You haven’t learned that making this much ado about nothing is a sure indication that you have nothing.
Not surprisingly, the left can’t remember that they live in glass houses. As John Hinderaker has said, “Obama can’t order a cheeseburger in a restaurant without his Teleprompter.” The always ridiculous David Shuster jumps on the wagon with some of his own juvenile sneering:
The mark of a successful public figure, especially a Republican, is to be able to take these taunts in stride and deliver apt rejoinder. Palin does not dissapoint. In a later photo she responded with “Hi Mom” written in her palm:
Touche. Sarah gets the last laugh and her imbecile left-wing critics look like the fools they are. I think that’s why they hate her.
Also, check out William Jacobson, Palin Exposes Misogyny in Democrat Base, Again
Palin to Campaign For McCain in Arizona.
I think this is a mistake. Palin’s grassroots supporters are scratching their heads over this. McCain is anathema to Palin supporters. It may be honorable that she feels grateful to McCain for selecting her as his veep running mate which thrust her into the public spotlight, but to jeopardize your own standing with the very people who support you against vicious attacks by your enemies is too big a price to have to pay for showing your gratitude. It would be better if she just said a few kind words thanking him for the ride, and then went her own way.
It’s not certain whether J.D Hayworth said today that he will challenge McCain for the Republican nomination. Hayworth had already been within striking distance of McCain in the polls before it was known if he would mount a primary challenge. This development seems to put Palin in an awkward position because Hayworth is a true conservative and McCain is a pain in the ass to conservatives. Michelle Malkin has pointed to the irony of McCain now seeking help from conservatives to keep him in his Senate seat after spending his career doing everything to undermine them.
Palin may feel she is indebted to McCain, but this payment will prove to be too costly and raises doubts about her judgment. The expression on her face in the above photo may indicate she already knows she has stepped in a pile of something stinky.
Michelle Malkin reminds us that while we celebrate the good news for conservatives from the Massachusetts Miracle, the evisceration of McCain-Feingold by the Supreme Court, and the complete disarray of the Democrats, there are also a couple of dark clouds lurking in the Republican party that could disappoint conservatives in the coming months.
Pay attention: In the afterglow of the Massachusetts Miracle, there are flickers of peril for The Right. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but like Paul Revere’s midnight-message, consider this warning “a cry of defiance, and not of fear.” Conservatives have worked hard over the past year to rebuild after Big Government Republican John McCain’s defeat. But McCain isn’t going gently into that good night.
Red Flag Number One: A reader from Arizona informed me the day after the Bay State Bombshell that he had received a robo-call from Massachusetts GOP Sen.-elect Scott Brown. “He basically wanted me to vote for John McCain in November,” the reader said in his description of the automated campaign call supporting the four-term Sen. McCain’s re-election bid. “No wonder [Brown] said he hadn’t had any sleep…he was busy recording phone messages!”
Red Flag Number Two: Also in the wake of the Massachusetts special election, the nation’s most popular conservative political figure, Sarah Palin, announced she would be campaigning for her former running mate in Arizona in March. Palin told Facebook followers that she’s going to “ride the tide with commonsense candidates” and help “heroes and statesmen” like McCain. Facing mounting conservative opposition in his home state and polls showing him virtually tied with possible GOP challenger and former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, McCain welcomed the boost: “Sarah energized our nation and remains a leading voice in the Republican Party.”
Savor the irony: After a career spent bashing the right flank of the party, Sen. McCain is now clinging to its coattails to save his incumbent hide.
Read the rest of Michelle Malkin here.
It is a mystery and a disappointment that Sarah Palin is going to campaign for John McCain, whose entire record and persona is the opposite of what conservatives think, or thought, she stands for. We new that Scott Brown was not likely to be a Ronald Reagan conservative but it is a little shocking that he so quickly began making robo calls for McCain.
One thing is a certain fact even if not talked about very much. The conservative movement has been revived in the last year and it would be stone dead if John McCain had been elected president.