March 02, 2009
You can eat me. Seriously.
I find it telling that Frum and his ilk can only decry conservatism, while offering no real solutions other than "be more like the Democrats." Note, they don't directly say that, but it's what they mean. Democrats are the ones who divide people into groups (i.e. Hispanic voters, Wal-Mart voters, etc.). We don't. Why? Because that's what Saul Alinsky would do. Democrats are the ones who believe in spending a trillion dollars, not us.
The only way Frum doesn't want us to be like Democrats is when it comes to partisanship. Democrats can be as partisan as they want, but we must be nice. Because our partisanship will cause people to turn to the Democrats - which is the more partisan and acidic today than it has ever been. They're allowed to stand on their principles. We aren't.
Unlike many here, I'm open to more moderate/liberal Republicans running in states where only a liberal Republican can win. I'm of the mind that Sens. Snowe and Collins are as good as we can get in Maine. However, it makes no sense to use them as the national model. If I remember correctly*, the national GOP already tried being Democrat Lite in similar circumstances during the FDR era. How'd that work out? We ended up with 20 straight years of Democrats controlling the White House. It sucked, but at least we were inclusive.
Exit question: Would anyone even know The New Majority existed if Allahpundit didn't link it every damn day?
*I may not.
Update: Erick Erickson says what I wanted to say, but much more succinctly:
These other turds who want us to sideline our most proven warrior do nothing but tear down others to elevate themselves, and none of them have proven any lasting success that we can trust. They preach about big tents, inclusion and broad appeal, but they can’t stop condescending to the majority of the Republican Party that consider themselves Rush Limbaugh conservatives. I’m so sick of these leeches.
Posted by: It's Vintage, Duh at
10:46 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.
FTFY, David. Oh, and...
...soft-spoken and conciliatory...
See "I won," re: the Spendulus. Yeah.
Posted by: Sean M. at March 02, 2009 11:21 PM (rLWHv)
On the one side, the president of the United States: soft-spoken and conciliatory, never angry, always invoking the recession and its victims. This president invokes the language of “responsibility,” and in his own life seems to epitomize that ideal: He is physically honed and disciplined, his worst vice an occasional cigarette. He is at the same time an apparently devoted husband and father. Unsurprisingly, women voters trust and admire him.
Hagiograhy
Function: noun
Date: 1821
1 : biography of saints or venerated persons
2 : idealizing or idolizing biography
Posted by: ECM at March 03, 2009 01:24 AM (q3V+C)
"Exit question: Would anyone even know The New Majority existed if Allahpundit didn't link it get some serious spoongin time with David Frum every damn day?"
Fixed.I really like Michelle Malkin, but if there is one bone I would have to pick with her, it's that she continues to employ that wet blanket of conservatism. HotAir is barely readable any more. Thank God that there are thousands of other conservative blogs.
Posted by: thirteen28 at March 04, 2009 09:22 PM (MsWP4)
I really like Michelle Malkin, but if there is one bone I would have to pick with her, it's that she continues to employ that wet blanket of conservatism. HotAir is barely readable any more.
Hear, hear!
Posted by: Ramrocks at March 04, 2009 09:31 PM (dU7r2)
Posted by: eddiebear at March 04, 2009 09:43 PM (/McCa)
Posted by: ECM at March 04, 2009 09:49 PM (q3V+C)
Posted by: doubleplusundead at March 04, 2009 09:54 PM (XnKSB)
Posted by: thirteen28 at March 04, 2009 10:21 PM (MsWP4)
I still read Malkin. Yes, she gets her outrage up a bit much, and I don't agree with her on certain issues as she's more conservative than I am. However, she's proactive and tries to get things accomplished (the Tea Parties are a good example), unlike AP who just whines and cites polls and does zero towards actually changing anything.
Plus, Malkin has developed a complete distrust of and disdain for politicians, which I personally like.
Posted by: Hermit Dave at March 04, 2009 10:31 PM (WhFvm)
Look at it this way, would you rather have Michelle dialing up the outrage a bit too much here and there, or Kathleen constantly slobbering over Obama? I'd pick the former any day.
Posted by: Sean M. at March 04, 2009 10:41 PM (rLWHv)
Michelle Malkin is unabashedly proud to be a conservative.
Allahpundit ... not so much.
Posted by: thirteen28 at March 04, 2009 11:03 PM (MsWP4)
Sadly, it's about 100 "I want to punch him" to 1 "I agree with him".
But, hey, traffic is traffic.
Posted by: eddiebear at March 05, 2009 12:26 AM (89VC+)
Look at it this way, would you rather have Michelle dialing up the outrage a bit too much here and there, or Kathleen constantly slobbering over Obama? I'd pick the former any day.
Uh, is that one of those choices between whether I'd have my dick chewed off by a pitbull or 'cleansed' a la the bathing sequence in Coming to America? Just because I think Malkin is a screech owl too much of the time doesn't mean I don't think Kathleen Parker is an unreadable gutter skank for Obama.
Posted by: ECM at March 05, 2009 01:12 AM (q3V+C)
Powered by Minx 1.1.2-pink.
