Dear GOP Establishment: BOOM! Taste her nightstick!

January 27, 2012

The last few days have erupted in controversy as former Reagan-era politicians and bureaucrats have come forth to question hack with a meat axe at Newt Gingrich’s claims to have been a leading figure in the “Reagan Revolution” of the 1980s. Among the most hard-hitting was former Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams’ broadside. (Rebutted by Jeffrey Lord, also a former Reaganite.)

To say the rhetoric has become angry and bitter would be like characterizing the Civil War as a “family argument.”

Enter Sarah Palin, who knows a thing or two about being the victim of a coordinated hatchet-job. Flawed as Newt is, Momma Grizzly is mad and breaks out her nightstick.

Boom.

I am sadly too familiar with these tactics because they were used against the GOP ticket in 2008. The left seeks to single someone out and destroy his or her record and reputation and family using the media as a channel to dump handpicked and half-baked campaign opposition research on the public. The difference in 2008 was that I was largely unknown to the American public, so they had no way of differentiating between the lies and the truth. All of it came at them at once as “facts” about me. But Newt Gingrich is known to us – both the good and the bad.

We know that Newt fought in the trenches during the Reagan Revolution. As Rush Limbaugh pointed out, Newt was among a handful of Republican Congressman who would regularly take to the House floor to defend Reagan at a time when conservatives didn’t have Fox News or talk radio or conservative blogs to give any balance to the liberal mainstream media. Newt actually came at Reagan’s administration “from the right” to remind Americans that freer markets and tougher national defense would win our future. But this week a few handpicked and selectively edited comments which Newt made during his 40-year career were used to claim that Newt was somehow anti-Reagan and isn’t conservative enough to go against the accepted moderate in the primary race. (I know, it makes no sense, and the GOP establishment hopes you won’t stop and think about this nonsense. Mark Levin and others have shown the ridiculousness of this.) To add insult to injury, this “anti-Reagan” claim was made by a candidate who admitted to not even supporting or voting for Reagan. He actually was against the Reagan movement, donated to liberal candidates, and said he didn’t want to go back to the Reagan days. You can’t change history. We know that Newt Gingrich brought the Reagan Revolution into the 1990s. We know it because none other than Nancy Reagan herself announced this when she presented Newt with an award, telling us, “The dramatic movement of 1995 is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century.  Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.” As Rush and others pointed out, if Nancy Reagan had ever thought that Newt was in any way an opponent of her beloved husband, she would never have even appeared on a stage with him, let alone presented him with an award and said such kind things about him. Nor would Reagan’s son, Michael Reagan, have chosen to endorse Newt in this primary race. There are no two greater keepers of the Reagan legacy than Nancy and Michael Reagan. What we saw with this ridiculous opposition dump on Newt was nothing short of Stalin-esque rewriting of history. It was Alinsky tactics at their worst.

But this whole thing isn’t really about Newt Gingrich vs. Mitt Romney. It is about the GOP establishment vs. the Tea Party grassroots and independent Americans who are sick of the politics of personal destruction used now by both parties’ operatives with a complicit media egging it on. In fact, the establishment has been just as dismissive of Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Newt is an imperfect vessel for Tea Party support, but in South Carolina the Tea Party chose to get behind him instead of the old guard’s choice. In response, the GOP establishment voices denounced South Carolinian voters with the same vitriol we usually see from the left when they spew hatred at everyday Americans “bitterly clinging” to their faith and their Second Amendment rights. The Tea Party was once again told to sit down and shut up and listen to the “wisdom” of their betters. We were reminded of the litany of Tea Party endorsed candidates in 2010 who didn’t win. Well, here’s a little newsflash to the establishment: without the Tea Party there would have been no historic 2010 victory at all.

Emphasis added. Read it all.

If there’s one person outside the candidates themselves who has sufficient respect and influence among the base to significantly influence the primary race, it’s Sarah Palin.

And she just shot a bullet at the feet of the GOP establishment.

Go, ‘Cuda.

RELATED: My blog-buddy ST has a long piece about this controversy, the dread charge of “RINO-ism,” and pols who try to manipulate voters. Legal Insurrection calls it a “thousand points of fright” for the GOP establishment.


When your name is “Palin,” you have no right to defend yourself

January 14, 2011

I was going to go off on another rant‡ about Democratic politicians, mainstream journalists, and leftist activists (but I repeat myself) and their blood libel against the Right and Sarah Palin, but then I watched this episode of PJTV’s Trifecta and realized that Greene, Ott, and Whittle said everything I could. And did it better. Just watch;  I’ll wait here.

Take away line from Whittle: “I have to count to ten.”

Of the many odd, even outrageous, things I’ve read and heard over the last few days since the shooting spree and, especially,  since her address two days ago, the corker has to be that Sarah Palin should have stayed out of the fray, kept herself above it all, let others handle it for her. In other words, she should have shut up.

To which I reply: Horse manure.

This was no garden-variety criticism from the Left that one could reasonably shrug off and let others handle. This was a monstrous accusation of inciting mass-murder, including the killing of a child, and of encouraging the attempted murder of a congresswoman. No human being could or should stay silent when slandered in that way. Sure as the sun rises in the East, someone would twist that silence into an admission of guilt, and others would believe him. To say that she had no right to defend herself is either cynical or idiotic, take your pick.

And to say she had been wronged but should have done the “politically smart thing” and stayed out of it shows monumental blindness to what’s been happening: a desperate attempt by the left-liberal establishment to destroy the one potential candidate who truly scares them and to delegitimize the movement of average Americans she symbolizes — and even free speech itself. Not only did she have to speak to defend herself, she had to fight back to defend the right of the Right to say anything other than “Yes, master*.”

This was not a case where Sarah Palin could sit back, eat moose dogs, and let others fight her battle. Besides, outside of talk radio and Center-Right blogs, just who the Hell has been defending her? Where are all these people she should let take up sword and shield in her name? I didn’t see a rush from the Republican “leadership” or the political experts on the talk-show carousel. Governor Palin gets carpet-bombed by the perpetually outraged Left, and all we hear is the sound of crickets from the Republicans and mealy-mouthed tongue-clucking from the talk-show panels. Thanks a lot, guys and gals. It’s nice to know you’ve got her back. Try not to stick a knife in it, okay?

We all saw the ABC news clip in the video above. Like Greene said, millions did. Millions who don’t read Center-Right blogs or listen to talk-radio, but who still get their news from the MSM — and they were just told Sarah Palin was to blame for Tucson. And yet she was supposed to stay silent in the face of garbage like that, day after day?

No. Forget it. Not this time. I’ll even stipulate that there have been instances she’s fired back at more ordinary criticisms when she shouldn’t have, because she’s a fighter.

But not now.

Governor Palin had to respond to these slanders; it was her right and she was right to do it.

LINKS: Allahpundit has an assignment for budding speechwriters: “Try to write an address titled ‘I Didn’t Kill Anyone’ without sounding aggrieved.” Daniel Blatt thinks Sarah Palin made a mistake. I disagree in the comments. Power Line has a superb quote from President Lincoln about an earlier Democratic blood libel. Lori Ziganto calls her speech thoughtful and on-target, while accusing the Left of losing it’s grip on reality.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

 

*Any bets on how long it will take some hypersensitive Lefty to accuse me of racist rhetoric?

‡Guess I did, anyway.


Twisted propaganda: Linda Sanchez and the AZ immigration law

June 15, 2010

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about California Congresswoman Linda Sanchez, who asserted quite seriously that White supremacists were behind the controversial Arizona immigration bill, SB 1070, with the implication that those who supported it were also White supremacists, or at least sympathetic to White supremacy. For that, I was accused of “twisted propaganda.”

At PJTV, former Leftist Joe Hicks looks at the origins of Sanchez’s brain-dead assertion, tracing it back to wild claims made by the race-hustlers at the Southern Poverty Law Center:

(Click the image to watch)

Hicks’ arguments illustrate the point I tried to make earlier: that by smearing moderate and conservative opponents as racists regardless of their arguments, race-baiting groups such as the SPLC, La Raza, and MEChA, or individual race-hustlers such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, are attempting to stifle their concerns by making them afraid of being labeled as racists themselves while encouraging others to dismiss them as such.

The only point on which I’ll disagree with Joe is his possible implication that Sanchez was just a stupid tool mindlessly repeating smears she read elsewhere. She may not be the sharpest tack in the box, but she’s too experienced a politician not to know that her race-baiting words would be used to bully into silence foes of illegal immigration in her heavily Latino district.


Meet the Mob

August 7, 2009

Continuing our efforts to ensure that all right-thinking (not Right-thinking) citizens anxious to learn more about our President-Messiah’s corporatist power-grab Glorious Health-Care Plan, we present a link to Dana Loesch’s photographic guide to the Howling Mob of Republican Shills and Insurance Company Stooges. Here’s a sample:

iamthemob1

Note the sartorial Brooks Brothers splendor. Study well and be alert, citizen.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,072 other followers